(9 votes, average: 4.67 out of 5)
Loading...Sometimes I think that if I’m “getting it from all sides,” I may be doing something right. The religious conservatives seems to be up in arms about my book How Jesus Became God – both conservative evangelical Protestants and conservative Roman Catholics like the Very Reverend Robert Barron. In fact, as I’ve said, I do not think anything in the book is inimical to Christian faith, unless it is completely committed to a view of the infallibility of the Bible and its full, historical accuracy. The Christianity I admire is not like that.
But I get it from the non-religious left as well. Yesterday a member of the blog sent me the following critique – delivered in terms of mocking incredulity – by Richard Carrier, the mythicist (i.e., one who does not believe that Jesus existed) who has shown more vitriol, hatred, and mean-spiritedness toward me than almost any of the fundamentalists who attack me from the other side.
The following is in reference to my point that we do not have any references to Pontius Pilate in any (non-Christian/non-Jewish) pagan sources of the first century – a point I make in order to put into perspective the fact we don’t have any reference to Jesus in any non-Christian/non-Jewish sources of the first century (my point being that if the most important figure – historically, culturally, politically — in all of Palestine during Jesus’ adult years, the Roman governor of Judea, is never mentioned, what are the chances that Jesus would be? This point is made to counter the common but erroneous claim that if Jesus really existed, a lot of sources would have mentioned him. Really? When they don’t mention even someone like Pilate???)
Read Carrier’s critique, and then read the statement beneath it taken straight from my book, Did Jesus Exist.
–
Richard Carrier is the author of On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt and Why I Am Not a Christian: Four Conclusive Reasons to Reject the Faith, among others.
FOR THE REST OF THIS POST, log in as a Member. Click here for membership options. If you don’t belong yet, GET WITH THE PROGRAM!!!
Very bad, but probably nowhere near the worst of your detractors. Richard Carrion doesn’t think you’re going to burn in hell.
jmorgan,
Richard Carrion doesn’t think you’re going to burn in hell.
lol. No. But he would if he believed there was a hell to burn in, no doubt.
I really don’t follow Carrier much (his blogs are long and boring). However a scholarly protocol would have been for him to first contact you and get clarification from you directly before publishing his comments. I’m not sure if he holds an academic position or not, but his strategy may backfire if he is trying to get one.
No, he doesn’t have one.
Thank you very much for addressing this issue. Also was Philo a contemporary of Pontius Pilate? And please do excuse my ignorance, but how do we know that there were other Roman governors of Judea besides Pontius Pilate who were never mentioned?
Philo lived (in Alexandria, Egypt) from 20 BCE to 50 CE; Pilate was the governor of Judea from 26-36 CE. We know that there were because … they are never mentioned!
Did Philo mention Jesus? If not, then why mention Pilate and not Jesus?
No. Because Pilate was important to the Jewish world at the time, and Jesus was not.
Perhaps we don’t have names to match up with all the dates???
Robert Barron and Richard Carrier have something in common. They both demean the writer. Then, rather than taking the time to make sure they understand the context, announce their correct and you are obviously wrong.
There is a lot of that going around, It must be contagious.
Funny how fundamentalist Carrier is in his views isn’t it? That type of thought has little to do with religion, just people that have to be right at any cost…….
I guess Carrier ‘jumped the gun’. Or he just wants to make you look amateurish in the eyes of those who follow him even if he has to lie about it. Will he retract? Only if he’s noble of mind. Your point is a very good one. If Roman records scarcely mentioned Pontius Pilate why would they mention Jesus.
Bart, you have to understand that this is typical behavior of Carrier and the “free thought” blogs cult. Carrier and his comrades from “free thought” blogs ( I put free thought in quotes because they are not free thinking at all) have explicitly said that they seek to banish, shame, and make a pariah of those with views that are contrary to theirs. In fact, some years ago, Carrier and crew attempted to start a movement called “atheism +” which supposedly prided itself on being the truly “progressive” and “open-minded” atheist movement out there. Carrier went so far to say that those whose views do not line up with “atheism+” need to “GTFO”, which, in case you don’t know, stands for get the F_____ out. I’m not exaggerating here. This is really what Carrier said. How “free-thinking” and “progressive” of Mr. Carrier and his “free thought” blogs comrades, eh?
