Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-07-2015, 08:41 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
I don't really have a dog in this fight, but I thought I would throw a few logs onto the fire:

(1) I don't agree that it was 60 years after Jesus's death (whether or not that really happened) before any writings about him appeared. It may have been that long for the Gospels and the forged Epistles, but most Biblical scholars agree that the authentic Epistles of Paul (1 & 2 Corinthians, Romans, etc.) were written circa AD 50-55, or within 20-25 years of the commonly accepted date of Jesus' death.

(2) For those of you arguing with Free, he is not some wacky theist (unless he has undergone a recent radical conversion). He is, in fact, a gnostic atheist, who claims to be absolutely certain that God does not exist. I often disagree with him, and actually find him so annoying that he's on my ignore list -- but he is not a theist, so you should not treat him as one. He simply believes (as does Bart Ehrman, also an atheist) that Jesus was a real historical person. I'm on the fence with regard to that issue.

And that's all for now...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 08:53 AM (This post was last modified: 02-07-2015 09:06 AM by god has no twitter account.)
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 08:32 AM)Free Wrote:  Dude, I do not go out of my way to be liked by little old you. I don't know you, and don't really care about you. After all, who the fuck are you?

So, if you think I am some sort of joke just because I refuse to subscribe to your logically fallacious employment of reason and logic, then all that does is reaffirm by initial impressions about you.

Which, of course, are not favorable.

Thumbsup

So an atheist that believes in jebus. Well fook-a doodle-doo. Oh, yes, you are a 7.0 alright - but not on the Dawkins scale.

When you look out of your window at night, how many moons do you see?

So you can't see that jebus was a deity that was given an Earthly existence by christards who forged documents to create the impression that jebus really existed.

Why do you think that christards had to murder, rape, pillage and torture their way through history to get people to accept their religion and jebus especially?

How come there are so many similarities between jebus and past deities?

The real killer - which you have singularly avoided - is how come there are no contemporary accounts of jebus? FFS, we are talking about the Romans here. If some guy was wandering around Galilee preaching to crowds of 5,000 and performing miracles, surely they would have written about him. So, why not?

Because, HE DIDN'T EXIST.

Marburg virus, Ebola, Rabies, HIV, Smallpox, Hantavirus, Dengue Fever all brought to you by god - who cares for us and loves us all Censored
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 08:58 AM (This post was last modified: 02-07-2015 09:06 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 07:52 AM)Free Wrote:  And yet here we do not ever see Josephus, nor anyone else for that matter, ever- not even once- entitling Vespasian as Messiah or Christ.

Do we?

Your ignorant idiotic simplistic fundamentalism does not serve you well. We know that Simon Magus, a Samaritan, a god in Simonianism; they called him "christ".
Saying that ONLY means "messiah" or "annointed one". It's a TITLE, not a name. You have demonstrated the last few days you are utterly ignorant of Hebrew culture and the ancient Near East, but that's an easy one. Also Dositheos the Samaritan (mid 1st century), one of the founders of Mandaeanism, was also called 'christ". In fact he tried to persuade the Samaritans that he himself was the messiah. Dositheus said he was the Christ (Messiah), and used Deuteronomy 18:15 as applied to himself, and he compares himself with Theudas and Judas the Galilean, also known as christs.

"Christos" is the Greek translation of "messiah". So all we have to do to prove you wrong is demonstrate there were many messiahs. And there were.
In Judaism, "messiah" meant a divinely annointed king, such as David, Cyrus the Great or Alexander the Great. Later, especially after the failure of the Hasmonean Kingdom (37 BC) and the Jewish–Roman wars (AD 66-135), the figure of the Jewish Messiah was one who would deliver the Jews from oppression and usher in an Olam Haba ("world to come") or Messianic Age. And here's you list of more :
Simon of Peraea (c. Unknown – 4 BCE), a former slave of Herod the Great who rebelled and was killed by the Romans.
Jesus of Nazareth (c. 5 BCE – 30 CE),
Athronges (c. 3 CE),[8] a shepherd turned rebel leader.
Menahem ben Judah (?), allegedly son of Judas of Galilee
Simon bar Kokhba (died c. 135),
Moses of Crete, who persuaded the Jews of Crete to walk into the sea, as Moses had done, to return to Israel. They all died.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 09:00 AM (This post was last modified: 02-07-2015 09:09 AM by Free.)
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 08:53 AM)god has no twitter account Wrote:  
(02-07-2015 08:32 AM)Free Wrote:  Dude, I do not go out of my way to be liked by little old you. I don't know you, and don't really care about you. After all, who the fuck are you?

