Where did the Jesus myth come from?

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

...

In fact, if 99% of experts on a given subject agreed, then ignoring that fact would make YOU the person acting illogically for rejecting their expertise.

Nothing in this post suggests Jesus mythers are wrong SOLELY by virtue of the fact that they are in the minority. It certainly IS illogical to ignore the fact that they are experts and peers.

Then you should be more clear. I never thought you meant "ignore" as in "not take into consideration" before. Why would I? I never suggested we should not take into consideration the opinion majority, just that ultimately you cannot say "x is true" simply because the majority says so.

---

The two names were Richard Carrier, and Robert M. Price. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Carrier
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._Price

I'm wondering if I'm not understanding what a mythicist is (as my previous question said).

The Wikipedia reference you gave said Price is a member of the Jesus Seminar. I'll grant that Wikipedia often gets things wrong, but how can a guy who is casting his vote with colored beads to decide what Jesus actually said and didn't say believe that Jesus didn't exist?

Also, Richard Carrier is noted for writing on the internet on a variety of anti-Christian topics with most outside his area of expertise. He also self-published a book for lay audiences, which I assume was not peer reviewed before publication.

Have any of Carrier's writings alleging the non-existence of Jesus been peer reviewed and published in a professional journal? The list of publications on Wikipedia makes him sound more like an anti-Christian ideologue than an objective scholar. I'm having trouble justifying him as a credible source for the same reason I reject many Christian author's claims until I can find a skeptic that agrees. Hence the reason I take Bart Ehrman's opinion on historical consensus, but disregarded the same claims from Christian sources for quite some time (I was an atheist and hard-core naturalist for 25+ years before becoming a Christian).

Please take my questions as sincere inquiry, not as a challenge or dismissal. I'm seeking to understand the credibility of the sources provided by asking questions. I am a skeptical person and naturally question a lot of things. As I said, Wikipedia often gets things wrong.

The Jesus Seminar was a relatively mainstream group led by many dozens of scholars in the 90's. They established certain criteria and used those criteria to determine what sayings of Jesus in the canonical and non-canonical gospels were likely authentic sayings of Jesus. I'm not sure what the beads were but they had a color system I think for different levels of certainty regarding what we can know Jesus said and didn't say.

Carrier's latest book "Proving History" was peer-reviewed.

Have any of Carrier's writings alleging the non-existence of Jesus been peer reviewed and published in a professional journal?

He has a book coming next year on Jesus that's suppose to be for the academic community.

The books he has out now (except for his latest one "proving history") all assume historicity. They're not arguing for the mythicist position. And as far as I can tell, they're not arguing anything that's very controversial. I doubt they're peer reviewed since they seem to be just for lay men, but they have extensive references and you can read what they reference.

And again, I'd like to point out, I'm not a mythicist. I'm undecided. And I'm not interested in mythicism because it may supposedly debunk Christianity. The historicist position of Ehrman and other more mainstream scholars can do that just fine. And even supposed in the unlikely event that mythicism comes mainstream in the next few decades, Christians will still just deny it or just adopt an even more allegorical interpretation.