Thanks Nick, he will be talking to me again in the new year, I'm just gathering more questions to ask. If you have any suggestions then please let me know
@@Crecganford Ask Richard next time about the Psilocybin Cults, and if the Roman-Judeo civil war was purely economical or the Romans banned drugs :) Thnx
@@tarakerac If time allows then absolutely, I'm quite interested in these aspect too. The interview should happen one the second week of January, so keep your eyes peeled
@@bluegreen6153 Hi, if time allows as we now have a heap of questions to ask for th enext video, but if not don't worry as I will ask him back again! He thoroughly enjoyed this chat so I hope he'll be willing to give me more of his time.
@@matthewsmolinsky5605 I've removed Daniel from the channel as I felt he was very negative in his approach to commentary. I don't mind different views but not in the manner he was applying them.
Dr. Carrier’s work is well worth the money. I’ve read “On The Historicity of Jesus”, “Jesus From Outer Space”, “Hitler, Homer, Bible Christ” and “Proving History”. Earl Doherty’s “The Jesus Puzzle” is an easy read and was what got Dr. Carrier looking into the thesis. That’s a great introduction, followed by “Jesus From Outer Space”.
Sou do Brasil e adoro os livros do Dr Richard Carrier. Tenho todos os seus livros, e na minha opinião, foi o único a fazer uma pesquisa seria nesse campo, ademais concordo plenamente com Richard Carrier em relação ao Jesus histórico, pois para mim, não há necessidade de existir um homem por trás do mito, mas pode muito bem, assim como a lenda de Moisés, a comunidade cristã tê-lo criado um Jesus para formalizar os seus ideais.
🤣This guy Carrier is profiting from professing fringe nutter theories in my view. Entertaining this guy does your credibility no good Crecganford!🤭 I can accept other Crecganford videos saying that creation stories such as in Genesis, Gilgamesh etc can be linked back through language to sources tens of thousands of years ago. However to then deny the historicity of Jesus (the fact he existed even if one doesnt believe in his ressurection) when it comes to the the sheer number and date of manuscripts and external language sources (and archeology) is utterly ridiculous. One then only has to spend 3 minutes on Wikipedia to find the following statements about Carrier: "However, most contemporary scholarship has been critical of Carrier's methodology and conclusions. According to James F. McGrath, Carrier misuses Rank and Raglan and stretches their scales to make Jesus appear to score high on mythotype.[80] According to Christopher Hansen, Carrier misuses and manipulates Raglan's scale to make Jesus appear more aligned with a mythotype by scoring him high, thus more mythical, when other scholars have scored Jesus as low, thus more historical. [81]" "Both classicists and biblical scholars agree that there is a historical basis for a person called Jesus of Nazareth.[82][8] Writing in 2004, Michael Grant stated, "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non-historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary."[83] More recently, Patrick Gray posited, "That Jesus did in fact walk the face of the earth in the first century is no longer seriously doubted even by those who believe that very little about his life or death can be known with any certainty."[i][84] For this reason, the views of Carrier and other proponents of the belief that a historical Jesus did not exist are frequently dismissed as "fringe theories" within classical scholarship.[85]" How too can this guy Carrier say that Paul doesnt say anything about a historical Jesus or about people meeting Jesus? ( around 17:20) Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15 (below): 1 Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. 3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas,[b] and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born. I ceased listening to Carrier's voice after this😂
@@bobboardman1156 are you an expert on the subject of the historicity of Jesus, or are you just a christian who doesn’t want to know that their religion might be based on fantasy?
@@kellydalstok8900 Hmm.....What is an expert? The evidence for the historical existence of Jesus is so overwhelming that I think to claim otherwise is silly. What is more debatable is whether Jesus was in fact the son of God, or that he was in fact resurrected (which would support his claim). I personally also think that the evidence for Jesus' resurrection is substantial - as substantial as say, the case for human evolution.
Great interview! Good and informative responses and questions. Good to see two people with a passion for history and valuing truth and accurate historical storytelling and daring to investigate them thoroughly.
I don't know how I've never come across Carrier before. Thanks for the introduction. It's nice to see an actual scholar espousing the same ideas and views I have had for decades. I need to get his books.
Yes, when I first saw him he's ideas were well thought, and so I brought On the Historicity of Jesus. Very interesting book. My second interview with him was much better I think, a lot of great information on the New Testament.
I'm very impressed by his research too. He is back in a few weeks so keep an eye out for that interview where we dig a bit deeper into this. Thanks for watching and your support!
I just recently found your channel through the finding the pre proto Indo-European gods video (seems to be going viral, congrats!), subscribed and have been working through your other content since. I wanted to say fantastic job interviewing. Unlike some channels, you give your guest plenty of breathing room to expansively talk about their points without constantly interjecting and only adding well thought out and relevant material to keep conversation flowing and evolving. Same goes with your questions, they are asked at the right time, as one point begins to reach it's conclusion and the next injects new energy into the interview. Not easy skills to balance but you did an awesome job and I look forward to seeing more in future. Very happy to have found your content mate :)
@@Crecganford most welcome! I am watching the second interview right now as we speak, loving it so far! Your channel deserves to blow up in a big way, fantastic content!
On the reason why the Gospels were written in Greek, I'd make a small annotation: Greek was not just a "foreign language" but the lingua franca of the Mediterranean in the moment. It wouldn't be "a history of the us written in italian" but rather a "history of Italy written in english", so that everyone can know about it. Merchant enclaves in Spain would use greek as a commong language, meanin celtiberics, phoenicians, and romans used greed. Especially romans, given that written latin was just a law language; hence why Cicero, Marcus Aurelis, and other prolific roman writers used greek in their personal texts. Like today if you want to make something well known you need to use the english language. People in India, Argentina, China, and Russia can understand english and will do so.