Wow.
yikes !
I realise that this is old, but I want to set the record straight by saying that this needs more nuance.
The Atheism+ initiative was specifically a reaction to a series of unfortunate and unpleasant events that happened on the atheism/freethought conference circuit and related kerfuffles in the blogosphere. Fed up with the insistence that atheism should be about atheism only, and not concerned about petty details like feminism, conference codes of conduct and anti-harrassment policies, et cetera, some people basically said “Sure, fine, atheism per se only means a lack of belief in gods, you win the dictionary battle; we’ll call ourselves Atheism+, by which we mean that we speak up for atheism AND we think that once you turn down the Bible as a source of morality, this has implications on ethics and conduct, and feminism, anti-harrassment policies, and all that jazz will come out of that”. So Atheism+ is basically atheism plus an acknowledgement of secular/humanist awareness of social justice issues…years and years ago before “social justice warrior” became a thing.
I certainly don’t agree with all the A+ bloggers on everything, but denigrating and demonising them as a bunch of exclusionist fascists is blatantly unfair. They’re a reaction to the problem that a number of people in the atheist community lead to serious problems with sexism and harrassment (for unpleasant details, feel free to research Thunderf00t, The Amazing Atheist, “Elevatorgate”, or the unfortunate “Dear Muslima” letter by Richard Dawkins, who has written such wonderful books but also…that thing).
And frankly, although I’m hardly a member of the Richard Carrier fanclub, I’m entirely sympathetic with saying: “People who oppose the mention of feminism and who are against anti-harrassment policies at conferences can indeed GTFO”.
I agree Bart. Your time is too valuable to spend it engaging Carrier. Let others do it on your behalf.
Specifically, I am thinking of the articulate scholar James F. McGrath. (“James McGrath is an Associate Professor in the Religion and Philosophy department and has taught at Butler University since the fall of 2002.”) He regularly takes Mr. Carrier to task for his slippery scholarship and lack of civility in his blog, Exploring our Matrix. One example is here:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/2012/03/responding-to-richard-carriers-response-to-bart-ehrman.html
Just type in “Richard Carrier, Bart Ehrman, Exploring our Matrix” in the Search box and you will see a lot!
His blog, and many others on religion, can be found at:
http://www.patheos.com/Blogs.html
And congratulations on hitting the 100 K mark! tracy
Thanks. And thanks!
As an aside – $100,000? Wow! Good job, people! Only, me thinks it should be a bit more.
I wish it were a *lot* more. Everyone should feel free to donate as they are able and willing!
I am just concerned that you will overwork yourself when we need you here on the blog to answer questions that bug us/me like the following.
The word “glory” has always confounded me. I am on page 272 of your new book, and in the last paragraph you use the word a lot, e.g., “But he has been glory equal to that of God the Father”. So it is an important term.
This website
http://www.intouch.org/magazine/content/topic/heart_language_glory#.U1dtRWeKCFY
gives these definitions:
“In the Old Testament, the most common word for glory is the Hebrew kabod, meaning “heavy in weight.” When you glorify someone, you recognize his importance, or the “weight,” of some desirable uniqueness he possesses. Beauty, majesty, and splendor are the main ideas the word seeks to convey. In the New Testament, the Greek word for glory is doxazo, and its usage is meant to convey a sense of brilliance, or radiance.”
So, “… he has been glory equal to that of God the Father” means…?
Thank you!
I think it means that he has been given all of God’s magnificence and status and is equally worthy of worship.
The question answered itself but it was an informative question, to me.
I want to link to the video for those who won’t read the article:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB6EZzJ7m1c
Ya just gotta love it!
Apparently you are not the only target of Carrier’s attacks. In Maurice Casey’s book “Jesus: Evidence and Argument or Mythicist Myths” he quotes some of Carrier’s rants against Christian fundamentalists which are similar in tone to what he says about you and comments “I cannot see any point in unscholarly writing like this.” I once read Carrier’s book “Why I am not a Christian” and thought it was a reasonable defense of atheism. But lately I have lost much respect for him. Would like you to know how much I have learned from your books and blog about the historical Jesus and early Christianity and am not interested in the mythicists’ illusions (as Casey calls them).
I totally agree with you. Life is too short for vitriolic fools like Carrier. It is no fun dealing with people like that. It is too bad he just rants without reading the book!
I disagree. I have a brother who used to be as upsetting as Carrier, but I did well to value what he said and read The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine, accept his gift of Early Christianities by Bart Ehrman, and listen to him talk about Misquoting Jesus by Bart Ehrman.
MY MAJOR QUESTION is what is the difference between standards for History and standards for debating.
I guess Dr. Ehrman has read Gorgias by Plato, a dialogue in which Socrates speaks with an orator. The orator could be as convincing as a legitimate member of a profession but moreso because he would be applying the instruments of oratory.
That said, the debator/orator must avoid fallacies, must use evidence.
I’ll put the question to Carrier since he’s written a book about historical evidence.
Bart, what would you say about fact checking of orators/debaters vs. the historian?
I’m not sure what you’re asking. Debaters should not make up facts any more than historians should. (And yes, the Gorgias is one of my favorite Platonic dialogues, and has been for over thirty years!)
Carrier is so full of himself.
Go get ’em, Bart LOL. I just watched your Skeptical Fence interview. Good stuff. I agree that Carrier’s not worth your time. That said, I would love to see some sort of published correspondance between yourself and Robert Price, be that in the form of a debate, or have him as a guest on your blog, or go on his ‘Bible Geek’ podcast.
Actually, a better request: Now that you seem to be doing the ‘atheist/skeptic community’ podcasts promo-ing your new book, I’d highly recommend trying to get on “The Thinking Atheist” podcast. That’s the best quality and probably the most popular one (in terms of ‘hits’). He’s had Price and Carrier on the show before. I think it’s important not to let those two be the sole representatives of Christian Origins to the atheist/skeptic community.
Thanks for the suggestion. I don’t actually choose where I do interviews; I have requests and accept the ones that seem plausible.
I’m unclear if mythicists in general or this one in particular, are described here as on the ‘left.’ As an unabashed political lefty, I see just as many, if not more, atheists, or non-religious, who are reactionary trolls, IMHO. Of these, it is my anecdotal impression that those on the right are, if anything, more likely to go whole hog and deny the historical Jesus (as well as buy into many, many other conspiratorial fantasies [q.v. http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/03/20/science-journal-retracts-paper-showing-how-climate-change-sceptics-were-conspiracy-theorists-after-sceptics-shout ])
Carrier still makes a point though, how much more Roman source can you get than Pilate commissioning the thing himself and it being displayed for all of Israel/Rome to see?
I say this only half-jokingly, but I have a theory that you might actually be some kind of advanced real-life troll. It seems the trolling plan is write something that somehows ticks off both sides and causes them both to come around to your way of thinking indirectly. You’ve got the mythicist indirectly defending the historocity of Jesus while you have the believers bringing deeper truths to light in a more public arena by refuting your theories, that I again posit, might only be a form of trolling. Genius!
Well, I wish we know who *did* execute the inscription and who executed it….
Egads! Hang in there! You have more courage than I. You do, indeed, get it from both sides. I guess one thing this might mean is that you write about subjects that are extremely important to people. I always do a double take when a critic claims that you have not studied this subject or have not really read your Bible. How can that be? Ridiculous! Totally ridiculous!
Personally, I consider Flavius Josephus to be both Jewish and a Roman source, writing in Rome, supported by Emperor. That is not meant as a nitpick, and I certainly would never endorse Carrier, but I think it is important to understand the extent to which many Jews of the time were fully integrated into the Roman Empire. We can debate Josephus’ earlier allegiance, we can even use Josephus to debate Josephus, but he and many of his priestly relatives were most likely already Roman sympathizers from the beginning.
Yes, good point. When I talk about sources for Jesus I usually differentiate them as Roman (and Greek), Jewish, and Christian. The first group includes everyone who was a “pagan.” That’s the only reason I don’t include Josephus in the group, but you’re right, it’s an arbitrary distinction. As are all distinctions!
By the way, I don’t read your blogs to either agree or disagree with you. I read your blogs and books and listen to your debates and Teaching Company tapes because it is the best way that I have yet found to learn stuff about a subject that really interests me.
Professor Bart, I’m the member of your blog who suggested some time ago that one day you could comment on the best way to communicate with an extremely conservative person, as I have a friend who thinks the earth is 10K years old and believes every word in scripture is to be taken literally. I have not been able to engage with him. Since you are now being “attacked” by one of those types, maybe now is a good time.
Well, there’s no talking reason to some folk, no matter how hard you try….
Carrier seems to be an unpleasant scholar, time should not be wasted in guys like that. On the other hand, I found similar arguments out of context in the “response book,” (especially in Michael F. Bird and Christ Tilling chapters) even when they read your book completely.
How many “critics” actually “read” the book, rather than just having skimmed through the pages?
Ha! Not a lot….
At least he’s not Richard Dawkins. He wrote a book called “The Selfish Gene” and has spent the next 40 years being attacked by critics who give every indication of judging his book entirely by the title. (It’s actually quite a brilliant book; Dawkins has said unfortunate things, especially on Twitter and similarly brief media, but his books are excellent.)
You’re far better off to ignore Carrier and his ilk, Bart.
Bart.
I noticed that Carrier said that if Jesus did, in fact, exist, your theory regarding his ministry and life (namely, that he was an Apocalyptic prophet) is most likely right!
I find this quite strange since Carrier has basically discarded virtually all the methods, believing them to be useless, that you and other scholars use to reconstruct the life and ministry of the historical Jesus! Do you find this inconsistent?
I suspect Carrier is not as sure of himself as he makes out and may be hedging his bets. 🙂
Upon reading Carrier’s comments in this and previous posts, I’ve concluded that Carrier’s behavior is more like that of a spoiled brat than a scholar. If I was ever interested in reading his books, or anything else he has to say, I would refrain from doing so now. He’s a thorn in the side of responsible and rational scholars…in my opinion.
Bart.
Sorry; I should have included this question in my earlier comment.
Is it even likely that the Romans would have recorded Jesus’ crucifixion or trial, in the first place?
Would they have bothered?
No, they simply didn’t keep those kinds of records. Or if they did, they’ve all been lost (I mean all — not about Jesus alone).
Well said. I agree completely. I’ve read Carrier’s comments and was appalled at how condescending and mean spiritied they were. No mature scholar would act like that in my opinion. Could it be that Carrier is so envious of Mr. Erhman’s notability that he thinks by attacking him personally, it wlll cause the public to esteem him more? Sorry to inform you Mr. Carrier but your diatribes only make you look like a child.
As you deal with ill-tempered attacks on you and your person, keep in mind what Ernest Becker wrote in ‘Escape from Evil’: “‘Every conflict over truth is in the last analysis just the same old struggle over . . . immortality’ (Otto Rank). If anyone doubts this, let him try to explain in any other way the life-and-death viciousness of all ideological disputes. Each person nourishes his immortality in the ideology of self-perpetuation to which he gives his allegiance; this gives his life the only abiding significance it can have. No wonder men go into a rage over fine points of belief: if your adversary wins the argument about truth, you die. Your immortality system has been shown to be fallible, your life becomes fallible.” No one, including Robert Barron and Richard Carrier, are going to allow you to undermine their immortality ideologies without a fight, a mano y mano confrontation.
