(The obvious extrapolation is that the life of Jesus was mixed with other ancient myths the fulfillment of prophecy, or that the other stories were garbed versions of prophecy, or the other stories were foreshadowing on the stage of history by God interacting with humans to prepare the hearts and minds of men for His Son.)
Or someone wrote it to seem that way. So God plants fake stories in the minds of men in order to prepare them? Hmmmm seems strange.
Minor quibble: When you quote me, please don't alter it, I don't want those comments attributed to me. It would be better to quote my original paragraph as is, and comment below it.
Ever hear of foreshadowing in stories? Why not do the same thing writ large across history, as it happens?
I think there are multiple problems with the interpretation of sacred writings according to contemporary standards--the entire mindset and worldview of humanity has been changing over time. Not just the words in languages, but the concepts, degree of abstraction or personalization/anthropomorphism attributed to items, confusion (or even fusion) of categories which are now considered distinct.
Try reading for example Owen Barfield (not a Christian at all, by the way) for more of the intertwining of thought and language.
It all depends on what God was trying to communicate; and whether he was interested primarily in stroking the intellectual pride of late 20th century / 21st century self-annointed cognoscenti rather than reaching the mass of humanity with things they could easily grasp.
On paper, it is easier for an intellectual to temporarily set aside insistence on using the intellect *exclusively* to grasp a truth, than it would be asking a dunce to follow quantum mechanics. So that is more likely why God spoke in simpleton terms, to make it accessible.
The paradox is that God enjoins humility--and by a strange coincidence, allowing something other than your intellect to be used, in order to grasp the truths, just happens to *require* humility.
Funny how that works out.
Minor quibble: When you quote me, please don't alter it, I don't want those comments attributed to me. It would be better to quote my original paragraph as is, and comment below it.
Reply: It is a common technique to copy and italicize a statement with which you disagree, strike out the text with which you disagree, and then substitute your favored wording.
Most people follow up with a variation on the theme of "There. All fixed."
Haven't you seen this before? I assumed it was standard practice.
Cheers!
...oh, and Merry Christmas!