@@annascott3542 But it wasn't. It was the common language of the Mediterranean. Most jew diaspora people spoke greek and no aramaic at the time. If you talk to a contemprary jew in californa or buenos aires, you won't speak to him in hebrew but in their actual language. The "historian" is not educated in the topic, he's not fluent in koine
@@kellydalstok8900 They would have to speak basic greek in order to sell/buy things at the city market. And the bible was meant for more scholarly people, precisely other reason why it was put in words after its first expansion. You should read more history bro
I am attracted to Joseph Atwill's theory that Jesus was invented and the Gospels written by Flavius Josephus and others in the Flavian Dynasty. The Flavians are historically known to have started cults in other countries for political reasons and Atwill's theory is that meek Jesus who taught to render unto Caesar and turn the other cheek was invented to unplug the Warrior Messiah or Masiyah concept that backed and gave energy to a lot of Jewish rebellion at the time.
Thanks for the video. I think of myself as a secular humanist but I've always wondered about the historicity of Jesus because I had a religious upbringing.
I agree, very intuitive arguments. For me separation of Jesus from other religions in common thought. The gospels written in Greek is a major puzzle piece I've needed for awhile personally. Although I've been aware of the multiple writers being suspect. I think he's gonna get his book bought by me soon. Top stuff @Crecganford
Dr Richard Carrier is eminently listenable.. he is so thorough in his research no wonder Bart Ehrman is no match for him .. Ehrman can’t risk his professorship in the deep south ... the people who really need to hear this historical truth unfortunately won’t ever listen
After a couple online lectures and a few podcast interviews I've come to view Dr Richard Carrier as the person who makes the most sense (logically speaking) on the validity/invalidity of a historical "Jesus." It doesn't take long (a couple/three decades) for a semi believable mythology to emerge on almost anything; things as common as say.. a baseball player's performance, or someone's national political stature, etc. etc. - that based on my own personal anecdotal, critical thought, observations - more or less believable... empirically speaking as it were. Thanks for this perspective, added to a dark foggy, too often politicised, mist of post-antiquity religious spiritually. With that said, however much is understandable, believable, credible, etc etc.. kinda sorta as it were. (Now impossible to truly sort out, after 20 or more centuries of defused religious subterfuge). Yikes! wtf.. frustration on steroids!
Thanks for the feedback and supporting the channel by watching the video. I'm speaking to him again this week, so look out for that of this channel hopefully next weekend.
I mean, shoot, a sect of American politics has managed to create a version of a known event that is patently false, and yet is able to convince millions of people of its supposed, “veracity”
But Carrier explains nothing about this era, he just says the gospels are mythical. If he had looked at the history, he would have found that Jesus was an AD 60s king of Syria and Judaes. Biblical: King Jesus Em Manuel of Judaea. Historical: King Izas Manu of E.dessa and Judaea. See book: Jesus King of E.dessa. Ralph
@@RalphEllis If he read the sports pages, he would have found out that Jesus still appears repeatedly in Major League Baseball and can play every position!
I like carriers 1 in 3 chance. It means if there was a person to whom you can say "that's the man who inspired what We call Christ" is ever found, they're still not the born of a virgin, risen from the dead, miracle worker son of God.
When I first heard Dr. Carrier talk about the Euhemerization of Jesus, it' blew my mind...and yet, having previously read Thomas Moore's _Utopia,_ the idea of presenting radical political views via _claimed_ interactions with a _fictional_ character made perfect sense. For that matter, Euhemerization "by committee" explains all the self-contradictory claims _within and throughout_ the New Testament quite effectively. (It also explains Moses, Noah, and many _Old Testament_ characters that _most_ Christian and Rabbinical scholars agree _also_ never really existed.)
As a lapsed Baptist and lazy classicist (BA in Latin & Greek, Calvin College, 1986), I have been following Dr. Carrier for a few years now. Thanks for a great interview. The buzz about Herculaneum is really exciting! Also, with reference to "outer space," it is important to explain that the popular conception of "the heavens" (note that it is plural) at the time was very different from our own. In their minds, earth was at the center of the universe, surrounded by concentric spheres in which all the planets and other heavenly bodies moved. Each sphere was inhabited and/or ruled by angels or demons.
I enjoy listening to Dr Carrier. Sobering to realise that he too, is proselytising. Would love to run some Nietzsche past him. Some Alan Watts Rudolf Otto & Mircea Eliade too.
FYI they do speak Greek in the whole Levant area it’s the international language of the time in that area Josephus speaks and writes fluent Greek that means he was educated in Greek and all the translations in Latin are synoptic
Cool, I used to read Richard Carrier’s blog all the time and checked out his Historicity of Jesus stuff. Kind of amazed to see him on video, though, because I know he’s older than me but he definitely looks like he’s barely out of high school.
Watching this 3 years later, this is a better explanation of his own version of Mythicism than I feel like I ever get in the debates with historicists. Dr. Carrier clearly states here that Christians were preaching that Jesus from Outer Space came down to Earth and was killed and rose again and went back to outer space. But that's by the time the church is established in the 2nd century. Saying early messianic Jews actually believed the events occurred on a low level of heaven (not Earth) seems silly from the 21st century, but in looking it up, turns out Paul's (and his contemporaries) understanding of heaven would have been a rather silly multi-level version. Seems like every time I try to check Carrier, I end up understanding him better.
Should have Dr. Michael Heiser on to point out some of the obvious flaws in a large part of Carriers positions. People really seem to want what this guy says to be true, its a fascinating study about people being bored with doctrine or misinterpreting what the scholarship actually says.
You say clearly far too much if you have to explain it, and so to many I would say it isn't, and some of the aspects of your argument I do disagree with. But I do thank you for watching and your feedback.
The fact that most of the scriptures is “made up” doesn’t mean that Jesus was not an historical character. The Carter’s hypothesis makes sense only for the Protestants that that adopted the doctrine of “sola scriptura”.
It's funny that Jesus mythicists are ridiculed when it all boils down to what one believes is most plausible. A man who rose from the dead and fed the 5,000? Or a mythical amalgam of all the pre Christian gods? I believe the latter.
@@juanjoseph Right, and that would exemplify how much a figure can be ahistorically mythologized - even with the figure’s exploits fully recorded in the early modern period, and a fairly clear archaeological and written record of the continent, along with a fully operational educational system ensuring that >95% of the current population is literate and exposed to “history”, there is a common understanding in the US that Columbus “discovered and founded America”, and is thus an “American hero”. There are statues of him everywhere, and Columbus Day was declared a national US holiday.
@@jamesfrancese6091 It is a bad example because italian to the US is not the same as koine greek to the ancient mediterranean world. Also, Columbus is a "hero" whereas Jesus is quite more than just a hero or even a profet. There's a reason why you need to know greek and latin when studying the ancient medieterranean...
@@juanjoseph Well, the process of Columbus’ contemporary “heroization” was spurred mostly by the political advocacy of Italian immigrants in the US, who came to exert a huge influence on American culture in the 20th century. So it is true to say that Italian cultural influence was necessary for Columbus’ later stature in US historical narrative, but yes, not via linguistic hegemony as you point out. I don’t think we’re going for an overwhelming equivalence here; there are just amusing similarities which make for an analogy.
Good day to you! 21:30, I love the idea that the Gospel of Mark was similar to Mark Twain in its use of colloquial style. In fact, we know from that Twain was a time-traveler, so in my new alternate reality the second book of the New Testament is The Gospel According to Mark Twain.
ok, but what about Jesus on a toast bread??? isn't that the strongest proof that Jesus is real and alive,you never mentioned that,probably you don't have any argument against that. Appreciate your research and your work.
Awwwwe, I miss his curly hair..I know that is a flippant and superficial thing to say but I really liked his hair when it was long and curly...I think he is an awesome guy..charismatic and great communicator ...I'd love for him to visit Ireland touring Humanist, Secular and Freethinking groups here..😁 Thankyou for uploading this..☘️💪🏻😁
@@lelandstronks319 There are other historians with Phds that don't believe Jesus was mythical. If you are atheist it will influence your way of thinking in every area of your life - it's inevitable.
@@stuart3178 Most of those PhDs are people that would lose their tenure at major Christian universities if they told the truth. The rest are bias being that they’re Christian apologist anyway. Wise up,Jesus is a myth.🤪😫
I love the listing from minute to minute. Great interview! I get frustrated listening to hosts and debaters interrupt Dr. Carrier in other podcasts. Nice work man!
@@inquisitivemind007 Of course, although I have plenty right now, but if I can fit some more in I will, if not we can get him back for a third time, it's no problem :)
The argument that the similarities of the savior God myths shifts the burden of proof for Jesus' historicity feels misguided. Why isn't it just as likely Jesus was a real figure who's narrative was blended with popular myths of the time?
That's certainly possible. But the use of other stories to form the Jesus story makes Jesus's existence more superfluous to the existence of his religion. Thus it does move the needle towards greater uncertainty in his existence. But it is only one piece of the puzzle.
I agree with Arcane Mormon. It's far too strange to accept that of all the euhemerized Gods, that the last on the list is real when his predecessors aren't. If anything the first would be real, and the rest a copy. But we know that even the first (Inanna) was also not considered real Therefore, neither can Jesus
It's because of all the _other_ weird things. Like how Paul doesn't know or talk about knowing a single detail of Jesus's life and deeds. Or how, if Paul is telling the truth about never having met Jesus, it means he _hallucinated Jesus_ after Jesus was already dead. If Jesus is historical but not miraculous, yet Paul can still hallucinate him, then that makes it more likely that _everyone_ could get away with hallucinating him. At some point, the needle moves enough.
Thanks for a great interview! Liked and subscribed. For the next interview, please please please PLEASE ask Dr. Carrier about: 1. Other Jewish faith literature written contemporary to the gospels (inter-war period 70 CE - 132 CE) such as 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. These show us what else was written at the time to cope with temple loss, and they look remarkably similar to the gospels: a miracle-working leader who promotes Torah adherence, shows conventional wisdom to establish spiritual authority, advises how to enter the kingdom of heaven, speaks of a coming Messiah, commutes with God in the desert for 40 days, and after his mission ascends to heaven. They are each set in the past with fictional characters in real settings, and come complete with their own fake epistles. What do they teach us about the gospels' authorship? Please discuss! 2. Thomas L. Brodie's "Beyond the Quest for the Historical Jesus" puts the nail in the coffin on Historicity, both of Jesus and of Paul. Any comments? And where is the scholarship headed? Who will continue Brodie's work? 3. Can someone please use AI to more efficiently identify all the sources of the gospels? 4. Where else should we be digging to find more archeological evidence? Yavneh? 5. What about 2 Corinthians, 11:32 -- this is the only date stamp in the "authentic" Pauline epistles, and a plain-text reading puts authorship in the time of Areras III, between 87 and 62 BCE, a century before the crucifixion story. 6. What can we extrapolate about the gospel authors? Are they the philosophies of the school of Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai, his students, or their contemporaries? Thanks!
