The Christmas Challenge

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2690
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 484 times

The Christmas Challenge

Post #1

Post by Athetotheist »

Now that the Christmas season is officially here [at least on the Commercial Calendar], it's time again for the Christmas Challenge. It's like atheist Dan Barker's "Easter Challenge", which tries to put all the biblical accounts of Jesus's resurrection into a single cohesive narrative, only the Christmas Challenge does this with the Nativity narratives in Matthew and Luke.

In Barker's Easter Challenge, the only rule is that no detail from any of the narratives be left out. To the Christmas Challenge I would apply this and a further rule that nothing be added to the accounts (in light of 2 Timothy 3:16-17, no additions should be necessary).

Any takers?

User avatar
Miles
Savant
Posts: 5179
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 434 times
Been thanked: 1614 times

Re: The Christmas Challenge

Post #2

Post by Miles »

.


............ Not promising anything, but I'll take a look.


.

Online
TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7956
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 931 times
Been thanked: 3484 times

Re: The Christmas Challenge

Post #3

Post by TRANSPONDER »

I don't think it is possible - not without leaving a lot out and making a lot of stuff up to make the two stories work together. That's even if one has the Shepherds and wise men turning up on the same night, so as to provide a vignette for a lot of Christmas -cards (even though the wise men turned up at Bethlehem between a year or two years after the shepherds, long after Joseph had gone back to Nazareth as per Luke) and asserts that the (Roman) census of Qurinus was carried out in the last year or so of Herod's rule.

Even if they do that, the story still has to have Joseph go back to Nazareth a week or so after the birth, while Matthew has the family go from Bethlehem to Egypt until Herod dies, and then because Herod's son was ruling, they go to Nazareth (even though another son of Herod ruled there) until Archelaus is deposed, the Romans take over and Quirinus has the tax -census - and Joseph travels to Bethlehem to register for the tax (even though as a Galilean under Herodian Rule, not Roman, he didn't have to, and even if he has, it would be silly to register in some town of ancient origin rather than where you lived and worked (1) when Jesus was already over 10 years old. Which is why there are such strenuous efforts to make the '2nd census' apologetic work.

But anyone who wants to write a Jesus and a younger Jesus Didymus or even an older Jesus Barrabbas narrative, is welcome to do so, though I doubt that will appeal to Bible -apologists. Yes, yes, I do like the fairytale nativity, but it doesn't work, even with astronomers who ought to know better trying to pass off Matthew's drone -star as a 'conjunction of planets' - like that would send Chaldean magi scurrying off to Judea to 'worship' the son of a Jewish rule (which is all they'd get from a star -map). I'm no antifunda, but one had to tell the child -minded, 'No dear, we cannot go to visit Hogwarts because it doesn't really exist'.

(1) the oft -wagged about Egyptian census - document makes it clear that people had to go back to their own city to register, not some town of a distant ancestor.

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: The Christmas Challenge

Post #4

Post by Tcg »

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #1]

I remember this book from college as required reading:

Image

Unfortunately, I no longer have the book. It'd be interesting to see how it handled this challenge.


Tcg

Online
TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7956
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 931 times
Been thanked: 3484 times

Re: The Christmas Challenge

Post #5

Post by TRANSPONDER »

Indeed. It would be interesting to see how (and if or whether) anyone tries to handle the challenge). Apart from the 2nd census apologetic (incorporating redating Herod's death), there are attempts to talk of Bethlehems in Galilee. Which just shows that Bible - apologists never read the Bible or they'd know that Luke refers to Bethlehem of Judea.

User avatar
Difflugia
Prodigy
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 3246 times
Been thanked: 1996 times

Re: The Christmas Challenge

Post #6

Post by Difflugia »

Tcg wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 2:27 amUnfortunately, I no longer have the book. It'd be interesting to see how it handled this challenge.
That's a straight reprint of a 1922 book, making it old enough to be in the U.S. public domain. There's a scan at Internet Archive.

It's actually more technically a "synopsis" rather than a harmonization. Aside from a few sparse notes, the author just lines up parallel accounts from the different Gospels without comment. Where they don't align, as in the nativity stories, the author just presents them sequentially.

I remembered hashing out the nativity narratives here a while ago and tracked down the thread. My analysis there was that Matthew and Luke are irreconcilable, even if we use the kind of logic puzzle reasoning from inerrancy apologetics where each verse is independent and no two verses share a context:
Difflugia wrote: Thu Jan 02, 2020 3:43 pmLuke is specific enough about lengths of time that Matthew's trip to Egypt doesn't fit. After the arrival in Bethlehem, Jesus is circumcized on the eighth day, Mary awaits her purification for thirty-three more days (according to Leviticus 12), then they travel to Jerusalem. They remain in Jerusalem until they do "all things that were according to the law of the Lord" and return to Nazareth.

