Forn Spǫll Fira: No Room for an Inn

Edward Burne-Jones (1833-1898),"Nativity" (1875), William Morris stained glass window, St. Martins in the Bull Ring, Birmingham city center, south window.

This afternoon I read this post on John Gee's blog and wanted to repost it in it's entirety because I enjoyed reading it. Here it is:

An entire folk tradition has sprung up based on the translation of Luke 2:7 which explains that Jesus was laid in a manger “because there was no room for them in the inn” (KJV). The King James translators did not invent the phrase. Tyndale rendered the passage as “because there was no roume for them within, in the hostrey.” Both translations match the Vulgate, which says “non erat locus in diversorio” and a diversorium is an inn. Thus nativity plays will often include an innkeeper and his wife and other parts derived from this particular phrase in the scripture. Sometimes in flights of artistic fantasy Joseph wanders from inn to inn seeking lodging only to find them all full. Bethlehem was a small town when Jesus was born. How many inns did they have? In the scriptural accounts, it is in the singular; Bethlehem could not have had more than one. One suspects it did not have that many.

But there is something wrong here. Joseph and Mary came to Bethlehem because of the need to register for the census which was made for taxation purposes (Luke 2:1). If it was simply a matter of registering for the poll tax, the tax that Rome levied on its subjects simply for drawing breath, then they could register wherever they were. They could certainly register in Nazareth without having to travel to Bethlehem. The reason that they would have to register in Bethlehem is if they owned property there.[1] But if they owned property in Bethlehem, why were they staying in an inn?

The Greek word translated as “inn” is καταλύματι, the dative form of καταλύμα. What is a καταλύμα? It “designates the residence of the king or the general when he is staying outside” his normal residence.[2] It can also refer to an assigned lodging for a soldier or functionary.[3] It can also refer to an inn.[4] Thus a καταλύμα is “a lodging where one goes, where one stays for a time. The temporary character is constant.”[5]

Thus the word designates wherever Joseph and Mary were staying temporarily. Since Joseph either wholly or partly owned property, he would have either been staying with the relatives who occupied the property (in the case of part ownership) or with the tenants who were renting (in the case of whole ownership). As houses tended to be on the small side, the couple perhaps might have felt that there was more privacy with the animals. By the time the wise men visited, they were back in the house (Matthew 2:11).

A careful reading of the nativity story indicates that there is no room for an inn.

---

[1] Sherman L. Wallace, Taxation in Egypt from Augustus to Diocletian (New York: Greenwood Press, 1937), 98-104.

[2] Geneviève Husson, OIKIA: le vocabulaire de la maison privée en Égypte d’après les papyrus grecs (Paris: La Sorbonne, 1983), 133.

[3] Husson, OIKIA, 134.

[4] Husson, OIKIA, 134-35.

[5] Husson, OIKIA, 135.

Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil

I recently read Jeffrey Bradshaw's paper entitled Mormonism's Satan and the Tree of Life and thought this paragraph was really insightful so I wanted to share. Here it is:

The Hebrew expression “knowledge of good and evil” in the description of one of the trees can mean knowledge of what is good and bad, or of happiness and misery—or else knowledge of “everything” if good and evil is taken as a merism. Perhaps the most relevant hint on the meaning of the phrase comes from Deuteronomy 1:39, which speaks of little children “who… have no knowledge of good and evil,” suggesting “that they are not legally responsible for their actions.” In this sense, the term aptly refers not to abstract conceptual knowledge but rather to the kind of “knowledge which infancy lacks and experience acquires.”

Wolves in Sheeps Clothing

In Matthew 7:15 the Savior warns his followers of false prophets who would come to them in sheep's clothing to conceal their identity as rabid wolves. The analogy is easily understood. The false prophets would appear outwardly to be ordinary members of the Christian community while concealing their true natures as enemies of the community and enemies of the Savior who is the Good Shepherd. The Savior often compared his followers to sheep and portrayed himself as their shepherd (see John 10).

Additionally, it is significant that the Savior depicts these false prophets as wearing the "clothing" of the sheep. Clothing is often closely associated in the scriptures with temple rituals. The word from which "clothing" was translated is ἔνδυμα (enduma). The root of enduma is ἐνδύω (enduō - from which our word endow comes) which means " to invest with clothing (literally or figuratively): - array, clothe (with), endue, have (put) on" (Strong's Greek Concordance). Exodus 28 describes the sacred vestments of the temple priests which were an integral part of the rituals of the temple just as the temple clothing is today in LDS temples. Clothing also serves the purpose of identifying the wearer as belonging to a particular group (for more on this I recommend Daniel Belnap's article in Studies in the Bible and Antiquity entitled "Clothed with Salvation: The Garden, the Veil, Tabitha, and Christ").