So, if you think I am some sort of joke just because I refuse to subscribe to your logically fallacious employment of reason and logic, then all that does is reaffirm by initial impressions about you.

Which, of course, are not favorable.

Thumbsup

So an atheist that believes in jebus. Well fook-a doodle-doo. Oh, yes, you are a 7.0 - but not on the Dawkins scale.

When you look out of your window at night, how many moons do you see?

So you can't see that jebus was a deity that was given an Earthly existence by christards who forged documents to create the impression that jebus really existed.

Why do you think that christards had to murder, rape, pillage and torture their way through history to get people to accept their religion and jebus especially?

How come there are so many similarities between jebus and past deities?

The real killer - which you have singularly avoided - is how come there are no contemporary account of jebus? FFS, we are talking about the Romans here. If some guy was wandering around Galilee preaching to crowds of 5,000 and performing miracles, surely they would have written about him. So, why not.

Because, HE DIDN'T EXIST.

Again, you obviously do not have any understanding of how history is determined.

Are you not aware that the vast majority of historians who specialize in ancient Jewish/Christian/Greco-Roman history all agree that it is most probable that a man named Jesus had his life embellsihed in the Gospels, and was actually a historical man who was crucified by Pontius Pilate?

Do you not understand that we are speaking about hundreds of professional scholars who have reached this same consensus about this Jesus?

Do you not understand that the position that Bucky holds is called "Jesus Mythicism," and that it is considered a "fringe theory" among the educated in this field, and that it represents less than 1% of the views of professional historians?

Are you not educated enough to understand that you are not educated enough in this field to judge anything at all?

Sure, you can have an opinion, but please be certain that your opinion holds at least some shred of credibility, otherwise you will be dismissed like all the other crackpots.

Okay?

Thumbsup

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 09:09 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 09:00 AM)Free Wrote:  Are you not aware that the vast majority of historians who specialize in ancient Jewish/Christian/Greco-Roman history all agree that it is most probable that a man named Jesus had his life embellsihed in the Gospels, and was actually a historical man who was crucified by Pontius Pilate?

Do you not understand that we are speaking about hundreds of professional scholars who have reached this same consensus about this Jesus?

Do you not understand that the position that Bucky holds is called "Jesus Mythicism," and that it is considered a "fringe theory" among the educated in this field, and that it represents less than 1% of the views of professional historians?

Are you not educated enough to understand that you are not educated enough in this field to judge anything at all?

Sure, you can have an opinion, but please be certain that your opinion holds at least some shred of credibility, otherwise your will be dismissed like all the other crackpots.

Prove it. All of it.

You have NO POLLS of any scholars or even ONE piece of evidence to back up even ONE of those assertions. They are YOUR insane opinions and you cannot provide ANY support for even one of them.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 09:25 AM (This post was last modified: 02-07-2015 09:29 AM by god has no twitter account.)
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 09:00 AM)Free Wrote:  
(02-07-2015 08:53 AM)god has no twitter account Wrote:  So an atheist that believes in jebus. Well fook-a doodle-doo. Oh, yes, you are a 7.0 - but not on the Dawkins scale.

When you look out of your window at night, how many moons do you see?

So you can't see that jebus was a deity that was given an Earthly existence by christards who forged documents to create the impression that jebus really existed.

Why do you think that christards had to murder, rape, pillage and torture their way through history to get people to accept their religion and jebus especially?

How come there are so many similarities between jebus and past deities?

The real killer - which you have singularly avoided - is how come there are no contemporary account of jebus? FFS, we are talking about the Romans here. If some guy was wandering around Galilee preaching to crowds of 5,000 and performing miracles, surely they would have written about him. So, why not.

