Richard Carrier debates Craig Evans

[manoj]

Ratio Christi Debate: Did Jesus Exist?
http://ksutv.kennesaw.edu/play.php?v=00030027

[toejam]

I can't get the video to play. Is it just me?

[Ulan]

I can't get the video to play. Is it just me?

It works without problems in Chrome. Firefox needs some persuasion (well, change of security settings for the site), but this may be due to some plugins I use.

[toejam]

^Yeah, doesn't like Firefox. Plays fine in IE.

[maryhelena]

I can't get the video to play. Is it just me?

I have no problem with the video in Chrome.

[toejam]

Two points: Carrier looks foolish trying defend the idea that Paul's view on Jesus was that he was crucified in outer-space. And I hate the way Evans spends his time in the cross examination giving speeches rather than asking questions, effectively cutting Carrier his deserved time to defend his views. He did this in his debate with Ehrman as well.

[winningedge101]

I am no fan of Carrier I think he is a whiny $^#& and annoying as hell, but Evans did nothing but appeal to census the whole time. This is exactly what you get when the debater(Evans) does not read his opponents work or study it at all(Carrier). I'm sure Evans thought that Carrier would be about as dimwitted as Acharya S where everything is a parallel even the dump I just took an hour ago. An interesting thought, was it Ignatius that Richard Carrier showed saying that "Jesus TRUELY was born of Mary, TRUELY was descendant of David, and TRUELY was crucified by Pilate". If Ignatius(?) is replying to Gnostics who DO accept that Jesus existed but want him to be a celestial deity(the reverse of Carrier's hypothesis) wouldn't that actually be more evidence for the historicity of Jesus? If the Gnostics are the closest mythicist scholars can get to their seemingly non-existent Jesus mythicists denomination then I think that mythicist scholars should really question why we really don't have any trace of this denomination anymore, especially since the passages they do like to use usually require a certain degree of ad-hoc.

[Giuseppe]

The point behind the mention of Ignatius is not relative to his (historicist or semi-historicist or maybe even mythicist) opponents, but to the convenient power obtained by appealing to a historical Jesus (even against other historicist adversaries, assuming they were such). To historicize Jesus was a profitable business for those who wanted power & influence.

Seen in this way, a ''historical Jesus'' is more ''strong'' than a ''mythical Jesus'' and always he will be.

[DCHindley]

I am no fan of Carrier I think he is a whiny $^#& and annoying as hell, but Evans did nothing but appeal to [con]census the whole time. This is exactly what you get when the debater (Evans) does not read his opponents work or study it at all (Carrier). I'm sure Evans thought that Carrier would be about as dimwitted as Acharya S where everything is a parallel even the dump I just took an hour ago.

In a currently dormant thread that I had named "Ignatz: Krazy Kat or Krazy editors?"* I have created PDF files with the Shorter & Longer Greek recensions of the letters where they are available for comparison, with English translation (largely from the first, "Apostolic Fathers", volume of the Ante Nicene Fathers series).

Anyhow, in my opinion, neither the shorter or the longer recension makes more sense, basically consisting of free association ramblings. The two recensions show way more similarities in subject and means of expression than differences, so I am wondering if they are not Pseudepigrapha through and through created by the same writer, but at different points in time (3rd to 4th century CE).

I really see no gnostic polemic, although Roger Parvus draws a lot of parallels to the neo-Marcionite Apelles, who he thinks served as the model for Lucian's Peregrinus Proteus (or "verse visa", as Coco the Clown used to say in the Out of the Inkwell cartoon shorts that were shown between reels of movies in the movie theaters of the 40s-60s).

An interesting thought, was it Ignatius that Richard Carrier showed [i.e., quoted as] saying that "Jesus TRUELY was born of Mary, TRUELY was descendant of David, and TRUELY was crucified by Pilate". If Ignatius(?) is replying to Gnostics who DO accept that Jesus existed but want him to be a celestial deity(the reverse of Carrier's hypothesis) wouldn't that actually be more evidence for the historicity of Jesus?

I think this is more indicative of the period in which it was created, that is, during the Trinitarian controversies as this creed is similar to the various ones adopted by the Roman "catholic" church.

If the Gnostics are the closest mythicist scholars can get to their seemingly non-existent Jesus mythicists denomination then I think that mythicist scholars should really question why we really don't have any trace of this denomination anymore, especially since the passages they do like to use usually require a certain degree of ad-hoc.

DCH (yes, I used to watch a lot of cartoons in my youth, 1960s, along with Our Gang = Little Rascals and Three Stooges shorts, every Saturday morning)

*The thread title is a reference to the old "Krazy Kat" comics about this female cat who is unnaturally in love with Ignatz, a male mouse. As he ignores her unnatural advances, she tries to gain his attention by throwing bricks at him, and he finds ways to thwart her. She is really the "Krazy" one, but since the name Ignatz is a form of the name Ignatius, I thought it appropriate to poke fun at the author's, well "crazy", ramblings.

[Ulan]

If the Gnostics are the closest mythicist scholars can get to their seemingly non-existent Jesus mythicists denomination then I think that mythicist scholars should really question why we really don't have any trace of this denomination anymore, especially since the passages they do like to use usually require a certain degree of ad-hoc.

I guess you forgot a few things about how history played out. From 380 on, heretical thought carried the death penalty in the Roman Empire. The first documented executions of people whom the Catholic church called heretics started 386. All non-Catholic literature was burned. Which means, it's rather surprising when we find any Gnostic literature at all, and it's not surprising at all that none of the other early denominations from within the Roman Empire survived.