Interesting point!
That’s helpful in understanding why my fundamentalist family and friends become hostile at the mere mention of Dr. Ehrman’s latest book! 🙂
Thanks for sharing! Wow. And I don’t have one of this author’s books? And he’s a Pulitzer winner? Just, wow!
I doubt in 2000 years anyone will know about Richard Carrier, but they might just know about you.
I *really* regret that I won’t be around to know about it!!!
I started reading “Not the Impossible Faith” by Carrier several weeks back but I’ve been getting worn down reading it. I always love learning new things about ancient cultures and even though there are several things I’m glad to have learned about, it’s just not interesting to read through the incessant attacks against Holding along the way, and it’s emotionally exhausting.
And it’s not just him either, several of his fellow authors from Prometheus have written books whose scholarly insight have been tarnished by their personal vendettas. I generally don’t have a problem with atheist literature, but those like Victor Stenger take it way too far, finishing his “God and the Folly of Faith” with a call to ‘eradicate religion’. And Hector Avalos just promises more than he can deliver in the “End of Biblical Studies” and often (like Carrier) seems to draw the reader into his personal roast of an opponent of his recent debate and concocts a few arguments that seem to be for the purpose to making his opponent look foolish (even if the argument seems forced or out of line with the premise of a particular chapter).
But the quality control with Prometheus books in general is sub-par, printing with cheap paper, ink that can smear if you have your thumb on it for too long, scattered typos in two of those authors’ books I mentioned, so I’m not surprised that the publisher didn’t pull the authors aside and counsel them on their juvenile mudslinging.
Dr. Bart D. Ehrman:
we do not have any references to Pontius Pilate in any (non-Christian/non-Jewish) pagan sources of the first century
Steefen (personal essayist on the historical accuracy of the Bible):
Dr. Ehrman, you are aware of this:
“In 1961 the archaeological world was taken back to the first century Roman province of Judea. A group of archaeologists, led by Dr. Antonio Frova were excavating an ancient Roman theater near Caesarea Maritima. Caesarea was a leading city in the first century located on the Mediterranean Sea. A limestone block was found there with a surprising inscription. The inscription, on three lines, reads:
…]S TIBERIVM
…PON]TIVS PILATVS
…PRAEF]ECTVS IVDA[EA]
The inscription is believed to be part of a larger inscription dedicating a temple in Caesarea to the emperor Tiberius. The inscription clearly states, “Pontius Pilate, Prefect of Judea.” The inscription is significant on several levels.”
http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2010/07/top-ten-biblical-discoveries-in-archaeology-%E2%80%93-6-pontius-pilate-inscription/
Dr. Ehrman, it really pains me to discover that you would question the historical existence of Pontius Pilate and expect us to side with you when archaeology trumps what has been recorded by humans. In Egyptology, I think it was Seti the I who made a list of pharoahs leaving out the Amarna kings but archeology trumped “sources” with the bust of Nefertiti, the bust of Akhenaten (which I saw at the Brooklyn Museum), the King Tut treasures. I almost have tears in my eyes feeling sorry for you for saying Pontius Pilate is not sufficiently established in history. How do you expect us to feel sympathy for you for being attacked when you do something as wrong as that?
You have saddened me…
Steefen;
You could just as easily have written/prefaced, “Despite archaeological evidence…” It’s writing style.
How can you reasonable write, “Contrast that with what I say in my book Did Jesus Exist?” People are responding to How Jesus Became God. Your response needs to be “Contrast that with what I say in How Jesus Became God.”
Bart Ehrman:
The following is in reference to my point that we do not have any references to Pontius Pilate in any (non-Christian/non-Jewish) pagan sources of the first century
Steefen:
I still don’t agree with your style of writing. If you take out Jewish sources, who is supposed to write about Pilate? The Parthians? You cannot quest the role of Pilate existed: Rome did govern Jerusalem in that time period. Why would Pilate be important to the historians covering the Roman Empire? Isn’t that like asking why didn’t federal historians write about some mayor in the city of the Confederacy when nothing of consequence was going on there.
