outhouse

Yes he uses Detering for his foundation.


Both are pretty much ignored for their beliefs.


The real Paul has historicity to the point its not questioned by modern scholars.

Criterion for Embarrassment, plays a decent role as we have original epistles and then later forgeries as later authors tried to soften Pauls extreme stance up a bit.

In the first few centuries he wasnt viewed as some grand theologian anyway, he was viewed as a martyr, and not just any martyr, one with extreme views.

he wasnt placed on a pedestal in the beginning as Christianities beliefs early on were very very wide and varied.



Prices view isnt even followed by 1% of those scholars who hold a real educations on this particular topic, its my opinion his targeted audience are the uneducated bloggers so he can rake as much cash in as possible, which doesnt seem to have been very successful.

mountainman

It's also called dogma.



These criteria rely upon faulty logic. See Carrier.

If we had an inscription to Paul like we have for Apollonius of Tyana you might have a case for Paul's historicity.








εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

outhouse

We dont just have a inscription, we have multiple inscriptions, their called epistles originally from the man himself.

Where mythicism fails is building a case for why they would need to create a Paul. It has no real plausibility. There was no conspracy they needed to cover up. Just the opposite, they later tried to soften up a extreme martyr because Pauls movement wasnt entirely matching the progression of some communities.


Why use Carrier? he follows a historical Paul arguing what he taught.

Even Doherty regards paul as historical.

aa5874

The assumption that there was an historical Paul is irrelevant when letters under his name are all FORGERIES.

In Acts, there is a character called Saul/Paul but he wrote NO letters to Churches up to time when Festus was governor of Judea or up to 59-63 CE.

mountainman

It would be a colossal help if you stated which posts (1,2,3 and 4) are to be considered as digressions and which posts are to be considered as hobby horses.




εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

mountainman

Literary evidence and epigraphic evidence are different in my book.

Didn't Bilbo Baggins write epistles to Frodo and the Elves?
Is Bilbo Baggins necessarily an historical figure?



What about a forgery mill?




Carrier used the analyses of at least two earlier authors to demonstrate that the Criterion of Embarrassment and other often misused Criteria are not logically sound. Do you want a link?




εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia