Can we deduce the nativity events are fiction?

[marco]

Rome built itself on logic, on a superb communication system. A census would give important details of population numbers, used for military purposes or taxation. The simplest way of obtaining information would be for a magistrate and his officers to set up stations and record information, then send it to the Emperor. Rome would have details of colonies thousands of miles away. Joseph would go to his nearest station wherever he lived and Rome would do the rest. Roman efficiency!

Luke's much debated census under Quirinius has people travelling vast distances to some supposed birth town, then back home again. If another census took place, the same wandering of nations would be involved. If a governor ordered such migrations he would possibly lose his head.

Given the importance Luke gives to the census, it is surprising that we are not told about Joseph performing the registration. And if Mary was incapacitated, she would not have been required to travel. One wonders how the hundreds of poor (always with us) managed to make similar journeys.

It is reasonable to assess Luke's tale as rubbish, without probing its supernatural elements.

Does this condemn his entire gospel? Is the explanation for Luke's Bethlehem location a case of fitting a tale to a name in Scripture?

[Athetotheist]

Yes, and I don’t see why they could not have gone from Nazareth to Egypt. There is really nothing in Gospels that tells they could not have gone to Egypt after they had done everything Law says and after they went back to Nazareth.

It makes no sense to have them go from Nazareth to Egypt. According to Matthew, Herod sent his soldiers to Bethlehem because the wise men had told him that the child would be born there, and the angel told Joseph to take the family to Egypt to escape the soldiers. In Nazareth they would have been perfectly safe.

[Difflugia]

Yes, and I don’t see why they could not have gone from Nazareth to Egypt. There is really nothing in Gospels that tells they could not have gone to Egypt after they had done everything Law says and after they went back to Nazareth.

At the risk of sounding snarky, I'm finding it rather funny that you accused me of not having read the Gospels. The reason they can't have gone from Nazareth to Egypt is because Matthew says they went from Bethlehem to Egypt to Nazareth.

According to Matthew, the Magi visited while they were in Bethlehem and the Jesus family went to Egypt right after the magi left (2:12-13). The whole reason they settled in Nazareth in the first place is because Joseph was afraid of Archelaus (Matthew 2:22-23). Archelaus took power after Herod died. Herod died while they were in Egypt (Matthew 2:19).

[Red Wolf]

Matthew had the intent to work the story of the "slaughter of the innocents" into his gospel. Of course an examination of this incident clearly shows numerous problems for the skeptical mind.
Take a close look and THINK...

[1213]

…. The reason they can't have gone from Nazareth to Egypt is because Matthew says they went from Bethlehem to Egypt to Nazareth…

Hmmm… Matthew tells Herod sent the wise men to seek Jesus. And they should have gone to Bethlehem. But Matthew doesn’t tell that was the place where they found Jesus. It is possible that, because the child had already born, the family had done everything the Law requires and returned to Nazareth.

He sent them to Bethlehem, and said, "Go and search diligently for the young child. When you have found him, bring me word, so that I also may come and worship him." They, having heard the king, went their way; and behold, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, until it came and stood over where the young child was.
Matt. 2:8-9

So, I think, by what the Bible tells, it is possible that before birth they went to Bethlehem and after Jesus was born they went to Jerusalem and from there to Nazareth, where the wise men found them and then after that they went to Egypt. Bible doesn’t say “from Bethlehem to Egypt�, that is your interpretation or conclusion. The wise men followed the star and it is possible it didn’t lead them to Bethlehem.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 24 by 1213]


WHERE WERE JOSEPH AND MARY WHEN THEY WERE VISITED BY THE MAGI?

It's certainly a possibility they had already moved back to Nazareth, but not a very logical one.

If the family were already settled up north, up in the mountains of Nazareth, they would have already been out of Herods target zone since he had been informed of Bethlehem, many miles to the south. Herod was made but he even he was unlikely to have decided to clear the entire county of two year olds.

Further, if they wanted to flee Herods territory entirely from up North the logical things would be to go further north west to Phenecia or north east to Syria . To "flee" south to Egypt from Nazareth would have taken them right back through the heart of the danger zone and that for many days. This would be like fleeing a burning house by running back through it to get out the front door when the shortest, fastest and safest route would be to go out the back door. Flee usually implies take the shortest, fastest route to safety. They of course could have taken a wide berth, and travelled south through Decapolis but again, since the objective was safety not Egypt itself, what would be the logic of such a destination from Nazareth?

