Richard Carrier - The Hero Savior Analogy

[Mudhammam]

You don't see a difference between "biographies" and "religious propaganda?"

Of course I do.  Applying the same criteria to both doesn't alter that.

It would have been embarrassing - to the pagan author of said criticism.

To the pagans, the Jews, the two cultures in which Christian beliefs arose.

Christians don't seem to be embarrassed by that - then or now.  What's the relevance, in any case?

It was a stumbling block to those whom the Christians sought to make converts, both then and now.  The relevance should be easy to see, but to spell it out for you, I certainly can't think of a good explanation as to why any Jew or pagan one would want to start a religion in which their Savior is supposed to usher in God's kingdom on earth and is put to death before the revolution hardly even gets off the ground.

 The roman pagan critic is discussing what christians then believed, not the historicity of the event.  No one doubts the historicity of christians who believe absurd things.

...What?  Every second and third hand account is a statement of belief.  The concern here is which beliefs are probably rooted in historical anecdote.  The element of awkward or embarrassing details within those beliefs lends credibility to their having a historical core, as the likelihood of such claims being among those one would make up, especially when attempting to persuade others of their veracity, decreases.  This is especially true in honor cultures.

Consider the implications of your argument here, though.  Wouldn't the existence of every ID criticizing thread on this boards by atheists.....who always take the time to point out the absurdity of this belief, lend weight to the "historical creation" moment by means of the criterion of embarrassment, as you've misapplied it???  

You've lost me. ID claims are not wrong because they're "absurd," as you say, they're wrong because they're redundant and do not logically follow from the evidence. That's not at all relevant to historians finding greater value in embarrassing claims which are in-of-themselves very probable.