Valerie Tarico questions Neil Godfrey, Lataster, McGrath

[ficino]

Psychologist Valerie Tarico sends questions about the historical Jesus -- was he, or wasn't he? -- to Neil Godfrey, Raphael Lataster and James McGrath:

http://thehumanist.com/magazine/january ... h-ink-blot

Some good summaries of positions and questions. I like your photo, Neil.

[MrMacSon]

A good discussion.

Though mealy-mouthed vagueness from McGrath -

I would say that doubt about the historicity of Jesus is not what makes one a mythicist. In the case of ancient history, the appropriate standard is (in my opinion) “more probable than not” rather than “beyond a reasonable doubt.” But be that as it may, it’s not doubt about the historicity of Jesus but insistence that Jesus is unlikely to have been historical—and that his first devotees thought he was a celestial deity rather than a terrestrial human—that deserves to be called “mythicism.” It’s important to distinguish that view from the uncertainty mainstream scholars may feel about whether we can discern anything more than a few basic facts through the veil of legend, myth, and dogma that shrouds the origins of Christianity from our view.

[ficino]

Has anyone read McGrath's The Burial of Jesus? Is it any good?

[outhouse]

Though mealy-mouthed vagueness from McGrath -

No, he is simply stating the importance of the non existing credible replacement hypothesis, required when one is choosing the most credible path of current studies on the subject.

I thought he was very clear.

[outhouse]

. I like your photo, Neil.

Looks like he could be my much older brother.

[perseusomega9]

Has Blogger McGrath gone apoplectic over Neil being called a scholar?