I'm no genius but I know to question things that don't make sense. Not saying a creator is fake but I choose to be an Agnostic. I don't know if there is a God or not.
@@Shake69ification that makes sense the way people die everyday makes me the same Agnostic Atheist. All u have to do is start watching shows on the ID channel to question God's existence. I'm an unbeliever now I believe in Evolution similarly to Charles Darwin
@@thenobleone-3384 I don't like to say I _believe_ evolution, but rather I _understand_ it. My point above is that the agnostic label refers to knowledge whereas the atheist label refers to belief. There _are_ those who will admit to bring agnostic theists. They are theists I hold in greater regard for being more humble.
@Random Thoughts I agree I feel stupid all my life God doesn't talk back not only that I have been going through Racism my entire life. I'm of mixed race and I know just by how much I have dealt with Discrimination that God isn't real. I believe firmly in Darwin's theory as well as Richard Dawkins. You're right the older I get I see that God and Satan were made up by the Roman Catholic church back then
Well, I think Carrier didn't find the truth he hungered for when he was into Taoism and turned his announce instead to oppose the Christian Gospel. "When a man's folly brings him to ruin his heart rages against Jehovah." (Prov. 19:3) Why didn't he go get his doctorate in eastern religions ?
@@jackwilmoresongs No one’s “heart rages against jehovah” because there’s no good evidence that he exists. Theists are always accusing atheists of being “angry at god”, but you can’t be angry at someone that doesn’t exist. We can be angry at the harm religion does, but not at an invisible, undetectable, imaginary deity.
@@judyives1832 Sure they do. One expression of this displeasure is to claim God imaginary. Another expression is to twist the mentality around in pretzel shapes imagining things like a DNA molecule is the result of lucky accidents. Rage, annoyance, desperation, lampooning, ridicule, caricature, - other forms of suppressing the conscience.
@@jackwilmoresongs “The burden of proof regarding the truthfulness of a claim lies with the one who makes the claim; if this burden is not met, then the claim is unfounded.” So let me know when you find some evidence to support absurd claims about an *INVISIBLE MAGIC SKY GENIE* , or that he impregnated Jesus’ mother 2,000 years ago, or that Jesus was a *VIRGIN-BORN DEMIGOD WITH SUPERPOWERS* and that his *ROTTING CORPSE MAGICALLY RETURNED FROM THE DEAD* before levitating bodily into outer space, or evidence for the talking snake, talking donkey, 900-year-old men, etc.
Like Dr. Carrier, I have never encountered any credible evidence for the historicity of Jesus or any of the events surrounding him as depicted in the gospels. I researched this topic exhaustively for 15 months defending my thesis (MDiv, Ecumenical Studies).
Please investigate the Shroud of Turin. The last examination confirmed the person appearing on the Shroud confirms what was written in the Bible. The image cannot be explained using the latest technology. A group of people including Jewish scientists carried out the examination. An earlier examination took a sample of the cloth but it had been contaminated due to the cloth being mended due to fire and water damage. The image is 3 dimensional. The person on the cloth has all the markings of crucifixion. Unfortunately, the teachings of Jesus have probably been controlled and manipulated by those seeking power and control. Earlier claims that the Shroud are a fake from the middle ages does not stack up with the evidence. I understand how people can believe this author. Evidence is not always forthcoming in all situations. Traditions and beliefs can be passed down by each generation without written evidence. Consider the Australian Aborigines, they did not record details as we do but their knowledge about their environment and ancestors cannot be matched.
A fascinating man and a brilliant talker. What a shame more people don't read his "On the Historicity of Jesus" then they would understand where he is coming from and raise there are indeed reasons to doubt.
My big issue is that modern "pure science" doesn't offer any sort of acceptable explanation for how it is that we are actually consciously self-aware. I don't know what the "right" answer is, but I think is going on that is more than our scientific theories cover. I just think there are still things we have yet to understand in this domain. These days I lean toward some kind of idealism - I particular find some of Dr. Bernardo Kastrup's ideas interesting, and I don't find those ideas incompatible with science at all.
I think the best way to utilize Carrier's ideas is not to argue that Jesus never existed (though that's possible) but rather to appreciate how all the mythical characters and beliefs current at the time were borrowed to shape the Jesus of Christianity.
53:00 - The power that detailed modern Christian beliefs have to "insert themselves" into a topic is hard to overestimate. It even happens in fiction. I am a fan of an urban fantasy book series by Jim Butcher called The Dresden Files. Christian-related themes appear to a limited extent in the series, along with elements of Norse mythology and more. Jim is kind of an equal opportunity writer in that regard. Anyway, I help moderate the Reddit community devoted to the series, and I am constantly amazed at how people will import Christian ideas and apply them to the story in ways that are *not* justified by the published words themselves. But you just can't argue with these people in a rational way - they're dead set and they will not budge. So it's a really strong effect.
I just want to let people know that while Dr. Carrier is very thorough and smart and studious (dude knows what he’s talking about), the “Jesus as Myth” theory is not the historical consensus. He has biases, as any scholar does. His methods are very good, but I just want people to know this is a very well studied topic with lots of good (and bad) research on it. Also if you’re gonna write a book called “Jesus from Outer Space”, at least make it about Heavens Gate lol
Personally, I think there was some form of a historical Jesus, most likely a follower of John the Baptist who took over a group of his followers upon his death (imo obviously). And, imo, the greatest piece of evidence of this is the myriad of different Christian sects in the 1st and 2nd centuries, which I think resembles more historically verifiable deaths of religious figures (Muhammad and Joe smith come to mind)
One thing for certain we know about the historical Jesus: He was not physically born to a literal "virgin". Nor did He literally "die" and then literally rise again. All of those physically impossible stuff would have to have "spiritual" meaning.
