As I announced earlier, I’m speaking for CFI in two locations this Sunday in Southern California, on why a Jesus was invented at all. But the following Wednesday (April 20 at 5pm), I will be speaking on simply what evidence there is for a historical Jesus, at UCLA, for the Bruin Alliance of Skeptics and Secularists (BASS). Ironically named given my recent debate. But no relation. 🙂
Details here.
We’ll be meeting in the Ackerman building, room 3516. Which is the Student Union, at 308 Westwood Plaza, Los Angeles, CA.
This will be a straightforward listing of the evidence that’s been offered (“The Historical Jesus: What Evidence Do We Have?”), and what the status of it is in the field and why, and what merit I think it has and why (I may also comment on some of the attempts at evidence made by Craig Evans in last night’s debate, which was…interesting). I will of course be selling and signing my books and doing a Q&A.
This supplements the Sunday talks well, so if you are intrigued by what you hear Sunday, you might want to make this talk, too. They won’t have very much overlap. But they address different angles of the same issue. Sunday will be about why they’d make Jesus up. Wednesday will be about what evidence there is that Jesus existed instead.
I’d like to see your take on these critiques of your posts on polyamory:
https://verbosestoic.wordpress.com/2015/07/29/richard-carrier-and-logic-and-polyamory/
and:
https://verbosestoic.wordpress.com/2016/04/11/poly-rationalization/
Ridiculously long rants by an anti-feminist with Gamergate sympathies who hasn’t read anything else on polyamory and has no idea what he is talking about? I have better things to do with my time.
Kenneshaw….interesting? : Any standalone post-debate analysis, Dr Carrier- as you’v done befor?
All mythicists are not the same…the same wud apply in the convurs ie neither are all historicists the same? so Evans v Horn?
Seems tumblweeds are playing, which is eery – I’v only seen wun report, from ‘dustin martyr’.
Cheers.
Yes. I’ll write a post analysis. Eventually.
Richard , you do realise that you can make an absolute shit load of cash if you do the following on your road trip :
1. When no one is looking , claim Jesus Christ appeared to you.
2. Claim he made you blind and then pay off some doctor to confirm your blindness
3. Hide from the public for about a week
4. Resurface a born again Christian and sell this off to the masses in books and television interviews.
If you’re keen , I’ll be your agent and stage the “Pauline Encounter” . I know you have a conscience and may think this is unethical , but we will be selling hope to millions . Nothing like a bit of religious placebo to secure an early retirement.
Cheers
Dave
“Has anybody written analysis about Matthew’s copyist fatigue?”
Richard Carrier on April 18, 2016 at 4:39 pm:
“You mean apart from Mark Goodacre?”
Well, I guess I mean including him. Where has he written about that anf has someone else written about the subject? If so, where?
I believe Goodacre even introduced the argument. It’s in his seminal work on Q (based on his earlier peer reviewed article: “Fatigue in the Synoptics,” NTS 44 [1998], pp. 45-58). I can’t recall if the evidence has been extended by anyone. (Or even rebutted.) I hadn’t regarded it as his strongest argument.