The Holy Innocents

[judechild]

Today, the Western Church honors the Holy Innocents. These are the children killed by Herod as he sought to destroy the Christ Child. The liturgical character of the Church places this event near to Christmas for obvious reasons, and it calls to mind the evil effects of sin. These Holy Innocents are honored by the Catholic Church as the first martyrs for Christ - they did not just die for Jesus; they died in His place. Their sacrifice, though unintended, is honored and mourned today.

Holy Innocents, Ora pro nobis.

 

[cajunhillbilly]

this act by Herod was a crime of great magnitude. may God grant all those who died in this aweful act eternal rest and peace.

 

[Dorothea]

Yes, our church also commemorated the holy innocents on that day, if I remember correctly. Sorry, this is a bit late. I try not to enter this forum too often.

 

[cajunhillbilly]

Yes, our church also commemorated the holy innocents on that day, if I remember correctly. Sorry, this is a bit late. I try not to enter this forum too often.

the Anglican churches also observe that day.

 

[Ave Maria]

I do believe that this happened since it is in the Bible but why don't any historians of the time mention it?

 

[narnia59]

I do believe that this happened since it is in the Bible but why don't any historians of the time mention it?

I've been asked that question before by non-believers. We're not told how many children were involved. My guess is that Bethlehem and even the region around it was not that large, and in the scheme of things and the way the Roman empire did things it may not have been that noteworthy at the time it happened.

In the same way people question why the crucifixion of Christ wasn't documented in the history of the time. From the perspective of the 'historians', it was just another criminal being executed. I've always asked those folks if there is some meticulous list of crucifixions the Romans kept that is missing the name of Jesus -- that would perhaps be noteworthy. But there isn't -- if those types of records existed they're long gone. I think the first mention we see of Jesus historically therefore is when this pesky group called Christians is giving the empire some disturbance.

Not an expert by any means but those are my thoughts. And your bumping this up confused me!

 

[James4_14]

Today, the Western Church honors the Holy Innocents. These are the children killed by Herod as he sought to destroy the Christ Child. The liturgical character of the Church places this event near to Christmas for obvious reasons, and it calls to mind the evil effects of sin. These Holy Innocents are honored by the Catholic Church as the first martyrs for Christ - they did not just die for Jesus; they died in His place. Their sacrifice, though unintended, is honored and mourned today.

Holy Innocents, Ora pro nobis.

I feel badly for the children too.
How is it they are called "martyrs? Define martyrs please.
No. They did not die in His place. He had an appointment on the Cross and that was His final destiny here on Earth. Herod could not have done a thing to thwart the plan.

 

[Zeek]

I do believe that this happened since it is in the Bible but why don't any historians of the time mention it?

Matthew 2:16Then when Herod saw that he had been tricked by the magi, he became very enraged, and sent and slew all the male children who were in Bethlehem and all its vicinity, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had determined from the magi. 17Then what had been spoken through Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled:
18“A VOICE WAS HEARD IN RAMAH,
WEEPING AND GREAT MOURNING,
RACHEL WEEPING FOR HER CHILDREN;
AND SHE REFUSED TO BE COMFORTED,
BECAUSE THEY WERE NO MORE.”

I don't see why Matthew can't be considered a Historian.

 

[judechild]

No. They did not die in His place. He had an appointment on the Cross and that was His final destiny here on Earth. Herod could not have done a thing to thwart the plan.

They did die in His place; Herod was after the Christ-child, and instead (literally "in the stead of") Christ, the children died. A martyr dies for the Faith and for Christ. The Holy Innocents died because ("being caused by") Christ.

 

[James4_14]

They did die in His place; Herod was after the Christ-child, and instead (literally "in the stead of") Christ, the children died. A martyr dies for the Faith and for Christ. The Holy Innocents died because ("being caused by") Christ.

Did the children have faith? No. A martyr is one who refuses to recant of beliefs under threat of death. A willing sufferer. These children had no choice.
They were the victims of Herod's wicked ways and that is all.
The did not die "because of Christ". That puts the blame on God.