One thing I would ask any academic with a fringe theory or controversial stance is where does their opinion deviate from other respected scholars. There must be some key points that one side sees totally differently or just ignores. What are those key things.
So... Real question... Does anyone here happen to know specifically the reasons why he shrugs off Acharya S's work on mythicism as "crank"? I ask because I've not seen much from her work directly besides a couple of interviews and whatnot, but all I know mostly is that she was criticized with some of the exact same criticisms Carrier still even gets today, even from some of the same people (looking at you Bart Ehrman, lol). And I plan to read her work at some point just out of curiosity regardless. However, the only criticism I've seen him give is that she was wrong specifically about the birth story of Jesus as it would pertain to a comparison she made with Horus, because I know he's real big on getting everything right with Horus misinformation that's widespread on the internet lol, but is there more to it than that? I've been a huge fan of Carrier's work on mythicism for several years now, and I'm just curious what it's about, I guess. Because it just seems like it would be weird and out of character for him to point out one mistake she made and then debase the rest of her work as bogus, particularly when after making that mistake she couldn't have even self-corrected it because she died not long after due to cancer... And from what I know of her, she knew several foreign languages including ancient Greek, she specialized in Greek classics, among other credentials and experience. I would be super disappointed and surprised to think that it would be anything along the lines of having to do with her not having a PhD or having access to certain source materials or anything like that alone, and I would seriously doubt any of these cases to be true. But, as much as I honor his work, I know he can also sometimes put too much weight on things like asserting that peer-reviewed research is unbiased and can put it on a pedestal at times as the end-all-be-all with academic research (when having been a peer-reviewed author under my maiden name, I can say it's *definitely* not unbiased, lol) among other sometimes overly rigid assertions when it comes to research and historical methodologies I've noticed here and there, though I appreciate his thoroughness and realize that's a major burden that does fall on Atheist scholars or activists within a Christian hegemonic society... So I'm just curious... But again, I don't know much about her work beyond that, as well as how most of her criticisms are just about verbatim the same Carrier gets himself all the time. So does anyone here happen to know more about this...?
Dr. Carrier should own his opinion expressed in his Book On The Historicity of Jesus that the odds are one in 12,500 against historicity and not just mention his view that the most favorable odds are one in three if you look at all the factors most favorably to the historicity view.
First of all, great interview. Honest feedback: I'm not a native speaker and despite I understand 100% of Carrier's words, I quite struggle with your questions, would be great if you slow down a bit and try to improve clarity. Not sure if it's just me though
@@Crecganford Just to clarify I think your audio is fine, it is the level. You are fairly quiet while your guests are usually louder. I listen to a lot of these types of videos in my car if I want to hear you clearly I have to blast it.
this is the BOGUS nonsense mythicism that Carrier and other REAL scholars have been dismissing as not properly vetted or even rigorously researched. it’s by atkins.
1:06:16 - How much would it cost to recover that library "right"? Is it something one could envision funding via a Kickstarter campaign or something like that? I would contribute to that for sure.
Work is just starting on it now, the first lines of the first scroll were recovered earlier this year. And so perhaps in the next ten years something may happen, very exciting times.
But what about the Holy Pagan texts and Scriptures that were written and were popular and strong during the fourth century AD or CE and fifth century CE ? Huh I'd love to see those.
I would have lived to see him dissect some of the actual sources that people cite as proof that there probably was a historical Jesus. For example, I've seen ppl cite roman execution records. Most of the time he speaks about the possibility of creating a figure like Jesus without any historicity, which I don't doubt is possible. But surely there must be some form of possible evidence that the majority of scholars point to when they say, he most likely was a historical figure.
I’ve always been curious. If churches didn’t exist yet then how was Paul writing to a church? I am having trouble even believing the letters were even sent at all and not written right there in Corinth etc.
@@cageragepodcast2795 wait. So let me get this straight? The letters were supposedly sent to regular people that already believed the stuff he was talking about? Not to an actual institution? This is getting fishier and fishier.
@@dpell3543 Right. So these letters are like personal stories sent to people that already believe it. And he wrote these things “so that you may believe” 🤦🏾♂️😂😂
Suppositional thinking is one of the great strengths of mystics "channeling" visions, making prophecies and writing scriptures that speak to people profoundly, many of which bare the style of a folk-religion of culture-hero allegories. Historic literalism was the downfall of Christianity's relevance.
1:02:23 If Paul sent the letters that he wrote to the different congregations, why would he have copies of them? Unless, he wrote them out twice, which seems unlikely.
Good question, and thanks for watching. I don't actually know if we have the original letters, but I'll be putting a question to Richard this week about this. Thank you
I have been reading the bible for years without believing it because I have found it very useful for understanding and investigating the paganism upon which it is based which I also don't believe in but find interesting.
Is that a Lagrange point space habitat in Dr. Carrier's background? I'm unsure - it looks more like it might be a torus-shaped thing, as opposed to the cylindrical ones I've seen previously.
