Mythicism, a closer look

The last few days I have been immersed in the videos and lectures of Richard Carrier about the Christ myth theory, to the extent that his views are shaking my previous point of view about the so-called historical Jesus (yesterday I ordered his latest book, On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt). In this lecture Carrier was younger than he is today but it is a good starting point for his work:

Today I will be reading the article of another mythicist, Stephen Law, published in Faith and Philosophy 2011, Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011, pages 129-151, which abstract says:

The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed—a principle I call the contamination principle—entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of independent evidence for an historical Jesus, remain sceptical about his existence.

Law’s full article, ‘Evidence, Miracles and the Existence of Jesus’ can be read: here.

Published in: on December 31, 2018 at 12:54 pm  Comments (4)  

4 Comments

  1. Happy New Year, Dear Fellow! Where there is life, there is hope!

    • Indeed!

  2. “Christ” was a Christian myth, Jesus was not.

    Once again, I find the two concepts being utterly confused. It is this confusion that leads to the debate about the man called Jesus. It is obvious that Jesus existed and it is just as obvious that Christians did not create him, but merely based their religious myths on the man.

    The story of Jesus is typical of the Jews and their history. That alone speaks volumes about the man. Details in the four canonical gospels validate the essential elements of story as historical fact. However, one must have a firm grounding in the Jews’ religion and its relationship to the Temple’s sacrificial system to understand what they see in those details. Outside Margaret Barker’s Temple Theology, nowhere do I find scholars addressing this subject so critical to understanding the story of Jesus.

    Instead, one invariably finds the usual conjecturing over irrelevant matters like those on which Richard Carrier elaborates. As with other Christian apologists, e.g Bart Ehrman and John Dominic Crossan, Carrier is steeped in the Jews’ anti-religious, Judeo-Christian programming designed to divide and confuse what remains of the gullible Christian masses and that is the only viewpoint he is able or willing to debate.

    The last thing Jews want the gullible goyim to understand is the real story behind Jesus. This fact was recently demonstrated by the Jews’ fanatical insistence that Mel Gibson removes the telling lines, “his blood be upon us and our children,” before they would allow their distribution network to release his movie The Passion.

    Jews couched their demands for this redaction as objection to the famous, so-called “blood liable” being “anti-Semitic.” In fact, this phrase runs directly counter to the very thing many Christian apologist maintain, i.e. the story of Jesus’ mission was about opposition to Rome and nothing more. Yet the “blood liable” clearly refutes such nonsense.

    Repeatedly, I have tried explaining how when one knows the real story behind Jesus, they will find it perfectly logical and well within the realities of not only first century Judea, but the present world in which they live, where the only bogus “miracles” are those told and retold by Hallowedhoax “eyewitnesses.” Just as there are rational explanations for the Jews’ Hallowedhoax lies, there are rational explanations for the so-called miracles performed by Jesus.

    Of course, one must begin with understanding the first century Jews’ definition of “miracle.” To date I have yet to find one that can accurately define that word by first century Jewish standards. The story of Jesus is in perfect alignment with historical opposition to the elite Jews’ methods of controlling the masses, amply demonstrated in the Jews’ religion, culture and beliefs.

    The Temple was a religious scam foisted off on fist century Judeans. What Jesus stood against in his opposition to the Temple is identical to those presently standing in opposition to the Federal Reserve and the elite Jews running that scam.

    So while scholars argue uselessly over niggling little points, primarily centered on personality, in their attempts to prove or disprove the existence of Jesus, one of the most monumental historical stories of opposition to the Jews remains hidden. Jesus’ opposition to the Jews was every bit as profound as that of Adolf Hitler, yet no can grasp this simple fact. This obviously works to the Jews’ great advantage.

    What most amazes me is how no one ~ NO ONE! ~ wants to hear about it. All they want to do is argue and debate over the existence of Jesus. Christians don’t want to hear it and anti-Christians don’t want to hear it because it upsets their cherished beliefs.

    The fact is both groups are controlled by their Christian foundations and Jewish programming that mentally proscribes entertaining any facts or concepts that might question anything outside the standard paradigms to which they have committed themselves.

    Good luck to both groups arguing over these absurd, niggling points that lead nowhere. Maybe they will finally hash it out among themselves in another two thousand years.

    • I thought you had said you’d not comment on this site anymore. What happened to your promise?


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: