Herod and the slaughter of babies-- messianism too!!

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
outhouse
Posts: 3577
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Herod and the slaughter of babies-- messianism too!!

Post by outhouse »

Kris wrote: Does anyone think Herods slaughter was fact-based?
No 100% fiction based.

Its building divinity and authority while plagiarizing OT text to mirror the prophecy.

The authors were literally shoving a square peg in a round hole the best they could

Or a story that Matthew used to compare Jesus to Moses?
Yes,,,,, not disputed by anyone who is credible.
What do you think about the prophecy?
It was copied, and used to sell Jesus divinity
Steven Avery
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Herod and the slaughter of babies-- messianism too!!

Post by Steven Avery »

Kris wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2017 12:49 pm Does anyone think Herods slaughter was fact-based?
Definitely. This is one area where I think a number of Christian writers have done an excellent job. I don't really have much original to add, but I could put together a summary. e.g. Layman went over some issues with Peter Kirby earlier, the IIDB threads are gone-threads, James Kiefer and Gordon Franz have some material.

Steven
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Herod and the slaughter of babies-- messianism too!!

Post by Ulan »

By the way, similar fairy tales about his birth circumstances were even told of a contemporary of Jesus, Emperor Augustus:
According to Julius Marathus, a few months before Augustus was born a portent was generally observed at Rome, which gave warning that nature was pregnant with a king for the Roman people; thereupon the senate in consternation decreed that no male child born that year should be reared; but those whose wives were with child saw to it that the decree was not filed in the treasury,137 since each one appropriated the prediction to his own family.
Source: Suetonius, The Life of Augustus, 94,3

Julius Marathus was a freedman of Augustus and wrote a - now lost - biography of Augustus himself.
Steven Avery
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Herod and the slaughter of babies-- messianism too!!

Post by Steven Avery »

Ulan wrote: Sat Nov 18, 2017 10:39 amBy the way, similar fairy tales about his birth circumstances were even told of a contemporary of Jesus, Emperor Augustus:
According to Julius Marathus, a few months before Augustus was born a portent was generally observed at Rome, which gave warning that nature was pregnant with a king for the Roman people; thereupon the senate in consternation decreed that no male child born that year should be reared; but those whose wives were with child saw to it that the decree was not filed in the treasury,137 since each one appropriated the prediction to his own family.
Source: Suetonius, The Life of Augustus, 94,3. Julius Marathus was a freedman of Augustus and wrote a - now lost - biography of Augustus himself.
Do you view the account of the senate’s decree, as described, a fairy tale?
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Herod and the slaughter of babies-- messianism too!!

Post by Ulan »

Steven Avery wrote: Sat Nov 18, 2017 3:57 pm
Ulan wrote: Sat Nov 18, 2017 10:39 amBy the way, similar fairy tales about his birth circumstances were even told of a contemporary of Jesus, Emperor Augustus:
According to Julius Marathus, a few months before Augustus was born a portent was generally observed at Rome, which gave warning that nature was pregnant with a king for the Roman people; thereupon the senate in consternation decreed that no male child born that year should be reared; but those whose wives were with child saw to it that the decree was not filed in the treasury,137 since each one appropriated the prediction to his own family.
Source: Suetonius, The Life of Augustus, 94,3. Julius Marathus was a freedman of Augustus and wrote a - now lost - biography of Augustus himself.
Do you view the account of the senate’s decree, as described, a fairy tale?
The likelihood is very high. Biographies of emperors and other important figures were often enough full of miracle stories. The birth house of Augustus had a consecrated room that nobody was allowed to enter without permission, as anybody entering is "seized with shuddering and terror" or "thrown out by a sudden mysterious force", "half-dead before the door". His reign was foretold by an omen. His mother was, during the night of a solemn service to Apollo, marked with the sign of a serpent, and 9 months later, Augustus was born, which is why Apollo was seen as his father. He commanded frogs to stay silent, and they were never heard again in that area. And so on.

Note that Suetonius places the story of the decided infanticide from the Augustus biography by Marathus into the same section as the stories I just mentioned, not in the first chapter where he discusses Augustus parents, birth and early years, or what you could consider solid biographical data. The section is introduced by the following: "94,1 Having reached this point, it will not be out of place to add an account of the omens which occurred before he was born, on the very day of his birth, and afterwards, from which it was possible to anticipate and perceive his future greatness and uninterrupted good fortune."

Note also that this tale by Marathus contains a trick, in that it immunizes itself against the complaint that nobody had ever heard of this story before: the alleged decree of the senate was never registered with the treasury. How convenient. It's like the messianic secret in gMark, which also explains why nobody had ever heard his story before he told his tale.
Steven Avery
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Herod and the slaughter of babies-- messianism too!!

Post by Steven Avery »

Do you have factual material, not involving forces and omens, where there are demonstrable errors in Julius Marathus?
Or is he basically known for "solid biographical data", putting aside the woo-woo (which looks to have been rather mild.)

As for "a trick", that of course is circular to your conclusion. If Suetonius through Marathus was simply relaying the history, and why it was not registered, then no trick is involved from Marathus.

On the other hand, the fact that he accurately relates the formalities of the Senate, the necessary filing, would support this being history. This goes beyond some question of hearing shudders to whether he was simply relaying Roman legal history or fabricating outright, for no particular gain. I lean quite heavily to the first, unless there is real indication that he fabricated secular aspects of history in general.

"those whose wives were with child saw to it that the decree was not filed in the treasury, since each one appropriated the prediction to his own family. "

Steven
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Herod and the slaughter of babies-- messianism too!!

