Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-06-2015, 09:37 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
I don't want to paint all historicists with the same brush, but Minimalist's summary captures my experience as well.

Religion is proof that invisible men can obscure your vision.
Visit my blog
Follow me on Twitter @TwoCultSurvivor
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-06-2015, 11:08 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
The key to disarming the fundies with that is to follow-up and ask what is the consensus on an HJ. As you would expect of any mythic character - or a Rohrschact Test - everyone sees what they want to see.

Outside of a seminary full of jesus freak morons no one sees the "HJ" as a miracle worker who really came back from the dead and flew up to heaven. They dumb him down to something they can imagine and move on to different issues.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-06-2015, 11:28 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(16-06-2015 11:08 AM)Minimalist Wrote:  The key to disarming the fundies with that is to follow-up and ask what is the consensus on an HJ. As you would expect of any mythic character - or a Rohrschact Test - everyone sees what they want to see.

Outside of a seminary full of jesus freak morons no one sees the "HJ" as a miracle worker who really came back from the dead and flew up to heaven. They dumb him down to something they can imagine and move on to different issues.

This is much like the discussion of a Historical King Arthur, if such a welsh warlord/king ever were to have existed he was nothing like the stories written about him. Jesus is the same, there probably was 1 or more rabbis wandering the backwaters of palestine making trouble that were used as a template for a Greek Mystery cult but the Jesus from the books is as real as Superman.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
16-06-2015, 05:43 PM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
Quote: there probably was 1 or more rabbis wandering the backwaters of palestine making trouble that were used as a template for a Greek Mystery cult but the Jesus from the books is as real as Superman.


Okay. That is a possibility but then are they willing to grant that all the other Mystery Cults had a similar historical core? Was there a historical Mithras? Or Demeter and Persephone for the Eleusinian Mysteries? Or Opheus? Or Cybele? Or Isis?

If none of the others required a historical figure what makes the fucking xtians different? Sadly, every answer they give comes down to "Special Pleading."

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Minimalist's post
16-06-2015, 07:47 PM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(11-06-2015 11:48 AM)TwoCultSurvivor Wrote:  Does anyone know of any scholarly rebuttals or responses (positive or negative) to Richard Carrier's book On the Historicity of Jesus?

I don't think there are many scholars rebuttals or responses to the Ahistorical view, as there aren't many scholarly rebuttals to creationism. These views are not seen as requiring a scholarly response. They don't even make it into the pages of peer reviewed journals. The views are deliberately marketed to laymen, and non-scholars. When scholars do make rebuttals, or address these views it's in a non-scholarly way, addressed to mainstream audiences, like Bart Ehrman's book.

While the views may be a bit mainstream among atheists, just like creationism is among many theists, it's seen a fringe view among historians as it as among scientist. And the views don't have as much steam to push them out of the fringes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Tomasia's post
16-06-2015, 08:04 PM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(16-06-2015 07:47 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(11-06-2015 11:48 AM)TwoCultSurvivor Wrote:  Does anyone know of any scholarly rebuttals or responses (positive or negative) to Richard Carrier's book On the Historicity of Jesus?

I don't think there are many scholars rebuttals or responses to the Ahistorical view, as there aren't many scholarly rebuttals to creationism. These views are not seen as requiring a scholarly response. They don't even make it into the pages of peer reviewed journals. The views are deliberately marketed to laymen, and non-scholars. When scholars do make rebuttals, or address these views it's in a non-scholarly way, addressed to mainstream audiences, like Bart Ehrman's book.

While the views may be a bit mainstream among atheists, just like creationism is among many theists, it's seen a fringe view among historians as it as among scientist. And the views don't have as much steam to push them out of the fringes.

Scholars don't care about or talk about the subject AT ALL, in general. The only ones who talk about Jebus are faculty of religiously funded institutions (in general). And of course they would lose their jobs if they were to suggest he was a fake. There are a few others who discuss the subject at all. It's just not interesting to historians.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
16-06-2015, 08:15 PM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(16-06-2015 08:04 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Scholars don't care about or talk about the subject AT ALL, in general. The only ones who talk about Jebus are faculty of religiously funded institutions (in general). And of course they would lose their jobs if they were to suggest he was a fake. There are a few others who discuss the subject at all. It's just not interesting to historians.

There doesn't seem to be any reason to believe that they would lose their jobs if they suggested he was a fake. Many of the more prominent ones never really risked their position by suggesting he wasn't God, that his body was eaten by wild dogs. So I doubt there's any closeted Ahistoricist out there.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-06-2015, 08:33 PM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(16-06-2015 08:15 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(16-06-2015 08:04 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Scholars don't care about or talk about the subject AT ALL, in general. The only ones who talk about Jebus are faculty of religiously funded institutions (in general). And of course they would lose their jobs if they were to suggest he was a fake. There are a few others who discuss the subject at all. It's just not interesting to historians.

There doesn't seem to be any reason to believe that they would lose their jobs if they suggested he was a fake. Many of the more prominent ones never really risked their position by suggesting he wasn't God, that his body was eaten by wild dogs. So I doubt there's any closeted Ahistoricist out there.

There's EVERY reason to think they would lose their jobs. Whether they would or not, it's not a subject that's discussed by scholars, and almost ALL of whom who care at all about the subject *claim* to be religious people.

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
16-06-2015, 08:48 PM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(16-06-2015 08:33 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There's EVERY reason to think they would lose their jobs.

Why would they lose their jobs for believing Jesus didn't exists, anymore so than believing he wasn't God but just a man, didn't resurrect, that his body was eaten by wolves etc... and the variety of other views expressed by scholars that would be anathema for most mainstream believers?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-06-2015, 08:56 PM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(16-06-2015 08:48 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(16-06-2015 08:33 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There's EVERY reason to think they would lose their jobs.

Why would they lose their jobs for believing Jesus didn't exists, anymore so than believing he wasn't God but just a man, didn't resurrect, that his body was eaten by wolves etc... and the variety of other views expressed by scholars that would be anathema for most mainstream believers?

You don't know the insanity of religious boards and administrators. No seminary or school of religion (in general) is going to go hire someone who doesn't share thier core beliefs. And the question of "historicity" is not whether he was "just a man". It's whether there was even a "man" at all.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: