(July 2, 2018 at 5:14 pm)Minimalist Wrote:(July 2, 2018 at 3:29 pm)JairCrawford Wrote: You're referring to Markan Priority and the synoptic problem. Yes, there are discrepancies and they were written by different authors. That does not, however, require us to make the jump to the conclusion that the whole nativity was fabricated. That is a speculation.
No, it is not speculation at all to state that the original story - so-called "Mark" - lacked any reference at all to the nativity. That is a FACT. If you do not know what a fact is, look it up. Neither is it speculation to state that the two elaborations on "mark" from the so-called matthew and luke narratives were in large part copied from it and that as it had no nativity story they obviously felt compelled to invent one. They differ from each other in virtually every significant detail. This is also a fact.
You have no primary sources for your godboy tales. No Greco-Roman writer* until the late 2d century ever heard of anyone named "jesus" even if they had heard of xtians.... or more likely "Chrestians" as Suetonius and Tacitus wrote.
I'm am really not interested in your beliefs about fairy tales. I want to see facts. And better scholars than you admit they don't have any.
*The fact that 4th century xtians felt compelled to forge "jesus" into Josephus' "Antiquities of the Jews" merely proves that they too were embarrassed by the godboys' lack of impact on history. So embarrassed that they committed fraud.
You are correct in that Mark has no nativity story whatsoever. And you are correct that Matthew and Luke almost certainly used Mark (or a Proto-Mark) as a source. I never denied that those are facts. I said, to completely disregard any form of the nativity as completely fabricated just from the above information is taking a leap, and thus, speculative.
As for primary sources outside of the Bible, there is Josephus, although I have noted that you are asserting that fourth century Christians fabricated the entire Testimonium, so I can presume you do not consider it a viable source at all.
However, that fourth century Christians fabricated the entirety of the Testimonium is not known fact. There is not a consensus among scholars that attests to this theory. What -is- known fact is that Christians at one point -did- tamper with the text. If you remove the most obvious additions (i.e. "He was the Christ"), you still have a perfectly plausible original Josephan text. The argument from silence is also not enough to remove the plausibility. I will read more on the argument from silence on it in the near future. But ultimately to assert that the whole Testimonium is fabricated is based on theory and thus speculative.
Im not here to preach about my beliefs, just have some good honest discussions. Now if people question my spiritual beliefs, I will defend and explain them to the best of my ability, but I do not expect you to necessarily agree. In the same way, if someone asks for evidence, I will try to present my case to the best of my ability. But ultimately I'm just discussing life with fellow people here.
