Chaucer

Not sure if this has already been mentioned here, but it is gratifying to learn that Carrier will finally submit his thoughts on Origen and Antiqs. 20 to a professional, scholarly, peer-reviewed periodical, Journal of Early Christian Studies. The piece is slated for the Winter 2012 issue. This may well be the first time that a piece from the MJ angle is being submitted for full vetting by professional scholars.

High time. My compliments on Carrier's getting off the dime and finally doing this. The Antiqs. 20 text is one of the most critically important texts there is, particularly since it's outside the Christian woo orbit.

Chaucer

Juststeve

Carrier is to be praised.

Steve

aa5874

We have gone through this already. It is irrelevant whether Carrier or any person submitted any writing to be peer-reviewed when it is HJers who are LOOKING for an Historical Jesus and CAN'T find him.

The QUEST--the SEARCH--for an Historical Jesus by HJers does NOT require any input at all from any group or person.

HJers CANNOT fing THEIR Jesus and want to blame Carrier, Doherty and "mythicists".

Please, just GO and LOOK for your Jesus. The SEARCH is still on.

Now, based on Origen, Antiquities of the Jews 20 MUST have been manipulated because certain statements made by Origen CANNOT be found anywhere in Antiquities of the Jews.

See Against Celsus 1.47.

aeebee50

Thanks, now I have a copy.

Toto

Carrier contends that
"The "him called Christ" makes most sense as a margin note by a later scribe copying the text, inserted by error in a paragraph about Jesus son of Damneus."

Richard Carrier. "Origen, Eusebius, and the Accidental Interpolation in Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 20.200.” Journal of Early Christian Studies 20.4 (Winter 2012).

Reference here and at various other places on the web.

Toto

He submitted it some time ago, and also insisted that his books published by Prometheus be peer reviewed.

Note that this articles is not "from the MJ angle" unless you think that any objective view of the textual evidence that does not support historicity is from the MJ angle.

Minimalist

That's what the HJers will say....as Ehrman just demonstrated.

Chaucer

LOL! :-)

Cheers,

Chaucer

Juststeve

Chaucer:

I wasn't joking. I think one who would be a scholar should submit his work to be peer reviewed by other scholars. That's what Carrier has done and I say good on him. I don't have to agree with him to know when he has done the right thing.

Steve

ApostateAbe

Carrier is squarely in the mythicist camp, the position on Ant. 20 is squarely in the mythicist interest, and almost nobody has the position except for mythicists. Yes, it is the MJ angle. I wish Carrier the best of luck.