Nativity Plays and Sociocultural Assumptions

 We were at our son’s nativity play few days ago and I had a better time than I’d previously imagined. It was somehow cute seeing little children dressed up as sheep, cattle, donkeys, chickens, stars, and angels in an attempt to retell the Christmas story. There was a surprise though, in Nigeria, nativity plays usually feature three wise men, but here they had three “white” kings of orient. I imagine verisimilitude is difficult with an almost all-white cast!

I joked to my wife at the end that they didn’t have the scene where Herod massacred toddlers— I imagine that is perhaps considered age-inappropriate , not cute and cuddly and bad for Christmas cheer.

Subsequently, I have been thinking about this typical nativity scene portrayal and  how the way we typically read the Christmas story is well, mostly wrong.

It is interesting that of all the four gospels only Matthew and Luke report the birth of Jesus. Matthew does not go into great detail about the birth of Jesus beyond reporting Joseph’s surprise at her pregnancy, his decision to end their engagement quietly (being a just man and concerned about her honour) and his angelic visit. Then he fast forwards many days, maybe even months (some imagine this was close to two years) after the birth of Jesus and reports the visit of the magi. 

Nowhere is it mentioned that these people were kings, neither was their number given. Although they gifted Jesus three items, we do not know whether they were two, three, five , thirteen or twenty-one. And it is in the context of the magi’s visit that Herod, paranoid Herod concerned about a threat to his throne commanded that boys in Bethlehem two years and younger were to be killed.

Matthew was laconic when he said, 

“When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.” 

But his audience would have understood why all Jerusalem was troubled with Herod, for Herod (the great) was a terribly paranoid man and very murderous. He in fact killed three of his own sons, his favourite wife (he had ten) and her presumed lover who was his own friend. He also killed his mother-in-law, several uncles and a couple of cousins. In fact when Herod was sick and about to die, knowing no one was probably going to mourn him, he had all the Jewish leaders arrested  with the order that they were to be killed once he died— that way people would have something to cry about. 

So when Herod was troubled, all Jerusalem was troubled with him! 

Crazy guy.

Luke takes a different angle at the birth of Jesus. He starts with the conception of John, the angel Gabriel’s visit to Mary, her trip to Elizabeth and her song of praise. Regarding the birth of Jesus he goes into some detail.

The way we read Luke, the birth of Jesus happened this way:

Joseph and Mary were engaged, she had become pregnant miraculously and Joseph had married her. Some months later, the command to return to one’s ancestral home had been given and Joseph and his wife set out (on their donkey) to Bethlehem. It was a difficult journey but they eventually made it but somehow late — the whole place was filled and despite going to every inn in town everywhere was packed full with people and there were no vacant rooms. 

Joseph did not know what to do— thankfully one of the innkeepers pitied him when he heard his wife was pregnant and offered them a place in his stables where the animals were kept. After all these, Mary fell into labour (Perhaps due to the stress of the journey and difficulty finding a place to rest) and delivered her first born son.

The mental image from Sunday school would not leave me— Jesus was delivered and put in a manger.  I grew up in a town with a very large market, in that market there is a section where cows, sheep and goat are sold. The animals feed from these wooden troughs surrounded by manure and filth — I imagine little baby Jesus was kept in such a thing.

Now what’s wrong with my story?

To the average western mind  I imagine it is acceptable for one to visit a place where one has family, pregnant wife in tow and one’s arrangements for accommodation would be to find and pay for a hotel room. However for other cultures, it would be scandalous for you not to open your doors to your relatives especially when they have a pregnant wife!

I imagine many of us read the Bible with western assumptions not realising the sociocultural context of the Bible story is Middle Eastern– in many ways similar to the communitarian cultures of Africa. So when we read there was no place for them in the inn, we don’t even question why they had to go to an inn in the first place. But we should wonder why Joseph, son of David returning to his ancestral home, would have no relatives to lodge with and his wife a descendant of David too would struggle to find lodging in Bethlehem— the city of David. But even if we’d wondered we would have concluded that perhaps the people there were just inhospitable.

Some people may even read the text and get a “message from God” that goes something like this— the most precious thing ever visited Bethlehem and people did not accommodate him, so don’t worry if people do not recognise you in your “womb season”, be patient and your manifestation will come; then angels will sing your welcome and wise men from the East will bring you precious gold!

I think it helps here to have some background on the story. A knowlege of 1st century Jewish architecture and perhaps a knowledge of biblical languages may be helpful here.

This is the picture of a typical house back in the day— most houses were a one-room affair. Some who are well off may have a guest room (typically built on the roof and reserved for special guests) remember Elisha and the wealthy woman of Shunem who built a guest room for him? It is to this guest room that Luke refers to in chapter 2. Although translated as inn, it is best understood as guest room. And it is in fact translated as that the next time the same word is used in Luke 22

“Then came the day of Unleavened Bread, on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed.

Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, “Go and prepare the Passover for us, that we may eat it.” They said to him, “Where will you have us prepare it?” He said to them, “Behold, when you have entered the city, a man carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him into the house that he enters and tell the master of the house, The Teacher says to you, Where is the guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?’ And he will show you a large upper room furnished; prepare it there.” And they went and found it just as he had told them, and they prepared the Passover.”

It is the exact same word, katalyma that is used in both places. There is another word used for proper inns by Luke. When he tells the story of the Good Samaritan and how he took the injured man to a place for care, he uses a different word pandocheion which is properly as inn; pan for “all” and dechomai for “receive” hence pandocheion— a place that receives all.

What about the dirty, smelly manger?

So in that house which is often a one room apartment but sometimes may have a guest room attached, that’s where the whole family lives including the animals. Only very wealthy people would have separate quarters for the animals. During the night, the livestock (some sheep, a cow and perhaps a donkey) would be herded into the end of the room next to the door and then the family sleeps. Doing this will protect the animals from theft but also provide some warmth during the cold nights. 

The manger is typically cut out in the floor of the room very close to the door as such hungry animals can easily access food at night. At other times, there is a wooden feeding trough placed in this area for animals to feed.

So to summarise, Joseph and Mary weren’t looking for motels, hotels, hostels or inns to stay while in Bethlehem, they stayed in a house, she delivered her baby in a house surrounded by family and the baby was kept warm in the manger…they did this since the the guest room was already occupied by other guests.

Someone would say, what does it matter whether they were looking for a hotel or not? What does it matter if the manger was in the house or outside the house?

Well, thankfully it doesn’t really change much. And I am very grateful for that. However, an ignorance of the context and original language in which the Bible was written can often lead to wrong interpretations and applications, some of which can even be dangerous. 

Thankfully this one isn’t.

However, the important lesson is to learn that studying the Bible requires us to do something really difficult which is to ensure we do not superimpose our own sociocultural assumptions on the text but try as much as possible ro understand the text in its own original context — both literary and cultural. Study bibles , commentaries often help in this.

Blessings.

References / Resources for further Reading

1. Kenneth E Bailey, Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: cultural studies in the gospels

2. Eugene Peterson, The Jesus Way: a conversation in following Jesus

3. Fred Wight, Manners and Customs of Bible lands