Matthew doesn't have time for Luke's trip to Jerusalem. He starts the narrative with the birth in Bethlehem and the wise men travel to the family's house (!) there. As the magi leave, an angel appears to Joseph in a dream and they depart for Egypt. They remain in Egypt until Herod dies and Joseph is once again given instructions in a dream. They return to Palestine, but don't enter Judea (where both Bethlehem and Jerusalem are) because Joseph is afraid of Archelaus. They go instead to Nazareth in Galilee.

If they go to both Jerusalem and Egypt, the Jerusalem trip must be before the trip to Egypt because after Herod died, they didn't enter Judea. The only time that isn't accounted for in Luke's narrative and could accommodate the Egypt trip, however, is during Mary's purification time. That would put the Egypt trip before the Jerusalem trip, though, and the Jerusalem trip can't happen afterward. They contradict.
I read it again and still think it stands.
My pronouns are he, him, and his.

Online
TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7956
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 931 times
Been thanked: 3484 times

Re: The Christmas Challenge

Post #7

Post by TRANSPONDER »

Difflugia wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 12:46 pm
Tcg wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 2:27 amUnfortunately, I no longer have the book. It'd be interesting to see how it handled this challenge.
That's a straight reprint of a 1922 book, making it old enough to be in the U.S. public domain. There's a scan at Internet Archive.

It's actually more technically a "synopsis" rather than a harmonization. Aside from a few sparse notes, the author just lines up parallel accounts from the different Gospels without comment. Where they don't align, as in the nativity stories, the author just presents them sequentially.

I remembered hashing out the nativity narratives here a while ago and tracked down the thread. My analysis there was that Matthew and Luke are irreconcilable, even if we use the kind of logic puzzle reasoning from inerrancy apologetics where each verse is independent and no two verses share a context:
Difflugia wrote: Thu Jan 02, 2020 3:43 pmLuke is specific enough about lengths of time that Matthew's trip to Egypt doesn't fit. After the arrival in Bethlehem, Jesus is circumcized on the eighth day, Mary awaits her purification for thirty-three more days (according to Leviticus 12), then they travel to Jerusalem. They remain in Jerusalem until they do "all things that were according to the law of the Lord" and return to Nazareth.

Matthew doesn't have time for Luke's trip to Jerusalem. He starts the narrative with the birth in Bethlehem and the wise men travel to the family's house (!) there. As the magi leave, an angel appears to Joseph in a dream and they depart for Egypt. They remain in Egypt until Herod dies and Joseph is once again given instructions in a dream. They return to Palestine, but don't enter Judea (where both Bethlehem and Jerusalem are) because Joseph is afraid of Archelaus. They go instead to Nazareth in Galilee.

If they go to both Jerusalem and Egypt, the Jerusalem trip must be before the trip to Egypt because after Herod died, they didn't enter Judea. The only time that isn't accounted for in Luke's narrative and could accommodate the Egypt trip, however, is during Mary's purification time. That would put the Egypt trip before the Jerusalem trip, though, and the Jerusalem trip can't happen afterward. They contradict.
I read it again and still think it stands.
Yes. That's without the hint that the Magi turned up at Jerusalem up to 2 years after the birth when (according to Luke) they would have gone back to Nazareth even though, according to Matthew, they hadn't budged from their own city, Bethlehem. The clue or hint is in Herod, who, when the magi turn up at his palace in Jerusalem asking directions, asks them when the star appeared.
What an odd thing to ask. But we understand why when he waits for them to come back to give him Joseph's street number and they don't come back. So he decides to put all of Bethlehem's male population in a two year age span to the sword to make sure of getting Jesus. Lucky he'd asked them how long's they'd been on the journey, eh? Though of course Joseph has already left for Egypt by that time, prompted by a prophecy.

While I'm at it, I'll mention the other apologetic, the '2nd census'. The idea is that the census that had Joseph toddle off to Bethlehem was not 10 years later than Matthew's nativity because it was an earlier census carried out by Quirinus in the time of Herod. This is helped by a gap in the governorships of Syria which is when (they say) Quirinus had an unknown earlier stint and carried out (or imposed) this tax census on Herod because Augustus was miffed with Herod for some reason and wanted to show him who was boss.

However, the timing is pretty much fixed by relating Luke's Nativity to the events of the Roman takeover in AD 6/7 when Quirinus was indeed governor of Syria and sent Coponius as governor of Judea (after Archelaus, Herod's son, had been removed) to assess Judea for tax, which included a head count of populace on Judea - but not of course Galilee which was still a client kingdom under Antipas and was not subject to the Roman tax. So Joseph as a resident of Galilee wasn't liable for the Roman tax.