Witness Lee explains the two ministries of Christ. This may help some who misunderstand Dr. Carrier's Jesus in outerspace concept. CHRIST’S TWO MINISTRIES At this point we need to see that the Lord Jesus has two types of ministries, His ministry on earth before His resurrection and His ministry in heaven. When the Lord Jesus was on earth, He carried on a tremendous ministry and did a great deal. In the course of this ministry, He accomplished redemption for us. According to Hebrews 1:3, having finished His ministry on earth, the Lord sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. Although His earthly ministry has been completed, His ministry in heaven is still going on. Christ today is ministering in a higher and more extensive way. As the High Priest, He intercedes for us and cares for all the churches, transmitting into them the heavenly supply. Christ is more busy now than when He was on earth. On earth He cared mainly for His disciples. But in heaven He is caring for a great many churches and for millions of saints. Not only does He intercede for us as the High Priest, but He ministers on our behalf as the heavenly Minister. Furthermore, according to Revelation 5, He as the heavenly Administrator is executing God’s universal government. He is the Lamb with seven eyes carrying out God’s administration. As the High Priest He intercedes; as the heavenly Minister, He ministers; as the Redeemer with the seven eyes of God, He administers the government of God for the accomplishment of God’s purpose. These are the things above on which we are to set our mind. JOINING THE LORD IN HIS HEAVENLY MINISTRY To seek the things which are above and to set our mind on them is to join ourselves to the Lord in His ministry in heaven. We need to join ourselves to the very One who is interceding, ministering, and executing God’s administration. Our living should be a kind of living in which we seek these heavenly things and set our mind on them. This means that we live in such a way as to join our heavenly Christ in [525] His priesthood, ministry, and administration. If we all live in this way, the church life will be greatly uplifted. Paul’s concept in the book of Colossians is that we should turn from everything earthly-from Judaism, Gnosticism, and asceticism-to the things above. We need to join ourselves to these things by setting our mind on them. Let us cooperate with Christ in His ministry in heaven. In our living our concern should be Christ’s heavenly priesthood, ministry, and administration. We should be concerned that the churches are supplied with the transmission from heaven. If this is our concern, we are seeking the things above and setting our mind on them.
Is there a timeline graphic anywhere that shows all the renowned people (historians, leaders, etc) that would have been present (temporally and spatially) during Jesus's time?
35:55 important thing to know about Pilate is that his position in Judia was a punishment, an exile. His career was basically ruined at this point. Also he was a hard-core quirites. So he had a very hard time putting together Jewish poverty and Perushim priests wearing literal kilograms of gold as ceremonial dresses. And keep in mind that those dresses were buried along with their owner, because it was sacrilegious to reuse this gold.
17:44 In 1 Corinthians 15 in the translations I grew up reading Paul talks about the appearances of Jesus to various people after his death, which are said to be evidence of his resurrection on the third day. Is Paul’s authorship of that passage in question? Is there translation errors? Or am I somehow misunderstanding something about the way that gets interpreted from this perspective?
My knee-jerk feeling about the historicity of Jesus issue is that it really depends on whether you're going for the whole enchilada or not. If you are talking about a divine Jesus, then whether or not he existed matters a whole lot - it's the entire question in fact. But if you're debating between "didn't exist" and "existed as an ordinary guy," then... who cares? It doesn't really matter that much beyond general historical interest. I don't mean to denigrate the study of the issue - it's certainly *interesting* as a historical question. But it really just becomes a question just like whether an individual named Homer existed. Interesting, but not terribly significant to us as a culture today. I would argue that the social factors in our culture today that make this a significant issue arise from people taking the other position - that Jesus was real and also divine.
I'm so confused. Lately I've been reading the opinions of very smart educated scholars who claim that the Roman Flavians invented Jesus. They wanted to give the Jews a kinder, gentler savior instead of the conquerer warrior they had been expecting for all those centuries. What's a person supposed to believe?
You don't have to believe anything. I'm aware of several interesting hypotheses/perspectives and think several of these may be part of the true answer, but realise that we probably may never know the whole truth. But this puts me a position of being more open to new evidences and new perspectives, which is more exiting than being locked down to one static answer.
@Bill Lawrence, In my opinion, one glaring fault in that hypothesis is, Flavians could have easily built the 3rd temple and "apparently fulfilled the messianic prophecy" and could have taken the whole jews to their side with that single master stroke.
![BabyChiefDoit - Too Slow (feat. STAR BANDZ) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zayaxws7RPg/mqdefault.jpg)
Good to see Carrier back out here. Hope he keeps making appearance's.
Thanks Nick, he will be talking to me again in the new year, I'm just gathering more questions to ask. If you have any suggestions then please let me know
@@Crecganford Ask Richard next time about the Psilocybin Cults, and if the Roman-Judeo civil war was purely economical or the Romans banned drugs :) Thnx
@@tarakerac If time allows then absolutely, I'm quite interested in these aspect too. The interview should happen one the second week of January, so keep your eyes peeled
@@Crecganford on that subject could you ask if he has read any of John Marco Allegro books and what he thinks of Allegro's theory's
@@bluegreen6153 Hi, if time allows as we now have a heap of questions to ask for th enext video, but if not don't worry as I will ask him back again! He thoroughly enjoyed this chat so I hope he'll be willing to give me more of his time.
Love Carrier, a rare independent scholar.
Thanks for watching the video, I hope to speak to him again in the New Year
@@matthewsmolinsky5605 I've removed Daniel from the channel as I felt he was very negative in his approach to commentary. I don't mind different views but not in the manner he was applying them.
@@Crecganford I suspect that's the same Daniel who preaches on The Friendly Atheist and elsewhere.
Yep, because nobody wants to employ him.
@@zoookx who Carrier? The people employ him, no need for some corporate entity to step in. We support him directly.
Dr. Carrier’s work is well worth the money. I’ve read “On The Historicity of Jesus”, “Jesus From Outer Space”, “Hitler, Homer, Bible Christ” and “Proving History”. Earl Doherty’s “The Jesus Puzzle” is an easy read and was what got Dr. Carrier looking into the thesis. That’s a great introduction, followed by “Jesus From Outer Space”.
Sou do Brasil e adoro os livros do Dr Richard Carrier. Tenho todos os seus livros, e na minha opinião, foi o único a fazer uma pesquisa seria nesse campo, ademais concordo plenamente com Richard Carrier em relação ao Jesus histórico, pois para mim, não há necessidade de existir um homem por trás do mito, mas pode muito bem, assim como a lenda de Moisés, a comunidade cristã tê-lo criado um Jesus para formalizar os seus ideais.
That was a really enjoyable interview.
Thankyou for asking pertinent questions and allowing your guest to speak.
High quality content.
Thanks for having Richard Carrier on, always interesting and informative.
No problem, I hope to ask him more questions in the new year. Thanks for watching :)
🤣This guy Carrier is profiting from professing fringe nutter theories in my view. Entertaining this guy does your credibility no good Crecganford!🤭
I can accept other Crecganford videos saying that creation stories such as in Genesis, Gilgamesh etc can be linked back through language to sources tens of thousands of years ago. However to then deny the historicity of Jesus (the fact he existed even if one doesnt believe in his ressurection) when it comes to the the sheer number and date of manuscripts and external language sources (and archeology) is utterly ridiculous. One then only has to spend 3 minutes on Wikipedia to find the following statements about Carrier:
"However, most contemporary scholarship has been critical of Carrier's methodology and conclusions. According to James F. McGrath, Carrier misuses Rank and Raglan and stretches their scales to make Jesus appear to score high on mythotype.[80] According to Christopher Hansen, Carrier misuses and manipulates Raglan's scale to make Jesus appear more aligned with a mythotype by scoring him high, thus more mythical, when other scholars have scored Jesus as low, thus more historical. [81]"
"Both classicists and biblical scholars agree that there is a historical basis for a person called Jesus of Nazareth.[82][8] Writing in 2004, Michael Grant stated, "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non-historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary."[83] More recently, Patrick Gray posited, "That Jesus did in fact walk the face of the earth in the first century is no longer seriously doubted even by those who believe that very little about his life or death can be known with any certainty."[i][84] For this reason, the views of Carrier and other proponents of the belief that a historical Jesus did not exist are frequently dismissed as "fringe theories" within classical scholarship.[85]"
How too can this guy Carrier say that Paul doesnt say anything about a historical Jesus or about people meeting Jesus? ( around 17:20) Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15 (below):
1 Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. 3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas,[b] and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
I ceased listening to Carrier's voice after this😂
@@bobboardman1156 are you an expert on the subject of the historicity of Jesus, or are you just a christian who doesn’t want to know that their religion might be based on fantasy?
@@kellydalstok8900 Hmm.....What is an expert? The evidence for the historical existence of Jesus is so overwhelming that I think to claim otherwise is silly. What is more debatable is whether Jesus was in fact the son of God, or that he was in fact resurrected (which would support his claim). I personally also think that the evidence for Jesus' resurrection is substantial - as substantial as say, the case for human evolution.
Great interview! Good and informative responses and questions. Good to see two people with a passion for history and valuing truth and accurate historical storytelling and daring to investigate them thoroughly.
I don't know how I've never come across Carrier before. Thanks for the introduction. It's nice to see an actual scholar espousing the same ideas and views I have had for decades. I need to get his books.
Yes, when I first saw him he's ideas were well thought, and so I brought On the Historicity of Jesus. Very interesting book. My second interview with him was much better I think, a lot of great information on the New Testament.
Probably bc he's really creepy and started hiding after affidavits he submitted showed how much of a wierdo perv he is lol
Richard has the mind of Sherlock Holmes - he is simply the best.
I'm very impressed by his research too. He is back in a few weeks so keep an eye out for that interview where we dig a bit deeper into this. Thanks for watching and your support!
I appreciate your scholarship and integrity Dr. Carrier.
Oh the algorithm provides!
So good to find this in my suggestions.
Thanks for uploading.
Fascinating as always with Richard Carrier.
And thank you for watching
Amazing video brother really great interview and done so well Richard is so insightful 👏
My two great history passions coming together! Jesus study and earlier creation myths!
I'm aboard!
I just recently found your channel through the finding the pre proto Indo-European gods video (seems to be going viral, congrats!), subscribed and have been working through your other content since. I wanted to say fantastic job interviewing.
Unlike some channels, you give your guest plenty of breathing room to expansively talk about their points without constantly interjecting and only adding well thought out and relevant material to keep conversation flowing and evolving. Same goes with your questions, they are asked at the right time, as one point begins to reach it's conclusion and the next injects new energy into the interview.
Not easy skills to balance but you did an awesome job and I look forward to seeing more in future. Very happy to have found your content mate :)
Thank you so much for your kind words, they are very much appreciated.
@@Crecganford most welcome! I am watching the second interview right now as we speak, loving it so far! Your channel deserves to blow up in a big way, fantastic content!
Can't believe Crecganford interviewed Richard! This is great!!
He's a smart man I walked away from Religion completely cause of Dr Hagins who is similar to Richard.
He definitely knows his stuff, thanks for watching
On the reason why the Gospels were written in Greek, I'd make a small annotation:
Greek was not just a "foreign language" but the lingua franca of the Mediterranean in the moment. It wouldn't be "a history of the us written in italian" but rather a "history of Italy written in english", so that everyone can know about it. Merchant enclaves in Spain would use greek as a commong language, meanin celtiberics, phoenicians, and romans used greed. Especially romans, given that written latin was just a law language; hence why Cicero, Marcus Aurelis, and other prolific roman writers used greek in their personal texts.