Finally Matthew's narrative makes a point of specifically mentioning the locations. The child was born in "born in Bethlehem of Judea" the astrologers came " to Jerusalem" the family was told to flee to "Egypt", after the danger the family was told to return to "the land of Israel", that "Archelaus ruled Judea"...he even clues us in that the family moved I to a house indicating they chose to put down roots where they were.... in fact Matthew mentions no less than eight locations by name and alludes to two others in the course of a relatively short passage. It would therefore be an uncharacteristic omission, given the context, to neglect to inform the reader of the family moving to another district entirely before the being warned to flee to another country entirely .


WHERE WAS THE HOUSE?

Although Matthew doesnt say specifically there is good reason to conclude that the family were in in fact still in or near Bethlehem when visited by the astrologers.







RELATED POSTS

Did Luke correctly date Quirinius census?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 557#987557

WHO sent the "star"? (Onewithim)
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 095#993095

Did the Slaughter of the innocents really happen?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 216#994216

Was Bethlehem-Ephrathah a location or a reference to the decendace the son of Caleb's second wife Ephrah?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 930#931930

Was Jesus a wicked baby?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 517#980517

Where were the family when they were visited by the magi ? [this post]
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 208#994208

Is there any evidence the town of Nazareth actually existed?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 741#377741

Why did Matthew say there was a prophecy that Jesus would be called a Nazarene (Mat 2:23)?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 986#781986

Tonread more, please go to to other posts related to

CHRISTMAS , THE NATIVITY and ...JESUS OF NAZARETH

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to post 24 by 1213]

It's certainly a possibility, but not a very logical one.

If the family were already settled up north, up in the mountains of Nazareth, they would have already been out of Herods target zone since he had been informed of Bethlehem, many miles to the south. Herod was made but he even he was unlikely to have decided to clear the entire county of two year olds.

Matthew 2:16 has Herod specifically targeting children "in Bethlehem and in all its districts". So Nazareth, lying in the opposite direction from Jerusalem and at a far greater distance, would certainly have been well out of the danger zone.

A further point to be made here is that since the family would have been safe in Nazareth, there would have been no reason for the angel in verse13 to warn them to flee anywhere. I would say that reduces the possibility to essentially zero.

[marco]

It's certainly a possibility they had already moved back to Nazareth, but not a very logical one.

Thank you, JW, for brightening a dull January morning. We are dealing with angels singing, virgins conceiving, shepherds moving to a manger, a star offering directions, wise anonymities offering lunatic presents to a baby, threats of mass slaughter of children.... and it can be said that "moving back to Nazareth is not a logical possibility." Good grief, Rome has already decreed the most illogical conditions assigned to a simple census - have people travel to their supposed place of birth, even 90-year-olds and pregnant ladies?

You have brought entertainment to the question of fiction in the Nativity.

[marco]

So, I think, by what the Bible tells, it is possible that before birth they went to Bethlehem and after Jesus was born they went to Jerusalem and from there to Nazareth, where the wise men found them and then after that they went to Egypt. Bible doesn’t say “from Bethlehem to Egypt�, that is your interpretation or conclusion. The wise men followed the star and it is possible it didn’t lead them to Bethlehem.

Some folk think Jesus visited Britain - perhaps the family did a detour there as well. I don't think considerations of geography add to or subtract from faith or doubt. Obviously if we admit the absurdity of a simple family having to do a 200 mile round journey just to register, we can accept anything.

If they had to visit other countries on their long trek home the bigger problem would be encountering robbers, especially since they were carrying a chunk of gold. Basically if one believes, no absurdity is too absurd.

The geographical considerations are caused by Matthew's invention of an event (murder of male children) that parallels Scripture, something he likes to do. If the "wise men" were really wise they would not have made themselves the instruments of infanticide. If Jesus were coming with peace and goodwill, it would have been a bad start to be the direct cause of the killing of babies. Matthew has a wonderful imagination and so too, it seems, have those who plan fabulous journeys for the Holy family on their unnamed donkey.

All this to avoid saying the nativity scene, as reported by one Matthew - who thinks corpses walk about - is fictional. It clearly is. The phrase "might have been" redeems it not. There might have been unicorns.

[1213]

…If the family were already settled up north, up in the mountains of Nazareth, they would have already been out of Herods target zone…
…Further, if they wanted to flee Herods territory entirely from up North the logical things would be to go further north west to Phenecia or north east to Syria . To "flee" south to Egypt from Nazareth would have taken them right back through the heart of the danger zone and that for many days….

It could be said they were escaping Rome. Egypt would be the logical solution, if one wants away from Roman empire. If they would have gone deeper to territories that Rome controlled, it could have been worse.

[1213]

...There might have been unicorns.

Unicorns still exist, here are few images:
https://www.google.fi/search?biw=1468&b ... 8421839255