 

[judechild]

It does not matter that the children were too young to die willingly; they still suffered a martyr's death because they died for Christ, and in Christ's place (I see you didn't challenge that aspect). They are still among those who can say "How long will it be, holy and true master, before you sit in judgment and avenge our blood on the inhabitants of the earth?"

You are also incorrect to say that "The Holy Innocents died because of Christ" puts blame on God. Blame is in the causal agent, and Christ did not cause the death of the Holy Innocents, but His Incarnation was the reason that Herod attacked the children, and so it is true that the children died because of Christ's incarnation, which means that it is true that they died "because of Christ."

 

[James4_14]

they still suffered a martyr's death because they died for Christ, and in Christ's place (I see you didn't challenge that aspect). They are still among those who can say "How long will it be, holy and true master, before you sit in judgment and avenge our blood on the inhabitants of the earth?"

I wish you would re-read my posts concerning the challenge I did not enter. You will find you are wrong. #7 in particular.

Your quote from the book of Revelation concerns the saints who were martyred for not taking the mark of the beast and concerns that time period only. This particular situation has led to other erroneous dogma. Overreaching eschatology leads to serious error. Another error is reading into Scriptures that which is not there.
The children were victims of Herod's evil.

 

[judechild]

I wish you would re-read my posts concerning the challenge I did not enter. You will find you are wrong. #7 in particular.

Sure, I read them, and you didn't challenge it. All you said was that Christ was going to die, but that doesn't challenge my claim. It doesn't matter whether Herod could or could not have killed Christ, because the question is not about Christ's death; it is about the deaths of the Holy Innocents. I responded to your half-objection in post 9, but you did not continue the discussion on that point in post 10, and so I said that you did not challenge it (i.e. in post 10, which would be the natural continuation).

Your quote from the book of Revelation concerns the saints who were martyred for not taking the mark of the beast and concerns that time period only. This particular situation has led to other erroneous dogma. Overreaching eschatology leads to serious error. Another error is reading into Scriptures that which is not there.

If we are to say that "another error is reading into Scriptures that which is not there," then your problem is assuming that the souls under the altar are only the ones who "were martyred for not taking the mark of the beast;" since there is nothing in Revelation 6 that says such a thing. But even asuming that it did, I'm sure you've got some unique thought on what the mark of the beast is (is it a micro-chip, like so many co-religionists believe?).

But that's irrelevent, because I said that they can truely pray "How long will it be, holy and true master, before you sit in judgment and avenge our blood on the inhabitants of the earth?"

The children were victims of Herod's evil.

Yes, and Stephan was a victim of a mob's evil, but that doesn't affect his status as a martyr. The causal agent is Herod, but they died because of the Incarnation, and they died in His stead.

 

[James4_14]

If we are to say that "another error is reading into Scriptures that which is not there," then your problem is assuming that the souls under the altar are only the ones who "were martyred for not taking the mark of the beast;" since there is nothing in Revelation 6 that says such a thing. But even asuming that it did, I'm sure you've got some unique thought on what the mark of the beast is (is it a micro-chip, like so many co-religionists believe?).

But that's irrelevent, because I said that they can truely pray "How long will it be, holy and true master, before you sit in judgment and avenge our blood on the inhabitants of the earth?"

***Rev 20:4-5
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

Learning to use the Scriptures as a doctrinal whole and seeking "near context" as well as "remote context" are valuable tools for right division. John saw the very same thing as he saw in chapter six in chapter 20.
The two resurrections in Revelation form a pair. These resurrections are ONLY the ones that lived during the Great Tribulation period. These are NOT the only two resurrections in Scriptures.

 

[Standing Up]

-snip-

But that's irrelevent, because I said that they can truely pray "How long will it be, holy and true master, before you sit in judgment and avenge our blood on the inhabitants of the earth?"

-snip-

Do you find it of interest that they asked for judgement and avenging, yet Stephen and Christ, prayed forgiveness? IF SO, perhaps these are OT saints prior to resurrection (unless you have a better suggestion).

 

[James4_14]

What is the Biblical defintition of...holy?