Freethought & Rationalism Archive

lpetrich · 07-29-2010, 11:18 PM

Book Updates He's been busy at work, but he has paused to make a few announcements.

Some of his books are now available on Kindle. You can get Kindle hardware, or else Kindle software for OSX, Windows, iPhone/iPad, Android, and Blackberry.

Quote:

And second is a status update on my book On the Historicity of Jesus Christ. Donors to the project have already received a full report, but for the general public the latest news is that I've solved the problem of cutting material down by seeking publication as two volumes, the first on method and the second on results, though the first volume includes one major section of results. That volume is completed. I am seeking a private peer review from a number of respected scholars, and shopping for a publisher. Meanwhile, I'm hard at work on volume two, some of which donors have already seen, but there's even better stuff to come.

His working title for the first volume:

Bayes' Theorem and Historical Method: The Invalidity of Current Historicity Criteria in the Study of Jesus and Their Replacement

He describes Bayes's theorem and answers objections to it for historicity research. He also assesses many of the commonly-used historicity criteria and finds them to be lacking.

The second volume:

On the Historicity of Jesus Christ

popgoestheweasel · 07-30-2010, 01:11 PM

Can't wait to read Richard Carrier's new book!

Doug Shaver · 07-31-2010, 06:42 AM

How often have we heard, "No modern scholar with relevant credentials doubts Jesus' historicity"? This ought to blow that argument out of the water.

Of course it won't. But it ought to.

aa5874 · 07-31-2010, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

How often have we heard, "No modern scholar with relevant credentials doubts Jesus' historicity"? This ought to blow that argument out of the water.

Of course it won't. But it ought to.

And this "blown OUT of the water argument" seems extremely similar to another where it is constantly stated that "most scholars agree that there are at least 6 or 7 authentic Pauline writings.".

But, it is ALL HOT AIR that is BLOWN OUT.

Littlejohn · 07-31-2010, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

How often have we heard, "No modern scholar with relevant credentials doubts Jesus' historicity"? This ought to blow that argument out of the water.

Of course it won't. But it ought to.

And this "blown OUT of the water argument" seems extremely similar to another where it is constantly stated that "most scholars agree that there are at least 6 or 7 authentic Pauline writings.".

But, it is ALL HOT AIR that is BLOWN OUT.
.

There is a document by catholic source, estimated written in the second century by the experts of textual criticism, which clearly let it guess that none of the so-called 'Pauline Epistles' may have been written by the character who is still today known incorrectly as 'Paul of Tarsus'. However, incredibly, nobody scholar that disputes the authenticity of the Pauline letters has ever mentioned it! ... And yet this document is considered genuine by the same catholic exegetes ...

Greetings

Littlejohn

.

darstec · 07-31-2010, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Littlejohn

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

And this "blown OUT of the water argument" seems extremely similar to another where it is constantly stated that "most scholars agree that there are at least 6 or 7 authentic Pauline writings.".

But, it is ALL HOT AIR that is BLOWN OUT.
.

There is a document by catholic source, estimated written in the second century by the experts of textual criticism, which clearly let it guess that none of the so-called 'Pauline Epistles' may have been written by the character who is still today known incorrectly as 'Paul of Tarsus'. However, incredibly, nobody scholar that disputes the authenticity of the Pauline letters has ever mentioned it! ... And yet this document is considered genuine by the same catholic exegetes ...

Greetings

Littlejohn

.

Ssssh. You're not supposed to know that. It's a secret.

Littlejohn · 07-31-2010, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darstec

Quote:

Originally Posted by Littlejohn

There is a document by catholic source, estimated written in the second century by the experts of textual criticism, which clearly let it guess that none of the so-called 'Pauline Epistles' may have been written by the character who is still today known incorrectly as 'Paul of Tarsus'. However, incredibly, nobody scholar that disputes the authenticity of the Pauline letters has ever mentioned it! ... And yet this document is considered genuine by the same catholic exegetes ...

Greetings

Littlejohn

.

Ssssh. You're not supposed to know that. It's a secret
.

There are lots of secrets, even more important than that, such as the one about who was really Paul of Tarsus! ... Or the true character who was really crucified in the days of Pilate, since Jesus died stoned by the Jews over 30 years more later!

Greetings

Littlejohn

.

GakuseiDon · 07-31-2010, 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Littlejohn

There is a document by catholic source, estimated written in the second century by the experts of textual criticism, which clearly let it guess that none of the so-called 'Pauline Epistles' may have been written by the character who is still today known incorrectly as 'Paul of Tarsus'. However, incredibly, nobody scholar that disputes the authenticity of the Pauline letters has ever mentioned it! ... And yet this document is considered genuine by the same catholic exegetes ...

Sounds interesting. Which document is that?

stephan huller · 08-01-2010, 12:13 AM

Yes, this I have to hear. Sounds like something from a DaVinci Code sequel. I am always interested in new material but wouldn't other scholars with this same slant (Ehrman, Avalos, Price) have already mentioned this text? Who knows. Crazier things have happened but ... still sounds like a Simcha Jacobovici project.

GakuseiDon · 08-01-2010, 12:59 AM

Yes, it does sound like something from the Albino Monk Files. I can only think it is a comment repeated by one of the heresiologists.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-30-2010, 01:11 PM	#2
popgoestheweasel Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: northeast Posts: 18	Can't wait to read Richard Carrier's new book!

07-31-2010, 06:42 AM	#3
Doug Shaver Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: San Bernardino, Calif. Posts: 5,435	How often have we heard, "No modern scholar with relevant credentials doubts Jesus' historicity"? This ought to blow that argument out of the water. Of course it won't. But it ought to.

08-01-2010, 12:13 AM	#9
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Yes, this I have to hear. Sounds like something from a DaVinci Code sequel. I am always interested in new material but wouldn't other scholars with this same slant (Ehrman, Avalos, Price) have already mentioned this text? Who knows. Crazier things have happened but ... still sounds like a Simcha Jacobovici project.

08-01-2010, 12:59 AM	#10
GakuseiDon Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 5,714	Yes, it does sound like something from the Albino Monk Files. I can only think it is a comment repeated by one of the heresiologists.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.