Saigon is decorated for Christmas with lights and fake fir trees everywhere. One odd thing though, people seem to have the impression that the Nativity occurred inside a cave. The people to whom I’ve said that I always thought it was in a manger look confused and speculate that maybe the manger was in a cave.
Well, maybe. I’m not exactly fresh out of the seminary. Was the manger in a cave? It’s seems a strange place for a manger, but who knows? I know that Christ spent three days in a cave between crucifiction and resurrection. Maybe that’s the source of the confusion? Or maybe there was a mistake in the translation somewhere? Do other cultures have the same “creche in a cave” scene that is popular here? What about China?
There’s no cave mentioned in the Gospels. OTOH, the inn and the manger only appear in Luke; there is only the story of the wise men in Bethlehem in Matthew, and no mention of the birth at all in Mark and John.
All (all that I have seen here that is) the nativity scenes here (Italy) show a cave. Apparently the Basilica of the Nativity was built on top of the cave where he was born. Found this page which describes it as that at any rate.
That passage mentions both versions, which isn’t really the same thing as reconciling them. Well, I guess it does point out that stables could be in caves, so why not mangers? For that matter, wouldn’t you just feed the animals in the stables? That is, wouldn’t the manger and the stables be in the same structure?
By “Western teachings” that “mention” a manger, is this passage referring to the Gospel of Luke? It’s seems like people who believed this story at all, would take Luke’s word for it, and not suddenly decide in the 2nd Century that the manger was out and a cave was in. I’m still find this confusing, but it does explain why, when Christ pushed aside the rock and emerged from the cave after his rebirth, his first words were, “Whoa, deja vu!”
In my opinion, the Bible was revised many times after the first stories were written, in order to “sell” the new religion. Perhaps “hole in rock” sounded too rough for the Savior of the world, and some editior thought “manger” sounded more “rags -to-riches”.
The Church of Nativity is indeed built on the site of a sacred cave where people had worshipped for centuries. http://www.bethlehem-city.org/The_City/history-index.htm
It was the 2nd century Christian Justin Martyr that ID’ed the cave. This site also explains the Stables-cave connection. IANAArcheologist & take no position if it’s explanation is correct – but it does offer a synthesis answer to cave vs. manger.
Well, that was an interesting link. It’s full of strange misspellings and other solecisms, but at least it corrected a misunderstanding of mine. A manger is just something like a trough, not a whole building for feeding animals. Christ actually had to spend his first few days lying in a trough! Poor kid! Now I feel sort of bad for making light of the experience. The creche scenes suckered me into thinking it was a nice, peaceful, warm place. Now I realize all those animals standing around looking at the baby Jesus with what I had supposed to be divine love are actually nonplussed by the Messiah’s invasion of their feed box, and probably wondering if they’re allowed to eat him.
Jesus wasn’t born in a manger. He was wrapped in cloths and placed in a manger after he was born.
A manger, as has been pointed out, is a feeding trough. To to say that Jesus was born in a manger is to say that that must have been on HUGE freaking feeding trough, big enough to allow a pregnant woman to give birth in it.
Where would one find a manger in Palestine, 2000 years ago? A barn comes to bind. If not a barn, then perhaps a crag in the rocks made to do double duty as a barn (or a cave, if you prefer; however, having family as I do in Missouri, the word “cave” means to me something slightly different than what you may be thinking).