Because, HE DIDN'T EXIST.

Again, you obviously do not have any understanding of how history is determined.

Are you not aware that the vast majority of historians who specialize in ancient Jewish/Christian/Greco-Roman history all agree that it is most probable that a man named Jesus had his life embellsihed in the Gospels, and was actually a historical man who was crucified by Pontius Pilate?

Do you not understand that we are speaking about hundreds of professional scholars who have reached this same consensus about this Jesus?

Do you not understand that the position that Bucky holds is called "Jesus Mythicism," and that it is considered a "fringe theory" among the educated in this field, and that it represents less than 1% of the views of professional historians?

Are you not educated enough to understand that you are not educated enough in this field to judge anything at all?

Sure, you can have an opinion, but please be certain that your opinion holds at least some shred of credibility, otherwise your will be dismissed like all the other crackpots.

Okay?

Thumbsup

And yet again, you show a complete lack of understanding for one who professes much.

I have no doubt that historians thought that jebus actually existed.

100 years ago, I would think that most people believed in some sort of deity, including the dynamic duo: god and jesus.

Then, when science escaped the clutches of religion, it began to flourish.

Given science's advances, fewer and fewer people believe in god and, as science advances even more, fewer and fewer people will believe.

Dawkins thinks that there's a 1% chance that god exists. Personally, I don't think that it's that high.

Where does that leave jesus?

Nowhere.

I agree, most historians were of the opinion that jebus existed. That was then. That was pre-Carrier. Then, most people accepted that jebus existed and so didn't look for any evidence to the contrary. They just accepted that jebus existed, regardless of whether he was the son of god or just an extraordinary person.

That will change and is changing. We once believed that the Earth was flat. We moved on. Historians will move on from believing that jebus had an Earthly existence.

Carrier presents a compelling case that can't be ignored.

Now, boy, keep up.

Marburg virus, Ebola, Rabies, HIV, Smallpox, Hantavirus, Dengue Fever all brought to you by god - who cares for us and loves us all Censored
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 09:37 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 08:41 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  I don't really have a dog in this fight, but I thought I would throw a few logs onto the fire:

(1) I don't agree that it was 60 years after Jesus's death (whether or not that really happened) before any writings about him appeared. It may have been that long for the Gospels and the forged Epistles, but most Biblical scholars agree that the authentic Epistles of Paul (1 & 2 Corinthians, Romans, etc.) were written circa AD 50-55, or within 20-25 years of the commonly accepted date of Jesus' death.

(2) For those of you arguing with Free, he is not some wacky theist (unless he has undergone a recent radical conversion). He is, in fact, a gnostic atheist, who claims to be absolutely certain that God does not exist. I often disagree with him, and actually find him so annoying that he's on my ignore list -- but he is not a theist, so you should not treat him as one. He simply believes (as does Bart Ehrman, also an atheist) that Jesus was a real historical person. I'm on the fence with regard to that issue.

And that's all for now...

When I stated that the first texts relating to jesus didn't appear until 60 years after his death, I qualified it with the statement: external to the bible.

I didn't doubt that Free is an atheist. It's just that he's got some pretty fooked up ideas when it comes to jesus. I don't think that it will be long before he's on my ignore list too.

Marburg virus, Ebola, Rabies, HIV, Smallpox, Hantavirus, Dengue Fever all brought to you by god - who cares for us and loves us all Censored
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 09:37 AM (This post was last modified: 02-07-2015 09:45 AM by Free.)
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 09:09 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(02-07-2015 09:00 AM)Free Wrote:  Are you not aware that the vast majority of historians who specialize in ancient Jewish/Christian/Greco-Roman history all agree that it is most probable that a man named Jesus had his life embellsihed in the Gospels, and was actually a historical man who was crucified by Pontius Pilate?

Do you not understand that we are speaking about hundreds of professional scholars who have reached this same consensus about this Jesus?

Do you not understand that the position that Bucky holds is called "Jesus Mythicism," and that it is considered a "fringe theory" among the educated in this field, and that it represents less than 1% of the views of professional historians?

