(November 30, 2018 at 8:18 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:(November 30, 2018 at 12:32 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Do you bother to think before you speak? The majority of historians agree that Jesus existed, so why would I have to disprove a fringe theorist?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
If I didn't, then I would only be following your example, Huggy. What in Jesus' name does that have to do with your complaint that Carrier wasn't interested in the historicity of Jesus until someone paid him?
I was speaking to Minimalists disingenuity, ever since from before I joined this site, Minimalist has kept a tight grip on Bart Ehrman's ball-sack...
(August 3, 2009 at 1:49 am)Minimalist Wrote: as Professor Bart Ehrman has shown in "Misquoting Jesus" the so-called gospels were heavily edited to conform to later doctrines of the power mongers of the early church.
(March 7, 2010 at 9:08 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I know lots of snot-spewing xtians who think Ehrman is the anti-christ because he dares tell them the facts about their silly ass bible.
(May 24, 2018 at 5:06 pm)Minimalist Wrote: When a religious scholar like Bart Ehrman trashes their bullshit they insist that he only does so because he lost his faith.
I think you get it...
In case you didn't know, Minimalist doesn't believe that a historical Jesus, the basis of Christianity ever existed, the problem is that Ehrman DOES believe he existed, so Min can't use his beloved Ehrman to debunk Jesus, he has to find someone that agrees with his narrative.
As far as Richard Carrier goes, you'd be naive to believe that a guy who was basically begging for money on his blog, and asking for patreon donations would be completely objective when being funded by special interest groups, when you cannot find an example of that anywhere else, be it Politics or Religion.
