http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/on-the-h...909697492r

Quote:The assumption that Jesus existed as a historical person has occasionally been questioned in the course of the last hundred years or so, but any doubts that have been raised have usually been put to rest in favor of imagining a blend of the historical, the mythical and the theological in the surviving records of Jesus.

Carrier re-examines the whole question and finds compelling reasons to suspect the more daring assumption is correct. He lays out extensive research on the evidence for Jesus and the origins of Christianity and poses the key questions that must now be answered if the historicity of Jesus is to survive as a dominant paradigm.

Carrier contrasts the most credible reconstruction of a historical Jesus with the most credible theory of Christian origins if a historical Jesus did not exist. Such a theory would posit that the Jesus figure was originally conceived of as a celestial being known only through private revelations and hidden messages in scripture; then stories placing this being in earth history were crafted to communicate the claims of the gospel allegorically; such stories eventually came to be believed or promoted in the struggle for control of the Christian churches that survived the tribulations of the first century.

Carrier finds the latter theory more credible than has been previously imagined. He explains why it offers a better explanation for all the disparate evidence surviving from the first two centuries of the Christian era. He argues that we need a more careful and robust theory of cultural syncretism between Jewish theology and politics of the second-temple period and the most popular features of pagan religion and philosophy of the time.

For anyone intent on defending a historical Jesus, this is the book to challenge.

This just moved to the top of my reading list.

(August 23, 2014 at 1:49 am)Minimalist Wrote: http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/on-the-h...909697492r

Quote:The assumption that Jesus existed as a historical person has occasionally been questioned in the course of the last hundred years or so, but any doubts that have been raised have usually been put to rest in favor of imagining a blend of the historical, the mythical and the theological in the surviving records of Jesus.

Carrier re-examines the whole question and finds compelling reasons to suspect the more daring assumption is correct. He lays out extensive research on the evidence for Jesus and the origins of Christianity and poses the key questions that must now be answered if the historicity of Jesus is to survive as a dominant paradigm.

Carrier contrasts the most credible reconstruction of a historical Jesus with the most credible theory of Christian origins if a historical Jesus did not exist. Such a theory would posit that the Jesus figure was originally conceived of as a celestial being known only through private revelations and hidden messages in scripture; then stories placing this being in earth history were crafted to communicate the claims of the gospel allegorically; such stories eventually came to be believed or promoted in the struggle for control of the Christian churches that survived the tribulations of the first century.

Carrier finds the latter theory more credible than has been previously imagined. He explains why it offers a better explanation for all the disparate evidence surviving from the first two centuries of the Christian era. He argues that we need a more careful and robust theory of cultural syncretism between Jewish theology and politics of the second-temple period and the most popular features of pagan religion and philosophy of the time.

For anyone intent on defending a historical Jesus, this is the book to challenge.

This just moved to the top of my reading list.

Yeah, this sounds like a good read.

It is not meant to be a popular book. It is a serious scholarly book that is being submitted for peer review.

It is over 700 pages, heavily footnoted.

Hmm:

"Richard Cevantis Carrier is an atheist activist, author, frequent public speaker, and blogger. He is a trained historian and one of the leading current proponents of the Christ myth theory."

Looks like he has an agenda.

I have heard that originally Jesus was meant to be a spirit. Paul was talking about some godly spirit who was not born of a virgin that got brutally killed ten years prior. I've also heard that Jesus was originally thought to be a separate, superior being to Yahweh, which explains why Jesus' personality and views differ from Yahweh's in some areas. Though they both seem to believe thinking something is as bad as doing it. Back in the ten commandments, coveting is on the same list as stealing, as if wanting what other people have is equivalent to taking what other people have.

(August 23, 2014 at 9:57 am)Chad32 Wrote: I have heard that originally Jesus was meant to be a spirit. Paul was talking about some godly spirit who was not born of a virgin that got brutally killed ten years prior. I've also heard that Jesus was originally thought to be a separate, superior being to Yahweh, which explains why Jesus' personality and views differ from Yahweh's in some areas. Though they both seem to believe thinking something is as bad as doing it. Back in the ten commandments, coveting is on the same list as stealing, as if wanting what other people have is equivalent to taking what other people have.

My bold. You get the same thing in Matthew (see what I know about the bible) where adultery is committed first of all in the heart. It's thought control.

Yeah, Jesus talks about it in Matthew. I'm not sure why anyone would equate thought with action. If I'm going to be punished for rape, despite not actually committing the act, what's my motivation to not do it? At least if I actually do it, I'd have some temporary pleasure to look back on while I'm being punished.

I deserve to be punished for not being perfect. Which is impossible to do because I was never given the chance to be perfect. I never was, and could never be, but somehow I'm being held responsible for it anyway..

(August 23, 2014 at 9:51 am)Diablo Wrote: Looks like he has an agenda.

And believers don't? Perhaps it would be best to consider the argument.

(August 23, 2014 at 10:11 am)Chad32 Wrote: Yeah, Jesus talks about it in Matthew. I'm not sure why anyone would equate thought with action. If I'm going to be punished for rape, despite not actually committing the act, what's my motivation to not do it? At least if I actually do it, I'd have some temporary pleasure to look back on while I'm being punished.

I deserve to be punished for not being perfect. Which is impossible to do because I was never given the chance to be perfect. I never was, and could never be, but somehow I'm being held responsible for it anyway..

That's right.

---

(August 23, 2014 at 10:12 am)Cato Wrote:

(August 23, 2014 at 9:51 am)Diablo Wrote: Looks like he has an agenda.

And believers don't? Perhaps it would be best to consider the argument.

If I wanted to spend $35 on 700 pages I might, but it's also useful to know where the guy is coming from. Same thing if a Reverend wrote it.

(August 23, 2014 at 10:13 am)Diablo Wrote: If I wanted to spend $35 on 700 pages I might, but it's also useful to know where the guy is coming from. Same thing if a Reverend wrote it.

Your religious bookshelf must be empty if you dismiss works by atheists and theists because of perceived bias. Again, it might be better to consider the argument, even if from a thorough third party review, than to immediately dismiss the work.

(August 23, 2014 at 10:25 am)Cato Wrote:

(August 23, 2014 at 10:13 am)Diablo Wrote: If I wanted to spend $35 on 700 pages I might, but it's also useful to know where the guy is coming from. Same thing if a Reverend wrote it.

Your religious bookshelf must be empty if you dismiss works by atheists and theists because of perceived bias. Again, it might be better to consider the argument, even if from a thorough third party review, than to immediately dismiss the work.

I have the 'End of Faith' and that's about it. I didn't mean to dismiss the book, I even said I'd consider reading it as long as I don't have to spend $35 for the privilege. I'd read an independant review for sure.

The point I was making is that it's good to look at the author's previous before reading it.