Okay, you’re saying…
Bart D. Ehrman:
if the most important figure – historically, culturally, politically — in all of Palestine during Jesus’ adult years, the Roman governor of Judea, is never mentioned, what are the chances that Jesus would be? This point is made to counter the common but erroneous claim that if Jesus really existed, a lot of sources would have mentioned him. Really? When they don’t mention even someone like Pilate???)
Steefen:
The same reason Ghandhi may have been more recognized than some of the government officials in India.
The same reason Martin Luther King, Jr may have been more recognized than some of the government officials in the U.S.
The same reason we know of Solzhentyn.
Those who speak truth to power or often more newsworthy and history-worthy than the establishment!
You aren’t reading me very carefully! I’m NOT arguing that Pilate didn’t exist. He certainly did exist. My point is that we have little written record of his existence: the inscription (which I mentioned — did you not see this? I’ve actually seen it in Israel and examined it, twice), some coins, Josephus, and Philo. You need to read what I say before attacking it!!!
Dr. Bart D. Ehrman
we don’t have any reference to Jesus in any non-Christian/non-Jewish sources of the first century
Steefen
Just as Pontius Pilate didn’t need to go down in History, Jesus didn’t need to go down in History until a Pacifist Jewish Messiah was needed. From Jesus’ year or three years of ministry, famous in Galilee, famous in Jerusalem, Matthew says famous as far as Syria; he was crucified and appeared to those who loved him but there was no need to write about him until the Jewish Revolt starts. Then, after 30 years, from 33 – 63, Jesus is resurrected as counter-culture against the bandit freedom from Rome fighters. Now, Jesus is friend of tax collectors, rendering unto Caesar, what is Caesar’s; but, Jesus still hopes God would free his people at the beginning of Holy Week.
There are four views concerning the Epistle of James:
1.that the letter was written by James before the Pauline Epistles,
2.that the letter was written by James after the Pauline Epistles,
3.that the letter is pseudonymous,
4.that the letter comprises material originally from James but reworked by a later editor.[
(We have to see what our Dr. Ehrman says about this. If James was written before James died who died before Paul and who died before the Jewish Revolt began, we can proceed to conclusion.)
Although Eusebius may have made up the Legend of the King Agbar of Edessa – Jesus Correspondence, Edessa did support the rebels for throwing out the Romans for the sake of self-rule. Edessa did support the Jewish Kingdom of God spoken of by Jesus. For this reason, it may not be true that “we don’t have any reference to Jesus in any non-Christian/non-Jewish sources of the first century .”
We can say, no, Bart is still right because they came not because Jesus and King Agbar were in correspondence but they came because of the royal family of Queen Helena and King Izates–Queen Helena-Mary and who her baby’s father, her brother, called his only begotten son, Prince (King) Izates-Jesus (they fed 5,000 and 6,000 when they brought famine relief to Judea).
Not much is written about “Mary and Jesus,” Helena and Izates; but, archaeology comes through where historians don’t: no one disputes the palace of Queen Helena and her gift to the Temple. Queen Helena was blessed to go down in History via two things tangible: her golden candle stick (possibly menorah) given to the Temple and her palace. ( It’s possible someone other than Josephus wrote about Roman’s removal of the gold including Helena’s gift from the Temple; then, this would make Dr. Ehrman’s statement incorrect to the extent Helena and Izates contribute to the Mary and Jesus Gospel story. )
both Carrier and Price really do come across as nut jobs. they have clear bias no different to fundies and all free thinkers should distance themselves from them. anybody serious about the topic should only read experiences NT scholars from good universities who dont have blind biases.
