PhilosopherJay

Hi Antipope Innocent,

Can you name the five or less professional academics who give the "Jesus Myth" credence?

I haven't counted, but it does seem to me that I've read more like twenty or thirty. Are you including just living academics in your count or would dead ones count too.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Antipope Innocent II

Who said anything about them agreeing that he was some kind of "son of the Ghost"? That's one of the things they disagree on most vehemently.

I'd struggle to. There's Price. And there's Wells, though his professional academic qualifications are in German, so when it comes to relevant fields he's another amateur. Then there's Thomas Thompson. Beyond that we're getting into amateurs like Carrier and Doherty.

I find that rather hard to believe.

I'm talking about living ones. Or at least recent ones. Jesus Mythers from the Nineteenth Century don't really reflect current thinking in academia now do they?

So that's two, or three if you allow Wells. Hardly impressive.

PhilosopherJay

Hi Antipope Innocent,

To 1) Wells, 2) Price, 3) Thompson, should we not add these present scholars: 4) Timothy Freke, 5) Peter Gandy, 6) Herman Detering, 7) Alvar Ellegard, 8) Darrell Doughty, 9) Frank Zindler, 10) Michael Turton, 11) Luigi Cascioli, 12) Michel Onfray, 13) Francesco Carotta, 14) Tom Harpur, 15) Hal Childs, 16), Herbert Cutner

Among the "amateurs" or nontotally Academics, we might list 1) Earl Doherty, 2) Richard Carrier, 3) Archaya S., 4) Joseph Atwill, 5) Ken Humphreys, 6) Harold Liedner, 7) Zane Winter, 8) Gary Courtney, 9) Michael Hoffman, 10) Max Rieser

As far as Jesus Mythers who did not live forever, there's 1) Georg Morris Cohen Brandes, 2) Bruno Bauer, 3) Bertrand Russell, 4) Joseph McCabe 5) William Wrede, 6) Thomas Whittaker, 7) John E. Remsburg, 8) Arthur Drews, 9) P. L. Couchoud, 10) John Allegro, 11) van den Bergh van Eysinga, 12) Robert Taylor, 13) Joseph Wheless, 14) Peter Jensen, 15) Gordon Rylands, 16) Guy Fau, 17) John Robertson

Apologies to the many who I left out. I only had a few minutes to research the question. I've only included people who have written books on the subject.

Special thanks to Ken Humphrey's page http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/scholars.html for a number of names on the lists.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay (AKA Jay Raskin who is not sure which of the first two categories he belongs in, although he is sure he doesn't belong to the third one yet.)

Zeichman

Are you serious? Micheal Turton? Wells? Zindler? Hardly "scholars" as traditionally defined. I don't think Doughty committed to ahistoricity, and I KNOW Ellegard did not. These lists are pure wishful thinking. Not just any jackass who has posted something on the internet or written some dubious book or article on the topic is a "scholar." Get a couple of degrees and then you can call yourself that. You're discrediting yourself by making this almost completely inaccurate list.

Antipope Innocent II

I was talking about professional academics, not self-declared "scholars". Freke?! Gandy?! Zindler?! Atwill?! Sorry - no cigar. "Occult researchers" and retired biology lecturers need not apply. If that list is the best you can do, all I can say is "I rest my case."

mountainman

Professional academics in the pond of "Biblical" History have been traditionally tenured by church-related income. WTF would you expect academics to say whose books are published by hegemon of christianity, and whose tenure is at stake?

Professional academic in the ocean of Ancient History are another story ... For example, see Michael Grant's The Ancient Historians which introduces the concept of Jesus in the chronological sequence following the mention of forgery in the literature of Josephus, in the last decade of the 1st century.

Antipope Innocent II

Yes, this obviously explains why none of them are Jews, agnostics and atheists. Oh, hang on ...

I don't see any of them on Jay''s list either.

So do Maccoby's fellow Jews Paul Frederiksen, Geza Vermes and Harvey Falk. And then there are plenty of agnostic or atheist scholars in the field, including Bart Ehrman. So the idea that everyone sticks to an HJ orthodoxy because they are all Christian apologists getting their marching orders from "the Church" is clearly total nonsense.

PhilosopherJay

Hi Antipope Innocent,

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "professional academic." Peter Gandy has an M.A. specializing in ancient mystery religions, and Timothy Freke has a Ph.D. in Philosophy. I am not sure if they teach or not. Frank Zindler has taught both biology and geology at the University level and is a member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, New York Academy of Science, Society of Biblical Literature and the American Schools of Oriental Research.

I placed Atwill on the second list of Jesus Mythicists who may not qualify as professional academics, although I'm not quite sure what the inclusion rules are for the category. I have a Ph.D. in Philosophy and I have made my living by teaching at the University level for the past twelve years. Do I qualify?

It seems to me that one could attempt to discredit the case for an Historical Jesus by demanding that proponents adhere to a rigid criteria for academic qualifications. For example, I could demand that a serious proponent hold degrees in both ancient history and ancient literature. Under this criteria, I think we could say that there has never been a serious proponent of the Historical Jesus Theory. This would naturally be absurd, but only slightly more absurd than demanding specific academic degrees and a certain academic status from proponents of a Jesus Myth theory in order to take them seriously.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Antipope Innocent II

I mean someone with relevant qualifications working in a field relevant to the subject of the origins of Christianity with a teaching or research position at an accredited university and publishing peer reviewed material in academic fora.

Not self-declared scholars, guys with an M.A. and a bit of time on their hands, self-published enthusiasts or New Age kooks with a website. These lists of "scholars" who don't believe Yeshua existed remind me of Creationists' lists of "scientists" who don't accept evolution. Once you winnow out the pretenders, the amateurs and the guys from other disciplines poaching out of field you end up with ... not much.

Well, so their promotional material tells us. I've never been able to work out where Gandy did his MA, for example. Not that it matters much. I have an MA in Medieval Literature but I'd never dream of calling myself a "scholar" in that field. I'm just an amateur with some pretty solid credentials and knowledge. If I was making a living in a teaching or research position and publishing in peer-reviewed journals I'd be a scholar. Gandy is no more a "scholar" than I am.

Apparently not.


Then I'd pay some attention to him on the subjects of biology and geology. And anyone with a credit card and a spare $65 can become a member of the Society of Biblical Literature - it's not like that's an achievement.

As a professional academic in Philosophy? Sure. Just not as a professional academic in any field relevant to the origins of Christianity.

Yes, that would be a bit narrow.

We can still take amateurs seriously. Where did I say otherwise? I've read Doherty's stuff several times and took it seriously (I just found it contrived and unconvincing, that's all). The point is that few of them fit the quitre reasonable criteria for a professional academic in a relevant field. Only two of them do so that I can see: Price and Thompson.

mountainman

Oded Golan had an engineering degree.