flying invisible Baby Jesus…
[sub]BAND NAME!!![/sub]
I had an Infant of Prague palm frond storage device when I was little. Only now, typing that, do I fully appreciate the weirdness of Catholicism.
Even now, as an atheist, I find Infant of Prague statues useful for at least one thing: if your local Italian eatery has one sitting up on the top of the salad bar, it probably has kickass genuine Italian food.
Dare ya!
And if you think the Infant of Prague is bizarre, you don’t want to know about those in Buffalo that venerate the “Madonna Bambina” - that’s right, the Baby Virgin Mary.
It’s unlikely that I’m the first person to post this link on this board, but it’ll really make you wonder what’s up with Baby Jesus. Be sure to follow the gift shop link and check out the “Baby Jesus Anti-Fornication Thong.”
Actually, what caught my eye was the link for the “Baby Jesus Creeper.”
Umm… excuse me, why would I need to buy a creeper, when the home page does it for free?
“Why?”
Umm… Christian speaking up here. Honestly, I’ve never spoken about The Baby Jesus, except in relation to the manger scene, or Herod’s slaughter of the innocents. I have no idea where this comes from, really. I’ve only heard the comment from athiests or people making fun of extreme Christians. I’m not saying that they made it up, or didn’t hear it from Christians, just that it’s not part of the imagery I’ve used or been exposed to. Maybe it’s a Protestant thing?
Point of information: The Apocrypha (capitalized)are seven books of the Catholic Old Testament that do not exist in the Hebrew Bible. They are so-called because the Protestants feel they do not have the imprimatur of being devinely inspired or directed books. Specifically the books are: Sirach, Wisdom, Baruch 1 and 2, Maccabes, Tobit, and Judith.
This is different from the other, or aprocryphal (lower-case), Gospels that were written in the first several centuries AD. Each Gospel claims to be the tradition or teaching of one of the Apostles, there is a Book of Peter, and of James, that I know of, and I believe there is one for each of the Apostles (Including Barabbas! :eek: ) but only the four of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are accepted as being divine in origin.
As for the official Gospels, the only mention I know of any act of Jesus before turning the water into wine is the incident where, as a boy, he debated philosophy and religion with the Temple in Luke 3:41-52.
Please follow MrO’s link above, at #25 iirc. They are actually serious.
Those are the folks I’m referring to. They’re not all that rare. I grew up in Bakersfield, and I heard people call up The Baby Jesus quite a lot. They almost always said “The Baby Jesus” too. I said that there is no baby, he grew up and became famous.
There is something in the bible that says the baby exists, but I have no idea where. Is is pretty oblique, iirc.
Anti fornication thong. Cripes, how can one resist ridiculing something like that?
I am genuinely confused by this statement, and not in a snarky way. Of course the New Testament says that baby Jesus existed – you can’t have an adult Jesus without a Baby Jesus first. In addition to following logically, Luke describes the birth of the B. J. You know, “shepherds abiding in the fields…and lo the angel of the lord came upon them.” That stuff from a Charlie Brown Christmas.
Presumably an omnipotent diety can manifest himself any way he chooses, to include as The Baby Jesus. Just think of it as one aspect of many.
Oh, I get it – you/mangeorge are talking existing in the eternal sense, not in the Bethlehem circa 4 B.C. sense.
Yeah, maybe I was a little unclear. What I’m trying to say is that they tell me that Jesus still exists as a baby. You can pray to and worship the baby. He exists as a baby and as an adult at the same time. Nobody else can be this.
You guys are quick!
What about the Infancy Gospel of Thomas?
The child Jesus it depicts was a real little hellion.
*IV. 1 After that again he went through the village, and a child ran and dashed against his shoulder. And Jesus was provoked and said unto him: Thou shalt not finish thy course (lit. go all thy way). And immediately he fell down and died. *
Kinda like an avatar.
And you’re right…it is kinda weird.
I have to confess - I spoke before I read the rest of the thread. I was interested in giving you my own experiences and views of the whole Baby Jesus concept. Again, I wasn’t doubting that people do use it, and refer to it in all seriousness.
Looking at that site is almost as bothersome to my mind as the Huggy Jesus* site. Egads, people, why do you have to put a harmless face on God?
I could go on about my personal theology, but I think that’s beyond the scope of this thread.
*It just doesn’t make sense to me. If you don’t accept the idea of infinite mercy from God why bother putting a mask on it? And do they really think that people who don’t accept their reasoning will find the idea of looking to that mask anything other than ridiculous? Sometimes evangelical types just leave me shaking my head.
Good point, although your word choice may need explanation. For most people who have ever heard of the thing, “the Apocrypha” is that collection of books found in some Bibles ensconced between the Old and New Testaments – and the books you refer to aren’t there. You’re speaking principally of the Protevangelion of James and the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, for which the term “Apocrypha” is perfectly acceptable, and standard usage among Catholic Bible scholars, but for which the more common usage in general is Pseudopipigrapha, preserving “Apocrypha” for Judith, Tobit, I and II Maccabees, and the rest of the intertestamental goodies.
And the books you referenced were deemed pretty much unreliable from the get-go, being already rejected in the Muratorian Fragment of about 130 A.D. Although Catholics derive the names of Mary’s parents and some background information on her from the Protevangelion, and consider it accurate that far.