Post by Ulan »

Steven Avery wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2017 3:21 am Do you have factual material, not involving forces and omens, where there are demonstrable errors in Julius Marathus?
Or is he basically known for "solid biographical data", putting aside the woo-woo (which looks to have been rather mild.)
I have quoted the full extent of what is known about the works of Marathus. Like with Christian church fathers like Papias, none of their works survived and you have only a small quote in a later work by someone else.
Steven Avery wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2017 3:21 am As for "a trick", that of course is circular to your conclusion. If Suetonius through Marathus was simply relaying the history, and why it was not registered, then no trick is involved from Marathus.
If Suetonius had been convinced it was history, he would have put it in his history section, right? You find the tale among those of the magical room in the birth house of Augustus, of how Apollo became the father of Augustus, or how a flame to the sky sprang from a drink offering when his father asked priests about the fate of his son, mirroring Alexander the Great.

It's a tale nobody can corroborate because it was never recorded. As such, it becomes a matter of belief, and I'm sure that most people will also disbelieve the stories that surround this tale.

The reason why I said this is that stories like these were common inventions for revered people. There is no reason to believe these, as they were just written with the purpose to instill awe and grant their ambitions divine blessings. I think Matthews tale serves the same purpose. Maybe, he even used the Augustus story as a template? Who knows.
Steven Avery
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Herod and the slaughter of babies-- messianism too!!

Post by Steven Avery »

"If Suetonius had been convinced it was history, he would have put it in his history section, right?"

No, he had a section pertaining to the birth, and he put it there. Plus, you are only talking about a mental finding of Suetonius anyway, which is decidedly irrelevant. (I should have pointed that out earlier.) The Marathus account has a prima facie ring of truth. Not definitely, of course, but calling it a fairy tale is absurd.

If true, the skeptic will likely claim that Matthew copied that account, the believer will say it was a natural counterpoint. This is not really an apologetic issue, simply giving an historical claim reasonable due.

Steven
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Herod and the slaughter of babies-- messianism too!!

Post by Ulan »

Steven Avery wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:17 am "If Suetonius had been convinced it was history, he would have put it in his history section, right?"

No, he had a section pertaining to the birth, and he put it there.
Steven, you are not really trying to understand things and make stuff up. The section about the birth of Augustus is chapter 5, after Suetonius is done with going over the parents. The quote from Marathus is in chapter 94, which sums up "omens" and legends from all stages of the life of Augustus, including old age.
Steven Avery wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:17 am Plus, you are only talking about a mental finding of Suetonius anyway, which is decidedly irrelevant. (I should have pointed that out earlier.) The Marathus account has a prima facie ring of truth. Not definitely, of course, but calling it a fairy tale is absurd.
So you also believe Augustus was fathered by the god Apollo himself in form of a snake? You are completely arbitrary in your judgment. You have no other source to judge the tale by Marathus as Suetonius, anyway, as there is none. And Suetonius put it in the "special" section, given he presents this as hearsay.

It's funny that how you try to defend a legend about Augustus just to shift the likelihood somehow that the very similar story about Jesus is true. In both cases it's just some story, written by someone with an obvious agenda. And Marathus was Augustus' freedman, so this kind of adulation is expected.

I mean, just look at your last post: You made stuff up that Suetonius put this in a in "a section pertaining to the birth" of Augustus, just to further your agenda. People do this today, and people did it in former times.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Herod and the slaughter of babies-- messianism too!!

Post by Secret Alias »

I don't know if you noticed my comment about Steve Avery being the guy who started the OP about the Shroud (he has since denied it but interestingly the posts have stopped too). In my research I noticed that Steve Avery is associated with a 'scientific' attempt to identify Jesus as having both 'DNA' from the Holy Spirit and Mary which somehow pertains to anomalies or things he can't explain about the shroud. My point is simply that anomalous opinions associated with Steve Avery are turning up in new threads in this forum - now at least openly in his own name.

I don't mean to shame people for their opinions. But it is an interesting psychological condition here. The KJV version is immaculate. The virgin birth is immaculate. Yet interestingly it - the virgin birth - is understood to be 'scientific' or rather having physical reality. I know average believers are supposed to take the virgin birth to be both immaculate and having physical reality. But when you really sit down and think of it - how can anything having physical reality be immaculate?

Immaculate means perfectly clean perfectly neat free from flaws free from sin - all these terms are subjective - unless you start out as a rabid believer in some dogma. But if you start as some rabid believer in a dogmatic understanding you can't possibly consider yourself to be behaving in a scientific manner. Basically your 'science' is just a reinforcement of your beliefs which - aside from being a circular argument - precludes any meaningful discussion at a forum such as this.

It's a narcissistic worldview. You can look down and sneer at 'haters' of various kinds - let's say the proposition that mythicists are closeted atheists who act 'just like you do' but only in reverse. Yet the reality is that such people are incapable of seeing strangely enough that many other people at the forum don't claim to know what the right answer is and are actually combing through the evidence trying to make sense of it all without a dogmatic preconception - in short in an honest manner and with a sincere methodology. I find the blind spot with regards to the honest participants such as yourself Ulan, Ben, spin, Peter and others rather comical. Basically Steve Avery lives in his own room full of mirrors and like Roger Pearse looks for like-minded selfish narcissists on the opposite end of the spectrum (atheists, haters) to reinforce that 'everyone is just as selfish and self-motivated as I am.'

What he can't see for some reason is that there are people who don't have dogmatic preconception, that there are people who don't comb through the evidence merely to reinforce pre-existent beliefs. I find the blindness to that reality an endless source of fascination.

I sometimes wonder whether I come here to 'discuss the Bible' and Bible-related things or witness first hand the limits of human objectivity.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Post Reply