Last Christmas I went to a carol service at Durham Cathedral. During one of the readings I got a bit of a revelation – but not really quite how the bishiop probably would have wanted.
The reading was this:
“For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder,and his name shall be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end,
on the throne of David and over his kingdom,to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore.”

Well, did Jesus ever sit on the throne of David? Was the government upon his shoulder? Has there been no end of peace since he was born? Was he called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty god etc, except by people who knew the prophesy so applied this to him?
It seems to me this is about someone else altogether.

Was the carol service any good? We were thinking of going along this year. Not religious but I do like christmas carols…

I’ve seen The Life of Brian documentary – they did get the wrong guy. He was a very naught boy, but he wasn’t the Messiah. Highly controversial documentary that one, the Catholic Church tried to get it banned and has been denying it’s findings ever since.

It’s all interpretation. A bit like all prophecies, after that fact it goes something like “No, that’s what I meant”

footflaps – Member
I’ve seen The Life of Brian documentary – they did get the wrong guy. He was a very naught boy, but he wasn’t the Messiah. Highly controversial documentary that one, the Catholic Church tried to get it banned and has been denying it’s findings ever since.

That was a spectacular piece of promotion by the Catholic Church. 🙄

Was the carol service any good? We were thinking of going along this year. Not religious but I do like christmas carols…

Yes, but take a warm coat and get there early if you go on Christmas Eve.

well this depends on your viewpoint.

The gospels did give jesus a genealogy leading back to David. Although obviously they also say Joseph was nt Jesus’s father so why bother with a genealogy ? Suppose it was so ingrained in them days you could nt help it. Suppose you could say both David and Jesus’s genealogy both eventually lead back to God as the original father but then you could say that for everyone.

Anyway in the gospel Jesus makes it clear that his Kingdom is not of this earth. So presumably you could say the old testament prophets and predictions for

Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end,

Hadnt really got the point that these things they were prophesying would be spiritual not physical.

Saint Augustine expanded on this in City of God linking the new testament prophesies to a heavenly jerusalem, rather than a earthy centre of power ie Rome/Real Jerusalem.

The mainstream jewish point of view is that Christians have got the wrong guy and their still waiting for a messiah who will bring earthly peace etc etc

The mainstream jewish point of view is that Christians have got the wrong guy and their still waiting for a messiah who will bring earthly peace etc etc

well quite, and I guess they’ve used exactly the same prophecies that Christians use to identify Jesus as the Messiah, to come to the conclusion that he wasn’t.
Seems to me they were looking for a politician – a King, or military leader. Here’s another:
“Marshal your troops, O city of troops, for a siege is laid against us. They will strike Israel’s ruler on the cheek with a rod. 2 “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times.” (Micah 5:1-2)

And another:
“The days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will raise up to David a righteous Branch, a King who will reign wisely and do what is just and right in the land. 6 In his days Judah will be saved and Israel will live in safety. This is the name by which he will be called: The LORD Our Righteousness.” Jeremiah 23:5-6

scu98rkr is right that Jesus isn’t even descended from David as Joseph is not his father.
It’s all looking a bit shaky for Jesus.

Anything that is no longer palatable or is patently untrue is allegorical.

Everything else is God’s inspired written word and is absolute truth. Until it becomes allegorical.

scu98rkr is right that Jesus isn’t even descended from David as Joseph is not his father.

I think you’ve missed my point, if you want to see it this way Jesus and David are both descended from Adam created by God. So they would still be in the same family ie humanity. Just depends how you see it.

Jesus mother, Mary, was also a descendant of the line of David.

Just to be pedantic – there is/should be a comma between wonderful and counsellor. I had this drummed into me by my headmaster when I was 13 and reading this at a Nine Lessons and Carols service. Only this week, I cringed slightly at the more modern reading of this. Funny how such things stay in your mind!

Isaiah 9:6
Michael Gove Version 😉
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Was the carol service any good? We were thinking of going along this year. Not religious but I do like Christmas carols…

If you’re going to go to Nine Lessons and Carols for more than the spiritual/religious element, then Durham has to be the place for it.

Hmm. Might take Toddler North for the children’s carols service earlier on the Saturday. Bit of a drive for a 30 minute service, but I haven’t been to the North East for 12 months so it would make a nice day out.

Anything that is no longer palatable or is patently untrue is allegorical.

Everything else is God’s inspired written word and is absolute truth. Until it becomes allegorical.

Wow, it sounds like you really have understood this religion thing brilliantly well.

Jesus and David are both descended from Adam created by God. So they would still be in the same family ie humanity”
Well, that hardly narrows the field does it? So the prophecy says: The Messiah will be …a person.

Jesus mother, Mary, was also a descendant of the line of David.

I didn’t know this, Underhill. Where’s the source?

Wow, it sounds like you really have understood this religion thing brilliantly well.

Obviously, this is a simplified version. I missed out the bit where people are tortured for saying the Earth orbits the sun.

HE HAS GIVEN US A SIGN!

Obviously, this is a simplified version. I missed out the bit where people are tortured for saying the Earth orbits the sun.

Are you deliberately trying to appear feeble-minded, or is it incidental?

Are you deliberately trying to appear feeble-minded, or is it incidental?

Right back at ya.

my name is David and my son has an important biblical name..

make of that what you will, but watch out for him doing great things in the field of popular mythology later in the century

8)

watch out for him doing great things in the field of popular mythology later in the century

Tell him to get a move on: there’s only a couple of weeks until the end of the world.

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzqiPvGrkTo[/video]

The Alleged Nazarene is a made-up character in a book of fiction.

Mr Woppit – Member
The Alleged Nazarene is a made-up character in a book of fiction.