Moreover Acts (surely by Luke) 5.37 has Gamaliel remind the Sanhedrin about the various revolts in Judea including the revolt of Judas the Galilean in the days of the census. Well, quite apart from various clues that Luke knew his Josephus and got his 'history' from there (1), we can identify the revolt of Judas the Galilean with the Tax census of Quirinus when the Romans took over. That pretty much settles the date and makes Luke's Nativity about a decade later than Matthew's nativity, as well as being separated by the rulership of Archelaus.

Almost forgot! :) It turned out that a study of Josephus' account of the doings in Judea after Herod's death and Archelaus being removed by Rome make it pretty clear that the previous governor of Syria, Varus (yes, That Varus ;) ) after his term as governor was up, was still carrying out the duties, putting down revolts in Judea when Archelaus was in Rome arguing before Augustus for his kingship to be confirmed. Thus even if Herod's death can be made a few years later (which is the only reason the Bible apologists try to do it - to wangle Jesus' birth in the last days of Herod into the gap in the governorship (2). But Josephus makes it quite clear that Quirinus is nowhere to be found in Judea and Herod is long dead anyway, and it is Varus acting as Syrian governor until the next one is appointed. That pretty much knocks the '2nd census' apologetic on the head.

Now, I won't weary your ears with the various excuses, convolutions and denials that Bible apologists have used to try to make these plain historical debunkings of the Nativities, but I reckon I've seen them all, but I'll say that this is why I regard the Nativities as the Touchstone example of Gospel fabrication. And thus is is not getting the Resurrection accounts off to a very good start when they, to, terminally contradict each other - and most notably Matthew and Luke, again. And quite apart from Christianity going down the tube with the Resurrection, the rest of the gospel contradictions - even the ones with a possible explanation - get dragged down to the slough of discredit along with Nativity and resurrection.

(1) e.g the account of the death of king Herod Agrippa in Acts which is clearly the same account as in Josephus, although Luke changes the Owl as a sign of Herod Agrippa's demise for an angel of God.
(2) though a number of the Bible apologists while battling for a 1st c date for Herod's death, don't seem to know Why they are arguing for it.

Online
TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7956
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 931 times
Been thanked: 3484 times

Re: The Christmas Challenge

Post #8

Post by TRANSPONDER »

Well, we have some time to go but no Christian has taken this challenge up. It is a patters I have observed before that Some threads where the Believers know they are up against it will leave it be be and hope it will vanish without getting past 2 pages,while those where they can cut and paste Creationist material can go on for 20 pages.

Mind, on a former board the 'Nativity' debate went on in 2 separate threads and many pages, mainly because the Bile -side denied everything and demanded that 'History'be proven to him. The evidence for Herod's death in 4 BC was denied (Reign -dates of his sons prove nothing) and it was the devil'sown job to get the evidence that Luke, Acts and Josephus all come together to identify the Tax of quiriinus as the 6/7 AD Roman tax and they so badly want to redate it to before Herod's death.

The problem with Luke conflicting with Matthew in the story,never mind the date, after futile attempts to 'weave them together' failed, even with claiming a 'Bethlehem' in Galilee that point was dropped. But it is fascinating that dead silence on any problems for the Bible while hammerring away for ever on any point they might make stick (like maybe 'prove evolution to me').

I don't think there's anything for them to use. The Astronomical phenomenon apologetic won't work. Matthew's star has to be no more than fifty feet up to indicate a particular house. The '2nd census' apologetic won't work as Acts identifies the census as the one that cause the revolt of Judas (according to Josephus when the Romans took over), and the governor -gap that a previous governorship of Qurinus could be popped into is shown by Josephus to have the previous governor still carrying out those duties until the next governorship. Of course this occasioned trying to discredit Josephus and that historians accept him and effectively science - denial so at to leave the Bible as the only reliable account, while ignoring any evidence that it really wasn't.

Though apart from one persistent Bible apologist, the rest ignored the thread after trying one apologetic like 'the 'star was a comet' and a comet will point out a particular house'. :) sorry to go on but We learned so much in that debate and none of it did other than knock the Nativity story on its'face, nice tale that it is. Like Herod's massacre of innocents. Taken as history even now, though it is quietly known that it is merely Matthew's invention and never happened.

hERICtic
Apprentice
Posts: 197
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 12:30 pm
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Christmas Challenge

Post #9

Post by hERICtic »

Bump

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Banned
Banned
Posts: 20879
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 4093 times
Been thanked: 2572 times

Re: The Christmas Challenge

Post #10

Post by JoeyKnothead »

hERICtic wrote: Sat Dec 11, 2021 9:41 amBump
Don't just bump the thread. Grab you a pitchfork or an axe handle and have at em!
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin

Post Reply