(February 3, 2016 at 7:21 am)robvalue Wrote: Right. If we just believe any testimony is likely to be true at points where it appears to be embarrassing, without further evidence, we're in a very strange position.
I could go ahead and write some stuff now which appears to embarrass me. Will it be true in 2000 years, if little else from the era survives for comparison?
The term "embarrassment" in the context of Biblical analysis criteria means that it goes against the views that the author held.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criterion_...arrassment
For example, if the Messiah was supposed to have come from Bethlehem, then it is an embarrassment that the person the authors believed to be the Messiah was instead from Nazareth. Another example is that if the Messiah was so great, why did he have to be baptized by someone who's supposed to be less great than him. Have a read of at least Matthew and you should see that they provide "filler verses" to provide explanations for some of these embarrassments.