Far from correct. Plenty of evidence for a character bearing most of the “attributes/background” of Jesus exists. The question of whether that individual was the son of god, a prophet, a holy man, a good bloke, an ordinary bloke etc is the matter for debate and analysis. IMO, of course.

Far from correct. Plenty of evidence for a character bearing most of the “attributes/background” of Jesus exists.

This was my understanding, too. Wikipedia says:

Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted. While there is little agreement on the historicity of gospel narratives and their theological assertions of his divinity most scholars agree that Jesus was a Galilean Jew who was born between 7 and 2 BC and died 30–36 AD. Most scholars hold that Jesus lived in Galilee and Judea, did not preach or study elsewhere and that he spoke Aramaic and may have also spoken Hebrew and Greek. Although scholars differ on the reconstruction of the specific episodes of the life of Jesus, the two events whose historicity is subject to “almost universal assent” are that he was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.

But he almost certainly wasn’t born of a virgin, perform miracles or rise from the dead; and even if he did that still wouldn’t prove that he was (the son of) an omniscient, omnipresent deity. Which he almost certainly wasn’t.

Happy to leave the last bit to individuals to make their own mind up!!

Plenty of evidence for a character bearing most of the “attributes/background” of Jesus exists

Don’t be silly. What’s his name, Brian?

Right back at ya.

Ah, the old “I don’t understand the issue so I just dismiss anyone’s attempts to explain it” position.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

I just checked on Wikipedia and Tony Blair’s Father isn’t called David.
Another theory kippered.

Ah, the old “I don’t understand the issue so I just dismiss anyone’s attempts to explain it” position.

Jesus being or not being the son of god isn’t going to be refuted or proven by something someone noticed in the semantics of the wording of a reading in a carol service. If it were, somebody would have noticed by now.

I was pointing out the shifting nature of ‘truth’ as interpreted from the Bible by Christians over the years. There’s a gradual shift from “everything in the bible is the literal, true word of God” through to “everything in the bible is the spirit-inspired word of God as interpreted by humans, and anyway some bits are allegorical and we don’t really believe those bits as they have to be interpreted within the historical context in which it was written, selected and translated”.

I did it fairly succinctly, admittedly, but as we’ve been over that ground many times on here it didn’t seem to be worth going into more depth.

I did manage to stay above the level of personal insult however, which you seemed to struggle to do.

I have a pretty good understanding of Christianity. My wife is a Christian; in fact, she’s an unordained chaplain who has studied some theology to undergraduate level and many people think should go for ordination. And I’m on first name terms with the guy who was a Canon at Durham Cathedral when this reading took place, so it could even have been a personal friend of mine who read it. If you like, I could email the chap in charge of ordinand training for Durham and Northumbria to get his take on this verse?

For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder,and his name shall be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end,
on the throne of David and over his kingdom,to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore.

Government? David? Hang on, this all sounds familiar.

I did manage to stay above the level of personal insult

I didn’t, and I apologise unreservedly. I’m just too used to and to fed up with idiotic religion bashing on here.

I was pointing out the shifting nature of ‘truth’ as interpreted from the Bible by Christians over the years.

You did seem to be being a little derogatory with it, but perhaps that’s STW goggles. It is an interesting point.

However, I take issue with you and others conflating the burning of heretics etc with Christianity.

People are INHERENTLY jingoistic, tribal, ignorant and aggressive. This is not the fault of Christianity. It’s just used as an excuse.

fed up with idiotic religion bashing on here.

… and “bashing” religion (by which I take it you mean – being against it and presenting the argument) is making you fed up why, exactly?

Cos the arguments are a) tediously obvious and b) unpleasant in tone.

by which I take it you mean – being against it and presenting the argument)

No – people usually don’t present intelligent reasoned debate, they just queue up to insult believers.

There’s just no point in pointing out the holes in bible stories of God and creation, for a few reasons.

1) It’s too easy, which puts it on the same level as teasing nerds or shooting buffalo herds from a train. Ie not sport, and not worthwhile

2) It ignores the real reasons many people believe. Christianity is absolutely not just a theory of how the world was created. This makes you look every bit as ignorant as bible bashing types.

3) It’s offensive to those people who do believe for valid reasons, when they come on and try to explain and you just ignore them.

It’s offensive to those people who do believe for valid reasons, when they come on and try to explain and you just ignore them.

Do I really? Good heavens! (Joke). I thought I always dealt with the specific claims directly.

What might be a valid reason for believing in unevidenced claims and unproven fantasies, then? In your opinion.

I thought I always dealt with the specific claims directly.

I’ve tried a thousand times and we come back to the same base argument every time.

What might be a valid reason for believing in unevidenced claims and unproven fantasies, then? In your opinion

Because it makes people happy.

I think we’re getting away from the point, friends. I was interested to hear how people who use the prophesies of the OT as part of their support for their view that Jesus was the Messiah, square my quotes in the original post with the character they believe to be The One. The prophesies appear to be about someone else – a strong military leader/politician who is going to free Israel and rule in peace etc. Jesus never did that. So the Jews (whose views also need to be given respect) might have a point, no??

@ neil_the_wheel

I didn’t know this, Underhill. Where’s the source?

From the Bible. Matthew’s genealogy refers to Joseph’s line back to David, going through David’s son Solomon. In Luke 3 there is another line which traces the link to David through another son, Nathan. Although both genealogies name Joseph as the father, they differ in that Matthew’s account names Jacob as father of Joseph and Luke’s names Heli. So Heli then was most like Mary’s father, as the line of descent was not passed through the mother, which also explains why she is not named.
The importance of Joseph’s line is that he was in an adoptive role, which would give Jesus a legal right to claim descent from the line of David.

molgrips – Member
Because it makes people happy.

Not everything that makes you happy is good for you.