The Jesus Itinerary

[Minimalist]

You are arguing from silence yet you won’t allow biblical theists the benefit of the doubt.

You have not earned any benefit at all.

Your ceaseless prattling about your fucking bible is terribly unconvincing you know.

[Godscreated]

There it is - you added to the text.

No, I didn't. It's the logical conclusion.

Story: "Person A went to that house to see person B."

Without any more information given in the story, the natural assumption is the house belonged to person B. Other elements in that chapter also indicate Bethlehem was Joseph's home, already explained ad neuseum.

Why, if Joseph owned a home in Bethlehem was Jesus born in a manger, and how was it that the shepherds knew where exactly to find Him, they were not given directions to where He was. Just how many mangers were in Bethlehem. Where there crowds gathered to see this birth and guide the shepherds to Jesus. Why would there be crowds to help the shepherds find Jesus, the angels told them of the birth or they would not have known it took place that night. If Joseph owned a house in Bethlehem wouldn't Jesus be born in a bed with Mary. Here are some problems you need to overcome to prove Joseph owned a home there, or even to suppose he owned a home there.

GC

[Minimalist]

Why, if Joseph owned a home in Bethlehem was Jesus born in a manger

Evidence that your godboy was born anywhere, to anyone, other than the fucking shit in your bible which does...in spite of your silly protestations...contradict itself.

[Cinjin]

No, I didn't. It's the logical conclusion.

Story: "Person A went to that house to see person B."

Without any more information given in the story, the natural assumption is the house belonged to person B. Other elements in that chapter also indicate Bethlehem was Joseph's home, already explained ad neuseum.

Why, if Joseph owned a home in Bethlehem was Jesus born in a manger, and how was it that the shepherds knew where exactly to find Him, they were not given directions to where He was. Just how many mangers were in Bethlehem. Where there crowds gathered to see this birth and guide the shepherds to Jesus. Why would there be crowds to help the shepherds find Jesus, the angels told them of the birth or they would not have known it took place that night. If Joseph owned a house in Bethlehem wouldn't Jesus be born in a bed with Mary. Here are some problems you need to overcome to prove Joseph owned a home there, or even to suppose he owned a home there.

GC

Ummm, it's fiction man. Fiction. Not real. Made up. It's plagiarized, re-hashed, regurgitated hocus pocus bull shit.
You want to know How and Why - thats easy - it's fiction. When writing a fictional piece of work, I can explain anything I want with, "because of magic, dude!"

[DeistPaladin]

Why, if Joseph owned a home in Bethlehem was Jesus born in a manger, and how was it that the shepherds knew where exactly to find Him, they were not given directions to where He was. Just how many mangers were in Bethlehem. Where there crowds gathered to see this birth and guide the shepherds to Jesus. Why would there be crowds to help the shepherds find Jesus, the angels told them of the birth or they would not have known it took place that night. If Joseph owned a house in Bethlehem wouldn't Jesus be born in a bed with Mary. Here are some problems you need to overcome to prove Joseph owned a home there, or even to suppose he owned a home there.

Simple.

The manger and the shepherds are part of Luke's story, not Matthew's.

The two stories don't sync. That's my point.

[John V]

No, I didn't. It's the logical conclusion.

Yes, you did. The text doesn't say it's Joseph's house. You say it is. That's an addition. It doesn't matter how logical or natural you think that addition is, it's still an addition.

[DeistPaladin]

Yes, you did. The text doesn't say it's Joseph's house. You say it is. That's an addition. It doesn't matter how logical or natural you think that addition is, it's still an addition.

"Conclusion" not "addition".

[max-greece]

"Why, if Joseph owned a home in Bethlehem was Jesus born in a manger, and how was it that the shepherds knew where exactly to find Him, they were not given directions to where He was. Just how many mangers were in Bethlehem. Where there crowds gathered to see this birth and guide the shepherds to Jesus. Why would there be crowds to help the shepherds find Jesus, the angels told them of the birth or they would not have known it took place that night. If Joseph owned a house in Bethlehem wouldn't Jesus be born in a bed with Mary. Here are some problems you need to overcome to prove Joseph owned a home there, or even to suppose he owned a home there."

Come on GC - you can do it. Make that logical leap.

I'll give you a clue:

Because it ______ happen.

The missing word beings with a D and ends with idn't.

[Cyberman]

Sorry to be so late into this, I saw the point I wanted to address and didn't expect there to be another half dozen pages before I got here. Prophets are down today, it seems (no change there, then).

Anyway, I just wanted to go back to the Kessel Run bit and at the same time highlight the distinction between ad hoc fanficking and drawing on available evidence. As DP pointed out, the Kessel Run Moment is, prima facie, an infamous script blunder which has fed into fan speculation and critical scorn for decades. Whole stables of literature have been bred from that single line. But is it as it appears?

I have an actual reproduced copy of the shooting script, published many years ago. Though not to hand and memory being what it is, I can nonetheless recall the gist, if not the verbatim text, of that scene.

Han is boasting about his ship and his piloting skills. He is blustering. He makes his comment about parsecs, then the direction goes something to the effect of "Kenobi reacts to this obvious misinformation". It's not just in the script; the scene was filmed exactly as written - Alec Guinness tilts his head and gives a withering "wtf? Tell me you didn't just say that!" expression. In other words, Lucas knew it was bad science and the gag was a throwaway glimpse into Solo's character; but more importantly, he expected the audience to know it too.

It's like my favourite gag of the entire film, when they go down to the detention block. They step into the lift and face the door. Inside, they have their bit of banter about how this is a bad idea ("Why didn't you say so before?" "I did say so before!"). Then the lift stops and the other door opens behind them. They go to step forward, realise the door they entered by didn't open, and look around in confusion before getting it. That's it - no jokey dialogue, no comedy music, no wacky sound effects. Just a bit of business with the set design which may have been improvised on the day (for comparison, see the mouse droid scene a few minutes earlier, which is as subtle as an air raid).

So after all that, I hope the illustration has been made that devising ad hocs to fill in plot holes is only necessary where there are actual holes requiring filling (giggety). Other than that, this was a thinly-veiled attempt to be part of the conversation.

[John V]

So after all that, I hope the illustration has been made that devising ad hocs to fill in plot holes is only necessary where there are actual holes requiring filling (giggety). Other than that, this was a thinly-veiled attempt to be part of the conversation.

Bingo.