Are you not educated enough to understand that you are not educated enough in this field to judge anything at all?

Sure, you can have an opinion, but please be certain that your opinion holds at least some shred of credibility, otherwise your will be dismissed like all the other crackpots.

Prove it. All of it.

You have NO POLLS of any scholars or even ONE piece of evidence to back up even ONE of those assertions. They are YOUR insane opinions and you cannot provide ANY support for even one of them.

See Bucky, this is why I can't take you seriously. You see things from only one side of the coin because you focus on one thing only. What that means is that you do not do the research to verify what the truth actually is:

There is near unanimity among scholars that Jesus existed historically. This is well known, and stated by such respected scholars in the field as Eahrman, Price, and yes, even your hero Richard Carrier.

Here's a short list of many of those scholars:

JD Crossan, M Borg, EP Sanders, J Meier and NT Wright, Geza Vermes, R Bauckham, C Evans, J Dunn, M Hengel, P Fredriksen, D Allison and B Chilton, Steve Mason, Alice Wheatley, Joseph Hoffmann, Louis H. Feldman, John P. Meier, James H. Charlesworth, Gerd Theissen, Annette Merz.

There's 21 just off the top of my head. Of course this is a sampling of the hundreds of others.

Now, let's put you to teh test.

Please find just 5 accredited historians who support Jesus Mythicism.

I'll start you off:

Richard Carrier, Earl Doherty (who has not once produced any evidence of his credentials), ....


Go!

Note: Did you notice that I didn't use the 150 scholars from the Jesus Seminar?

Thumbsup

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 09:47 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 09:37 AM)god has no twitter account Wrote:  I didn't doubt that Free is an atheist. It's just that he's got some pretty fooked up ideas when it comes to jesus. I don't think that it will be long before he's on my ignore list too.

I'm praying for that!

Laughat

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 09:51 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 09:25 AM)god has no twitter account Wrote:  
(02-07-2015 09:00 AM)Free Wrote:  Again, you obviously do not have any understanding of how history is determined.

Are you not aware that the vast majority of historians who specialize in ancient Jewish/Christian/Greco-Roman history all agree that it is most probable that a man named Jesus had his life embellsihed in the Gospels, and was actually a historical man who was crucified by Pontius Pilate?

Do you not understand that we are speaking about hundreds of professional scholars who have reached this same consensus about this Jesus?

Do you not understand that the position that Bucky holds is called "Jesus Mythicism," and that it is considered a "fringe theory" among the educated in this field, and that it represents less than 1% of the views of professional historians?

Are you not educated enough to understand that you are not educated enough in this field to judge anything at all?

Sure, you can have an opinion, but please be certain that your opinion holds at least some shred of credibility, otherwise your will be dismissed like all the other crackpots.

Okay?

Thumbsup

And yet again, you show a complete lack of understanding for one who professes much.

I have no doubt that historians thought that jebus actually existed.

100 years ago, I would think that most people believed in some sort of deity, including the dynamic duo: god and jesus.

Then, when science escaped the clutches of religion, it began to flourish.

Given science's advances, fewer and fewer people believe in god and, as science advances even more, fewer and fewer people will believe.

Dawkins thinks that there's a 1% chance that god exists. Personally, I don't think that it's that high.

Where does that leave jesus?

Nowhere.

I agree, most historians were of the opinion that jebus existed. That was then. That was pre-Carrier. Then, most people accepted that jebus existed and so didn't look for any evidence to the contrary. They just accepted that jebus existed, regardless of whether he was the son of god or just an extraordinary person.

That will change and is changing. We once believed that the Earth was flat. We moved on. Historians will move on from believing that jebus had an Earthly existence.

Carrier presents a compelling case that can't be ignored.

Now, boy, keep up.

Carrier is an idiot. He's the fool in the field, and an embarrassment to the profession.

He's shunned by the real pros, and ostracized. He's a conspiracy theorist who preys on the gullible, and who cannot get a job at any accredited university due to his crackpot ideas.

He sells books to fools like you so he can maintain his tar paper shack on the edge of town.

Thumbsup

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: