Comment on my Christmas book....

[JohnClay]

Hi I'm a non-Christian former creationist.

I made a book/ebook. It is intended to be informative, entertaining and a bit off beat.

I'm looking for criticisms such as any logic problems, inaccuracies and other nit-picks.

Edit: I removed the PDF file and here is the website I made for the ebook/book:

An Uncensored Guide to the Christmas Stories

 

[PloverWing]

The book seems to be a pretty good summary of the differences between the narratives in Matthew and Luke. It's well organized, with good graphics. I like the way you've described the differences in the stories, without having a hostile tone; that's a hard balance to hit.

Some questions and nits:

1) Is the intended audience young readers or adults? The first pages have the feel of a children's story, with simple sentences, but by the last pages you're using a larger vocabulary than most elementary-school children would have. It can still work as a book for adults, with the children's-story part being a simple telling of the stories, but I wasn't sure how to read it.

2) If you're mentioning Q, you should probably also mention Mark. Many of Jesus' sayings come from Q, but many of the stories come from Mark.

3) In the Bible passages you quote, make sure to acknowledge the translation you're using. Most modern translations are copyrighted. If you're going to sell your book, you probably need to get permission from the publisher of the translation. You've seen those notices in books: "Scripture passages are taken from the New Revised Standard Version. Used by permission."

4) I more often see John's father's name as "Zechariah", but you're right to be consistent with the Bible translation you're quoting. What translation is it?

5) I'm currently reading Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes. In that book, the author claims that for most first-century peasants in Palestine, the building where you kept your animals and the building where you kept your family were often the same building. If that's correct, there's not much conflict between saying Jesus was laid in a manger and that Jesus was in a house. I'm not enough of an anthropologist to research this claim for myself, but it's something you might take into account.

6) If it were me, I think I'd make Mary and Joseph a little more olive-skinned, given where they lived, but go with your own artistic vision.

Aside from those nits, I think your summary of the two stories and the issues surrounding them is good.

 

[JohnClay]

...1) Is the intended audience young readers or adults? The first pages have the feel of a children's story, with simple sentences, but by the last pages you're using a larger vocabulary than most elementary-school children would have. It can still work as a book for adults, with the children's-story part being a simple telling of the stories, but I wasn't sure how to read it.

I intended it to be for adults though I think kids would be able to follow a lot of it. The simple story telling was meant to be entertaining. It also shows a circumcision and a sacrifice so it isn't so appropriate for kids (depending on the parent). I have been influenced a lot by The Brick Testament which includes sex scenes and a lot of violence though it uses simple language and Lego. (he also sells books intended for kids though)

2) If you're mentioning Q, you should probably also mention Mark. Many of Jesus' sayings come from Q, but many of the stories come from Mark.

I'm concentrating on the Christmas stories though - I'm not sure that Mark is relevant enough to squeeze in a mention.

3) In the Bible passages you quote, make sure to acknowledge the translation you're using. Most modern translations are copyrighted. If you're going to sell your book, you probably need to get permission from the publisher of the translation. You've seen those notices in books: "Scripture passages are taken from the New Revised Standard Version. Used by permission."

I'm using the World English Bible which is public domain and I think doesn't require acknowledgement. But I'll mention the version in my copyright page.
World English Bible - Wikipedia

4) I more often see John's father's name as "Zechariah", but you're right to be consistent with the Bible translation you're quoting. What translation is it?

WEB

5) I'm currently reading Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes. In that book, the author claims that for most first-century peasants in Palestine, the building where you kept your animals and the building where you kept your family were often the same building. If that's correct, there's not much conflict between saying Jesus was laid in a manger and that Jesus was in a house. I'm not enough of an anthropologist to research this claim for myself, but it's something you might take into account.

I read somewhere that there might not have been animals around them with the manger. BTW the wise men coming to the house apparently happened about the year later. I have many children's Christmas books and they portray Jesus as being a toddler when the wise men visit. The manger is only at the time Jesus was born.

6) If it were me, I think I'd make Mary and Joseph a little more olive-skinned, given where they lived, but go with your own artistic vision.

Yeah I guess I should have though it is probably too late now.

Aside from those nits, I think your summary of the two stories and the issues surrounding them is good.

Thanks for all your feedback.

 

[PloverWing]

I'm concentrating on the Christmas stories though - I'm not sure that Mark is relevant enough to squeeze in a mention.

Fair enough. I don't think there's much Q material in the nativity narratives either, though.

That's part of what stands out about the nativity stories. In the rest of their gospels, the authors of Matthew and Luke are drawing heavily from the same sources -- probably Mark and Q. In the nativity stories, they seem to be drawing from different sources.

I read somewhere that there might not have been animals around them with the manger. BTW the wise men coming to the house apparently happened about the year later. I have many children's Christmas books and they portray Jesus as being a toddler when the wise men visit. The manger is only at the time Jesus was born.

"Toddler" is a reasonable guess based on Herod's killing all the babies under 2 years of age. On the other hand, I'm willing to believe that Herod was ruthless enough to kill extra children just to be safe. Because there's so little overlap in the two narratives, it's hard to know exactly how they match up in time.

Thanks for all your feedback.

Good luck on your project.

 

[JohnClay]

BTW this is my idea for the cover. I'm trying to give people an idea of the intended audience - the "a guide to..." part lets them know that it will be pretty in-depth.

 

[JohnClay]

Fair enough. I don't think there's much Q material in the nativity narratives either, though....

Well they have the things in common that I mention in "What's the Same...". I wonder if their ideas about Mary being betrothed to Joseph, etc, was in Q? Maybe it was just a couple of verses in Q?

"Toddler" is a reasonable guess based on Herod's killing all the babies under 2 years of age.

Actually it says they were aged 2 years and under (includes those aged 2 years old).

On the other hand, I'm willing to believe that Herod was ruthless enough to kill extra children just to be safe. Because there's so little overlap in the two narratives, it's hard to know exactly how they match up in time.

Well in Luke they seem to have left Bethlehem after they had been done at the temple which was a few weeks after Jesus was born. In Matthew it seems to be a lot later... though I guess those that believe in the historicity of this will harmonize it all somehow.

Good luck on your project.

Thanks!

 

[JohnClay]

Hi I've finished my book/ebook now. I called it "An Uncensored Guide to the Christmas Stories" by Lucas Walker.

 

[Motherofkittens]

Hi I've finished my book/ebook now. I called it "An Uncensored Guide to the Christmas Stories" by Lucas Walker.

Congratulations! It seems like an interesting read. I really love and appreciate in-depth analysis. Is it published yet?

 

[JohnClay]

Congratulations! It seems like an interesting read. I really love and appreciate in-depth analysis. Is it published yet?

Yes I meant it is published now. It is "An Uncensored Guide to the Christmas Stories" by Lucas Walker.

 

[JohnClay]

Hi I made mobile-friendly webpages based on the book that people might find interesting...

The ebook/book's main page:
An Uncensored Guide to the Christmas Stories

Here are The Bible's two Christmas stories told in parallel - with cartoons:
The Bible's two Christmas stories told in parallel
Note how little in common the stories have.

The conflicting genealogies of Jesus:
The Genealogies of Jesus

 

[Uber Genius]

John welcome to CF.

I read your excerpts and think they will be well-received. They appear to be analytical and informative. They highlight some of the many challenges we have n the Biblical texts if we frame them as God's dictation of truth through man, and thoroughly modern in their genre. That is to say written in modern historical biographic and historical genre standards as opposed to standards common to those writing history and biography 2000 years ago.

In order to accept your proposal however, we would have to ignore your anachronistic fallacy.

Secondly, we would have to ignore that the majority of scholars across Christian history have rejected the dictation view of how scripture was created in favor of humans writing about their experiences from their own perspectives, in writing styles they were familiar with, and with prescientific worldviews common to their culture.

Just as we would suspect collusion out of four witnesses to a crime that were exactly the same, so too the fact that there are differences in audience, style choice, 1st person eye witness as opposed to collecting multiple eyewitness reports seems to be neglected in your presupposition to your work. But you could always retort, "The book was meant to be comedic," or "entertaining."

For best practice works with the same false presuppositions I would recommend Richard Carrier and Bart Ehrman. Both have made great successes out of similar tomes, and no one seems to notice their fallacious attacks on strawman Bibles, so as I said, I expect you will be quite successful.

Besides neither the theist nor the infidel seems to have benefited from a class in philosophy in our current culture, let alone theology, your mistakes will go completely undiscovered.

 

[JohnClay]

John welcome to CF.

Thanks!

I read your excerpts and think they will be well-received. They appear to be analytical and informative. They highlight some of the many challenges we have n the Biblical texts if we frame them as God's dictation of truth through man, and thoroughly modern in their genre.

Here is the conclusion section of my book - I am saying there are a few possible views of the stories:

In the end, your explanations for why the Christmas stories are so different depend on how trustworthy you believe the Bible is. If you are committed to believing that every word of the Bible is true, then the differences must all be explained by the authors not being aware of things or deciding not to include them. It also means having to explain the apparent contradictions in the genealogies and journeys. Often, Christians say that in Luke, Mary was a descendent of David, even though John of Damascus only came up with this theory centuries after Jesus’ birth.

An alternative is that the stories are so different because they are based on independent rumors or fiction, intended to show that the Messiah’s prophecies were fulfilled. They could involve parables that utilize symbolism to tell deeper “truths”. Furthermore, some people believe that some stories in Matthew are based on Old Testament stories.

There is also another possibility – you might be open-minded that the Bible might not be factual, but despite the problems in the journeys and genealogies, you come to the conclusion that it is all factual and can all be reconciled to real history.

...In order to accept your proposal however, we would have to ignore your anachronistic fallacy.

Here is another section - it talks about the point of view of the authors and the possibility that they invented things, etc:

Why Were Things Left Out?
.....
Were the authors unaware of things?
One explanation for these things being left out is that the authors of the gospels were unaware of them. Mary and Joseph would have known about most of them, but perhaps the people they passed the stories down to only heard or remembered some of them. So some people only knew about an angel appearing in dreams to Joseph, while others only knew about an angel appearing to Mary.

Did they decide not to include things?
Another explanation is that Matthew and Luke decided not to include certain stories. Maybe Matthew wanted to focus on angels in dreams, kings and prophecy fulfillment (like the trip to Egypt) while Luke wanted to focus on real life angels and Jesus’ humble beginnings in a manger being visited by shepherds.

Were some things not factual?
The Messiah had to fulfill prophecies; perhaps some of these fulfillments were invented or based on rumors during the time these books were written. That would explain why Matthew and Luke fulfill the prophecies in different ways – with different genealogies and different stories involving Bethlehem and Nazareth.
There are additional stories about Mary and Joseph in writings that aren’t official parts of the Bible including the Infancy Gospel of James, which says that Mary rode a donkey to get to Bethlehem. These apocryphal writings aren’t usually considered factual.

Secondly, we would have to ignore that the majority of scholars across Christian history have rejected the dictation view of how scripture was created in favor of humans writing about their experiences from their own perspectives, in writing styles they were familiar with, and with prescientific worldviews common to their culture.

Yes I am talking about people writing from their own perspectives...

Just as we would suspect collusion out of four witnesses to a crime that were exactly the same, so too the fact that there are differences in audience, style choice, 1st person eye witness as opposed to collecting multiple eyewitness reports seems to be neglected in your presupposition to your work. But you could always retort, "The book was meant to be comedic," or "entertaining."

My goal was to be informative and entertaining but also a bit off beat.

For best practice works with the same false presuppositions I would recommend Richard Carrier and Bart Ehrman.

I am very opposed to Richard Carrier but a lot of what Bart Ehrman says seems reasonable.

Both have made great successes out of similar tomes, and no one seems to notice their fallacious attacks on strawman Bibles, so as I said, I expect you will be quite successful.

Well according to IngramSpark I've sold 2 ebooks and 3 paperbacks though I got to top #6000 in the kindle hourly charts somehow.

Besides neither the theist nor the infidel seems to have benefited from a class in philosophy in our current culture, let alone theology, your mistakes will go completely undiscovered.

I used to be quite a fan of philosophy when I was younger.

 

[Uber Genius]

If we look at how authors engage audiences then and now we see they are selctive about how they approach their topic and present it to their audience.

Your book is making claims that have been made in hundreds of books over the last 200 years. What if we just took four books written over the last 30 years and compared and contrasted hem on the consistency of the facts they presented, and impugned them for not having chosen the same evidence, or leaving out key evidence.

So my point is that if we apply your method across even modern writing it would produce skepticism of skeptical accounts regarding the Bible's authenticity.

That is before we try and apply modern historical standards to ancient writing (anachronism).

what if German scholars over 150 years ago started making some poor assumptions about scripture? What if atheism started creating into the seminaries, first in Europe, then later in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s into the US?
What if a group of evangelical conservatives wanting to stem the tide of liberalism in our churches and seminaries decided to recast scripture with as opposite of their detractors? What if they Recast it as infallible and without error?

What if both groups were extreme and incorrect?

Look at an e-book called "Defining Inerrancy," for a middle perspective. Dan Wallace / Bart Erhman debate to further understand where Erhman misrepresents the biblical record and knows it.

 

[JohnClay]

.....Your book is making claims that have been made in hundreds of books over the last 200 years. What if we just took four books written over the last 30 years and compared and contrasted hem on the consistency of the facts they presented, and impugned them for not having chosen the same evidence, or leaving out key evidence.

In the "Why Were Things Left Out?" section I quoted in my previous post, I came up with 3 possibilities of why some things aren't included - like how Luke doesn't mention Egypt or that Jacob is in some sense Joseph's father.

These possibilities are:
1. the author was unaware of it
2. the author decided to not include it
3. it isn't factual - perhaps it was a rumour that the author who included it incorrectly believed

Is there another possibility I missed?

In the conclusion that I also quoted in my previous post, I think the only claims I'm making are:
....If you are committed to believing that every word of the Bible is true, then the differences must all be explained by the authors not being aware of things or deciding not to include them. It also means having to explain the apparent contradictions in the genealogies and journeys....

An alternative is that the stories are so different because they are based on independent rumors or fiction, intended to show that the Messiah’s prophecies were fulfilled....

There is also another possibility – you might be open-minded that the Bible might not be factual, but despite the problems in the journeys and genealogies, you come to the conclusion that it is all factual and can all be reconciled to real history.

So my claims include the possibility that some people could conclude that the stories are accurate based on the evidence without previously assuming the Bible is reliable.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

Hi I'm a non-Christian former creationist.

I made a book/ebook. It is intended to be informative, entertaining and a bit off beat.

I'm looking for criticisms such as any logic problems, inaccuracies and other nit-picks.

Edit: I removed the PDF file and here is the website I made for the ebook/book:

An Uncensored Guide to the Christmas Stories

Nice online book, with cute pictures. Its a shame you're no longer a Christian/creationist. Peer pressure?

 

[JohnClay]

Nice online book, with cute pictures. Its a shame you're no longer a Christian/creationist. Peer pressure?

Most people I know who are close to me are Christians. I go to church every week and a lot of people there believe that the universe is 6000 years old. When I started university I was deconverted from creationism by an ex-creationist. Then I became a depressed atheist. My sisters think I'll become a Christian in the future.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

Most people I know who are close to me are Christians. I go to church every week and a lot of people there believe that the universe is 6000 years old. When I started university I was deconverted from creationism by an ex-creationist. Then I became a depressed atheist. My sisters think I'll become a Christian in the future.

If you believed in spiritual things, would this be evidence to you that God is real?

 

[JohnClay]

If you believed in spiritual things, would this be evidence to you that God is real?

Lately I have been suspecting there could be an intelligent force in the universe based on personal experiences. Those experiences happened at a Maundy Thursday service.
See:
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...-seemingly-supernatural-significance.8080791/