Biff the unclean

You know, of course, that the evil king who kills all the children in a vain attempt to get the supernatural hero is standard mythological fare. It happened to Jesus, Moses, Zeus, Krishna and several middle eastern god/heros. It even occurs in Irish and Germanic mythology.

This isn't history we are talking about, just myth. That's why nobody, outside of the Gospel, noticed all the dead babies.

Stephen T-B

Believing the Nativity story requires a disconnection from reality at a fundamental level.
Disregarding the contradictions and inconsistencies, a rational person must question the extraordinary absence of corrobratve evidence, not only for the Slaughter of the Innocents - a major event in any culture - but for the Nativity itself if indeed it had been accompanied by the appearance of an anomalous star hovering directly above Bethlehem ( a “star” which shone for days over a particular geographical location, as opposed to being simply very bright, would have caused widespread astonishment, comment and wonder) and / or ranks of angels appearing in the sky and singing praises to god. Did only the shepherds notice?
And this is the cruncher: a VIRGIN birth! We must believe that it just slipped by. Word obviously didn’t get out at the time - so how and when did it get out. Did Mary spill the beans? Did Joseph? And why would anyone have believed their story? And if people had believed it, why was Jesus allowed to lead an obscure existence, helping his dad in the carpenter’s shop until he was 12 instead of being hailed as something divine?
None of it makes sense - nor does the fact that anyone believes it.

lpetrich

Some examples of this "dangerous child" motif:

Zeus. His father Kronos wanted to avoid having his children overthrow him, so as Rhea bore them, he swallowed them. But when Rhea had Zeus, she wrapped a stone with some blankets and gave it to Kronos, who swallowed it also. Zeus was raised in secret, and when he grew up, he forced his father to vomit up his brothers and sisters, who were still alive inside. Then Zeus and his friends fought Kronos and his friends, and took over the Universe.

Hercules. When he was a baby, his aunt Hera decided to get back at his father, her womanizing husband Zeus, by trying to kill him by sending some poisonous snakes after him. The baby Hercules strangled them.

Oedipus. His father Laertes discovered that his baby son would grow up to murder him and marry his widow. So he left the baby Oedipus out in the wilderness. Where someone found him and raised him. And he ended up killing his father and marrying his mother, as prophesied.

Perseus. His grandfather Acrisius discovered that his daughter Danae would have a child who would someday kill him, and so he shut Danae up in a tower. But Zeus appeared to her as a shower of gold and made her have Perseus. When Acrisius learns of this, he shuts Danae and Perseus up in a trunk, and drops it in the sea. It floats to a shore, Perseus grows up, and one day, he accidentally kills Acrisius with a stray tossed discus.

Romulus and Remus. The wicked King Amulius had discovered that a certain Rhea Silvia would have a son who would overthrow him. So he made her a Vestal Virgin. But one day, the god Mars got a good look at her, one thing led to another, and she had those twins. They were put in a basket and put in the river Tiber, where a wolf found them and raised them for a while. Then some human peasants took over, and Romulus ultimately overthrew Amulius.

Moses. The Pharaoh decided that his Israelite slaves were too populous, so he ordered the killing of their baby boys. However, Moses's mother put him in a basket placed it in the Nile. A princess found that basket and raised the kid, who grew up, returned to his people, and became their leader.

Krishna. King Kamsa discovered that the eighth son of Vasudeva and Devaki would grow up and kill him. So he killed the first seven ones, but when Devaki had Krishna, he was switched with someone's daughter, and he was brought up elsewhere. And he eventually killed Kamsa.

Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha. King Shuddhodana wanted to keep his son Siddhartha from becoming a religious prophet, so he pampered the kid and tried to raise that kid to become his successor. But eventually, he saw scenes of pain and suffering, and became a religious prophet anyway, becoming known as the Buddha.

lpetrich

Another common ingredient is a prophecy of having some notable destiny. Which also agrees with the Gospels; consider the story of the three wise men who bring gifts to the baby Jesus.

Biff the unclean

Well consider those three guys. Magi, astrologer / priests of the demigod Mithra who bring Jesus the traditional sacred gifts of Mithra. And then they leave, and never come back, and are never heard from again. That's a strange thing to do.

"Hey look!!! The star in the east (we were on a cruise in the Mediterranean) lead us to the Messiah, the King of Kings, the Son of God, the Lord Almighty. Ooops, look at the time! Gotta go! Can't stay for supper, sorry. You know how hectic our schedules are. We'll have to do this again sometime (not!)

Grumpy

lpetrich, the Buddha connection to the Dangerous Child archetype seems tenuous to me. But I'll see your Buddha and raise you one <a href="http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Labyrinth/8657/jason.html" target="_blank">Jason</a>. You may recall that King Pelias was warned that a man with one sandal would overthrow him. This turns out to be Jason. Since he couldn't prevent Jason's birth (shades of the Terminator mythos, as well), he sends Jason on a deadly quest to prevent the prophecy from coming true.

Layman

This is an overstatement and an understatement.

The statement that the two stories only have Bethlehem in common is a misleading overststatement. Many other things are in common, some of which are quite obvious:

1. The child's name is Jesus.
2. The father's name is Matthew (an interesting similirity since Matthew is nowhere to be found in Jesus' ministry).
3. The virgin birth itself.
4. Conception by or of "the Holy Spirit."
5. The local timing. Mary conveived while she was betrothed to Matthew.
6. The broader timing. Mary conceived during the reign of King Herod.
7. The conception by the Holy Spirit was declared by angelic messengers before the birth.

But you are right that these are different stories in a way. But it is probably more accurate to say they contain different stories. Despite the similarities listed above, there is very little temporal overlap between the stories. In other words, other than the birth itself, there is little overlap in time.

Matthew focuses on Joseph before the birth and only mentions the birth itself as an endcap to Josephus' story. And he tells us nothing at all about Mary's conception:

After telling us about Matthew, then barely mentioning Jesus' birth, Matthew jumps ahead a couple of years to talk about the Magi and the massacre of the innocents.

Luke, on the other hand, spends much more time telling us about Mary's story prior to the conception.

Little or no mention is made about Joseph and his thoughts and actions during this time period, or at all. Then Luke spends a lot of time telling us stories about Mary after her conception. A time period that Matthew completely ignores. Then Luke spends a lot of time talking about the birth of Jesus and events surrounding it. An event also almost completely ignored by Matthew. Thereafter, Luke mentions Jesus' circumcision--another event Matthew ignores, but one which is almost surely assumed by him. Then Luke jumps ahead Jesus' presentation at the temple, also a story that Matthew ignores but probably assumed.

So it would probably be more accurate to say that Matthew and Luke tell us different stories related to the birth of Christ rather than saying they tell us different stories about the birth of Christ.

hinduwoman

Killing of infants to destroy a particular baby who would one day kill/depose the present king seems to be a common myth motif. Even King Arthur slaughtered infants to kill his son Mordred.
Maybe it is a memory of infant sacrifices?.