dog-on

Maybe, except for the part where the author themselves know they are writing fiction...

Amaleq13

True but I don't see how that applies to your apparently baseless speculation. In fact, your approach seems more simplistic than "complicated". It is nothing but an uniformed hypothesis at this point.

You only write as though you are finished when you really haven't even begun. This is what draws the criticism.

Do you really think that question is relevant to the point I was making? You asserted a probability statement with nothing to support it.

Now that is a relevant data point!! It doesn't establish your claim but it is evidence and it is relevant. Unfortunately, it appears to undermine your claim since there is no indication from either participant that this mistranslation was considered by anyone to be an indicator of fiction. Trypho offers it only as evidence that Christians are wrong. Justin clearly didn't consider it an indicator of fiction.

Amaleq13

No offense but I have less confidence in your ability to read the minds of the authors than I do in your ability to identify what their contemporaries considered to be indications of fiction.

dog-on

No need to read mind here, Amaleq.

Self evident is, well.... self evident.

Amaleq13

But it is certainly not self evident that the authors of the Gospels considered their entire story to be fiction so you are left pretending that you can read their minds. :huh:

dog-on

If the majority of the story is shown to be, not simply fanciful, but derived from stories that have nothing to do with the particular story at hand, then it would seem to me that this is "prima facie" evidence that the author knew he/she was writing fiction.

Of course, this does not mean that the author did not intend to fool the natives, per se.

The result being that it is now up to you to prove that the author did not intend to write fiction when, of course, that is exactly what he wrote.

aa5874

These stories indicate to me what people believed at that time or what the authors wanted their readers or audience to believe.

Look at "The Twelve Caesars" on Vespasian by Suetonius. The incredible stories of Jesus are just an indication to me of the prevailing beliefs of antiquity.

patcleaver

Yes incredible claims were common. However, you could never prove that the claims of Suetonius about the miracles of Vespasian are false. All you could do is point out that similar claims of the times were false, and that there is not enough evidence for such extraordinary claims.

We think that Suetonius intended us to believe what he wrote because he wrote things that nobody could prove false. If Suetonius had claimed that Vespasian had moved Rome to Sicily and Alexandria to Italy, then we would know that he was writing satire.

However, in Mark it is easy to prove that some of the claims of Jesus are false. Why would Mark include claims of Jesus that are easily proved false, if Mark really intended us to think that his book was history? This seems like fictional satire.

Yes, the gospels seems to be satirizing false messiah claimants. They do not fulfill the prophesies of the messiah, they make outrageous false claims, they perform fake miracles, they misquote Hebrew scripture and say silly things, then they get killed.

aa5874

I would say with reasonable certainty that it was not possible for a blind man to receive his sight with spit of another man, or that a lame person can be made to walk just by simply touching his heel, these are all fiction.

No medical journal can show that spit or the simple touch of a man has any healing effect on the eyes or on the lame as ordered by the Gods.

Both Suetonius and the unknown authors wrote fiction, but it was apparently believed to be true.

I am of the opinion that the Gospels were written in such a manner as to appear believeable, not fictional.

Amaleq13

Did you miss Ben's references to ancient historians doing much the same thing in describing events they certainly believed took place? Using older, familiar stories to describe more recent events apparently is not a reliable indicator of fiction or intent.

Contrary to your 21st century impression.

Sorry, but this attempt to shift the burden fails.