Therefore, the false prophets in the Savior's analogy are clothed in the ritual clothing that identify them as members of the community.

The story of Korihor in Alma 30 provides additional insights to the characteristics and tactics of false prophets. There are a few I wish to point out:

1. He was the recipient of a false spiritual manifestation (Alma 30:53).
2. He specifically targeted the leaders of the church with criticism in his efforts to destroy the faith of the Nephites (Alma 30:31).
3. He appealed to the Nephite's sense of pride (Alma 30:17-18).

In our day false prophets have followed a very similar pattern to that found in the story of Korihor and have followed the pattern established by the Savior in Matthew 5 by coming to the Saints dressed in sheep's clothing in order to lead them into a false system of salvation. On one occasion the Prophet Joseph Smith gave a key to detecting and ferreting out false prophets:

"I will give you one of the Keys of the mysteries of the Kingdom. It is an eternal principle, that has existed with God from all eternity: That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives." (HC 3:385)

On another occasion he is reported to have said:

"I will give you a key that will never rust, - if you will stay with the majority of the Twelve Apostles, and the records of the Church, you will never be led astray." (William G. Nelson, in “Joseph Smith, the Prophet,” Young Woman’s Journal, Dec. 1906, p. 543).

Based on the teachings of Joseph Smith those who come forward to claim that the leaders of the Church are in error unwittingly identify themselves as false teachers regardless of whatever else they may say. It seems especially ironic to me that false prophets often recognize Joseph Smith's prophetic calling while rejecting his successors. How can they claim to follow him while at the same time rejecting his teachings?

Safety is to be found by following the Lord's anointed and not speaking evil of them. If we do so the Savior has given us a promise that we will not be overcome. This promise is found in Joseph Smith Matthew 1:9-11:

"And many false prophets shall arise, and shall deceive many; And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold; But he that remaineth steadfast and is not overcome, the same shall be saved." (emphasis added)

Don't be deceived by those who claim to have more light and knowledge than the leading authorities of the Church. Their message may be very, very compelling. They exploit those who are seeking further light and knowledge by offering what appears to be deeper understandings. However enlightening and truthful this information seems it is invariably mingled with false doctrines and ideas and those who espouse those doctrines often set themselves up as a light while denigrating the Lord's anointed. Run as far away as you can from those who criticize the Church's leaders. They do not have your best interests in mind but are puffed up in their own self importance. True teachers will always remain within the channels the Lord has established in his Church and will foster a sense of loyalty. Use the keys the Prophet has provided and do not fall into the traps others set to ensnare.

What is Perfection?

Perhaps no concept in the Christain world has caused more discouragement and hopelessness than the notion of perfection. In Matthew 5:48 the Savior commands all of his followers to be perfect and all conscientous Christains strive for this ideal. However, it is easy to become overwhelmed and feel completely defeated when striving for perfection when we use the conventional English definition of perfection.

Webster's dictionary defines the word "perfect" as: "being entirely without fault or defect : flawless". Using this definition it is natural to conclude that when the Savior commands us to be perfect he is commanding us to be sinless. Using this definition it is easy to become disheartened because as King Benjamin explains in Mosiah 4:29: "I cannot tell you all the things whereby ye may commit sin; for there are divers ways and means, even so many that I cannot number them."

As Joseph Smith explained: "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly..." (Articles of Faith 1:8, emphasis added) and in the case of Matthew 5:48 the English translators of the King James version of the Bible chose a word that does not properly convey what the Savior was teaching.

The original language of the New Testament was Greek and the word from which "perfect" was translated is τέλειος (teleios) which means "complete" in the sense of having finished a journey or reached a goal.  Jack Welch points out in his book "The Sermon At the Temple and the Sermon On the Mount" that teleios "is used in Greek religious literature to describe the person who has become fully initiated in the rituals of the religion." Furthermore he states that "generally in the Epistle to the Hebrews, its usage follows a 'special use' from Hellenistic Judaism, where the word teleioo means 'to put someone in the position in which he can come or stand before God.'" (Welch 58-59, emphasis added).

It is interesting to note that there is a subtle difference in the command to be perfect as found in Matthew 5:48 and 3 Nephi 12:48. In the sermon given at the temple among the descendants of Lehi he gives the command to be perfect followed by the phrase "even as I, or your Father who is in heaven is perfect" (emphasis added). In the account given of the Sermon on the Mount the phrase "even as I" is not included.

The Savior delivered the Sermon on the Mount in Palestine as a mortal prior to his crucifixion and resurrection but he delivered the sermon found in 3 Nephi after his resurrection. We know that while he was mortal he had not yet ascended to the father to stand in his presence. Indeed even shortly after his resurrection he still had not yet done so as he explained to Mary in the garden (See John 20:17). However, it is clear from the Book of Mormon that he did not appear to the descendants of Lehi until after his ascension to the Father (See 3 Nephi 10:18 and 3 Nephi 11:12).