Well, Bart, all I can tell you is you win again! I can’t help but love when people just can’t seem to catch the truth in a lie. Although I’m sure you have made mistakes like everyone, you do seem to have a good way of covering yourself in every situation. Or maybe better said, you seem to cover all your bases in every situation that I have seen. Typically when your objectors believe they have you pinned, it’s because they have missed or misunderstood something you have said. Glad to be a member now.
I’m a week behind on the blog so I’m just catching up on my reading. I almost wasn’t going to mention an article I found last week, but when I saw this blog post I thought you might be interested. Skeptic magazine has an article on “Did Jesus Exist?” You get a full 2 pages of discussion covering your “Did Jesus Exist” book. The author says your contempt of mythicists is unfortunate (like there’s something wrong with that!). The author never mentioned their credentials although maybe they’re someone known and I just don’t know them. Anyway, the author, after mentioning some weird ideas held by a Christian apologist named Gary Habermas, some lengthy coverage of your book, discussion of Biblical accuracy and some short discussion of early non-Christian writings, does finally come full circle in saying that he thinks Jesus probably existed.
I got it from the B&N at Southpoint in Durham so you can probably get a copy there if interested.
I’m not contemptible of all of them — far from it. Just the really nasty ones and the really unintelligent and completely uniformed ones! (I have nothing at *all* against unintelligence: the problem is when someone claims to be an expert and doesn’t have a clue what they’re talking about….)
Oh I’m sure. I was quoting from the article and forgot to put quotes around “…contempt of mythicists is unfortunate”. I completely agree with your statement though.
On the 7th May, James White posted this on Facebook, which puts him in a similar category as Richard Carrier:
“This is about as close as you are going to get to hearing Bart Ehrman saying, “OK, I lost that debate.” https://www.facebook.com/AuthorBartEhrman/posts/660535794018218 Of course, his incredibly zealous followers didn’t catch that. Sadly, Rich had worked with Bart’s guy, who he said was a nice fellow, to help them get the footage of this debate. Ehrman just doesn’t seem like the nicest fellow. Then again, watch the debate: he was not only dismissive toward me, but toward the audience as well. And note his comment later on about not debating me again unless he gets a “boatload” of money for the “charities” he supports. Unless I’m mistaken, Ehrman walked out of our debate with a check for $5k made to…Bart Ehrman”.
Good god. Well, I rest my case….
Carrier is an interesting character. I don’t think he realizes how poorly his vitriol comes off. But nevertheless I had read his blog and do intend to address some of the issues he raises on his blog. (if I get time) I learned about the Pilate inscription from one of your books or lectures so I knew you were aware of it.
As far as “debates” and James White I think he and others take them way too seriously. They are a good vehicle to help introduce topics to people. But if you are only concerned with “winning” as opposed to using them as an educational tool then you are doing it wrong.
I really like the blog and forum format. People can think before responding and in general drill down on ideas in a much more precise way.
Yes, it does seem that James White is only interested in winning a debate. He really doesn’t like being challenged.
Having watched a number of James White’s debates; it’s all about winning to him. He doesn’t handle being challenged very well at all.
You’re obviously a glutton for punishment. 🙂
Here’s an interesting question: Carrier says there is a 1/3 chance that Jesus existed. If you had to assign a probability, what would you say is the likelihood that Jesus existed?
Unlike Carrier, I don’t think we can do history by statistics.
I agree Bart.
BT is a powerful tool but only as good as its data input. In this case we have incomplete data. And choices have to be made that will introduce bias and error:
Choice of evidence
Choice of definition
Choice of reference class
All of these choices will vary depending on your pre-existent theological positions. For example: If you believe Paul only believed Jesus lived and died in outer space – well that’s going to matter.
Trying to use BT to decide if 2000 yrs ago a Jewish preacher with a small group of followers lived and was crucified and viewed as divine- it’s simply not possible with BT.
I read a comment by Carrier on your blog one time Bart. He called you a crypto- Christian! I can’t believe a scholar, although he is amateur, can be so cruel.
Yeah, like using the L word….