Therefore, in the sense of perfection as being fully initiated into the rituals of the religion and being in a position in which to stand before God, Jesus Christ was not perfect until after his ascension. Also, we can conclude that it is not necessary to try to make oneself sinless in the absolute sense in order to be perfect or teleios. Perfection in the sense of sinlessness is an unrealistic and ultimately counter-productive expectation, an expectation that one is hard pressed to find in the scriptures. Certainly, obedience to the commandments of God and personal purity are essential to the Lord's plan and are a requirement to achieve ritual perfection but sinlessness is not required to obtain God's approval and to qualify for his highest blessings.

What did the Ark of the Covenant look like?

Moses and Joshua bowing before the Ark, painting by James Jacques Joseph Tissot, c. 1900

What did the Ark of the Covenant look like?

Let's look at the description given in Exodus 25:10-20:

Verse 10:

• It is called an "ark:" (Heb. ארון - "A box: - ark, chest, coffin." Strong's Concordance).
• It was made of acacia wood.
• The dimensions were: "Two and a half cubits long and a cubit and a half wide and a cubit and a half high." A cubit was approximately 20 inches long.

Verse 11:

• It was overlain "with pure gold" inside and out.
• There was some kind of crown or molding around the outside of it.

Verse 12:

• There were 4 gold rings - one attached to each of its four feet.

Verse 13-15:

• Poles of acacia wood overlain with gold were inserted through the rings for the purpose of carrying it.

Verse 17:

• There was a lid or covering often translated as "mercy seat" (Heb. כפרת - kapporeth. "A lid [used only of the cover of the sacred Ark]: - mercy seat." Strong's Concordance).
• The dimensions of the mercy were two and a half cubits by one and a half cubits.

Verse 18-19:

•  On top of the "mercy seat" there were two cherubim on each end.

Verse 20:

• The wings of the cherubim "covered" (Heb. סָכַךְ - sakak. "to entwine as a screen; by implication to fence in, cover over, [figuratively] protect: - cover, defence, defend, hedge in, join together, set, shut up." Strong's Concordance) the "mercy seat".
• The faces of the cherubim faced one another toward the "mercy seat".

The "Mercy Seat"

The description of the ark is fairly straightforward until we come to the description of the kapporeth (mercy seat). The word "kapporeth" shares its root with kaphar (כָּפַר) which means "to cover" or "to atone" in the sense of hiding or covering up sin. The Hebrew name of the "mercy seat" then does not make it clear that the kapporeth was a seat.

However, despite the ambiguity of the description in Exodus 25 it is clear from elsewhere in the Bible that the kapporeth was indeed a seat or throne of some kind.

1 Samuel 4:4 and 2 Samuel 6:2, in reference to the Ark, describe the Lord "dwelling between the cherubim". The word "dwelling" is translated from yashab (יָשַׁב) which can also be translated as "to sit down as in judgement". In addition, multiple prophets have seen in vision the heavenly temple wherein the Lord was enthroned in the Holy of Holies (see Isaiah 6:1; Ezekiel 10:1 and 1 Nephi 1:8).

The "Cherubim"

The cultural proximity of the Israelites and Canaanites was very close. In fact it has been argued that "Israelite religion [was] a subset of Canaanite religion." (See Peterson, Nephi and His Asherah, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies: Volume - 9, Issue - 2, Pages: 16–25 Provo, Utah: Maxwell Institute, 2000). As a result we can get a pretty good idea of how the Israelites may have depicted the cherubim on the ark by looking at Canaanite representations of cherubim.

Pictured below is the sarcophagus of Ahiram who was the king of Byblos around the time of King David. Interestingly he is depicted sitting atop a cherubic throne toward the left side of the photo and it is likely the Ark of the Covenant looked similar in some respects to this throne.

Below is another depiction of a cherub throne found on an ivory from Megiddo dating to approximately 1200 BC.

We can also find clues to the appearance of the Ark of the Covenant from another of the Israelites' neighbors, Egypt. It must be remembered that immediately prior to building the Ark the Israelites had spent several generations living in Egypt and must have been heavily influenced by its culture. It seems reasonable to assume Israel's artistic representations would have reflected that influence.

Interestingly, in Egypt we find examples of portable thrones carried on poles just as the Ark of the Covenant was. Below is an image of Ramesses III (ca. 1182-1151 BC) on a portable throne from Medinet Habu.

Therefore, by studying the description of the Ark in the Bible and by examining other ancient examples of portable cherub thrones we can develop a pretty good idea of what the Ark of the Covenant looked like.