Like today if you want to make something well known you need to use the english language. People in India, Argentina, China, and Russia can understand english and will do so.
He means it would’ve been foreign to those who were living in the Galilee and speaking Aramaic at the time the gospels were set.
@@annascott3542
But it wasn't. It was the common language of the Mediterranean. Most jew diaspora people spoke greek and no aramaic at the time.
If you talk to a contemprary jew in californa or buenos aires, you won't speak to him in hebrew but in their actual language.
The "historian" is not educated in the topic, he's not fluent in koine
@@juanjoseph no, it wasn’t. Simple fishermen wouldn’t have spoken Greek, they would have spoken Aramaic.
@@kellydalstok8900
They would have to speak basic greek in order to sell/buy things at the city market.
And the bible was meant for more scholarly people, precisely other reason why it was put in words after its first expansion.
You should read more history bro
Spanish people writing to spanish people wouldn't write in English. Jews wouldn't write to other jews in greek.
Excellent video my friend! Keep up the great work!
Thanks for watching and supporting the channel, it is much appreciated :)
I am attracted to Joseph Atwill's theory that Jesus was invented and the Gospels written by Flavius Josephus and others in the Flavian Dynasty. The Flavians are historically known to have started cults in other countries for political reasons and Atwill's theory is that meek Jesus who taught to render unto Caesar and turn the other cheek was invented to unplug the Warrior Messiah or Masiyah concept that backed and gave energy to a lot of Jewish rebellion at the time.
Thanks for the video. I think of myself as a secular humanist but I've always wondered about the historicity of Jesus because I had a religious upbringing.
Carrier is so well spoken and have great arguments. Earlier I did believe that Jesus might have been a real person, but now I'm highly doubting that
Yes, he has a convincing argument. Thanks for watching :)
I think there was an apocalyptic preacher whose followers saw him like Elvis and these stories were piled on him.
I don't discount Carrier's ideas. And he leaves more for a historical jesus
@@Crecganford thank you 👍
I agree, very intuitive arguments. For me separation of Jesus from other religions in common thought. The gospels written in Greek is a major puzzle piece I've needed for awhile personally. Although I've been aware of the multiple writers being suspect. I think he's gonna get his book bought by me soon. Top stuff @Crecganford
Dr Richard Carrier is eminently listenable.. he is so thorough in his research no wonder Bart Ehrman is no match for him .. Ehrman can’t risk his professorship in the deep south ... the people who really need to hear this historical truth unfortunately won’t ever listen
North Carolina is not as deep as some other places I’ve been. 😏😄
I find it drudgery. But I'm not devoid of Truth.
After a couple online lectures and a few podcast interviews I've come to view Dr Richard Carrier as the person who makes the most sense (logically speaking) on the validity/invalidity of a historical "Jesus." It doesn't take long (a couple/three decades) for a semi believable mythology to emerge on almost anything; things as common as say.. a baseball player's performance, or someone's national political stature, etc. etc. - that based on my own personal anecdotal, critical thought, observations - more or less believable... empirically speaking as it were.
Thanks for this perspective, added to a dark foggy, too often politicised, mist of post-antiquity religious spiritually.
With that said, however much is understandable, believable, credible, etc etc.. kinda sorta as it were.
(Now impossible to truly sort out, after 20 or more centuries of defused religious subterfuge).
Yikes! wtf.. frustration on steroids!
Thanks for the feedback and supporting the channel by watching the video. I'm speaking to him again this week, so look out for that of this channel hopefully next weekend.
Yes
I mean, shoot, a sect of American politics has managed to create a version of a known event that is patently false, and yet is able to convince millions of people of its supposed, “veracity”
But Carrier explains nothing about this era, he just says the gospels are mythical.
If he had looked at the history, he would have found that Jesus was an AD 60s king of Syria and Judaes.
Biblical: King Jesus Em Manuel of Judaea.
Historical: King Izas Manu of E.dessa and Judaea.
See book: Jesus King of E.dessa.
Ralph
@@RalphEllis If he read the sports pages, he would have found out that Jesus still appears repeatedly in Major League Baseball and can play every position!
I like carriers 1 in 3 chance.
It means if there was a person to whom you can say "that's the man who inspired what We call Christ" is ever found, they're still not the born of a virgin, risen from the dead, miracle worker son of God.
When I first heard Dr. Carrier talk about the Euhemerization of Jesus, it' blew my mind...and yet, having previously read Thomas Moore's _Utopia,_ the idea of presenting radical political views via _claimed_ interactions with a _fictional_ character made perfect sense. For that matter, Euhemerization "by committee" explains all the self-contradictory claims _within and throughout_ the New Testament quite effectively. (It also explains Moses, Noah, and many _Old Testament_ characters that _most_ Christian and Rabbinical scholars agree _also_ never really existed.)
Spot on!
Great question at the end.
Well done
As a lapsed Baptist and lazy classicist (BA in Latin & Greek, Calvin College, 1986), I have been following Dr. Carrier for a few years now. Thanks for a great interview. The buzz about Herculaneum is really exciting! Also, with reference to "outer space," it is important to explain that the popular conception of "the heavens" (note that it is plural) at the time was very different from our own. In their minds, earth was at the center of the universe, surrounded by concentric spheres in which all the planets and other heavenly bodies moved. Each sphere was inhabited and/or ruled by angels or demons.
Indeed. Christians have quite a habit of making documents that contradict their beliefs disappear.
I enjoy listening to Dr Carrier. Sobering to realise that he too, is proselytising. Would love to run some Nietzsche past him. Some Alan Watts Rudolf Otto & Mircea Eliade too.
Carrier is the best. He is definitely up there with all others:Harris, Ana hershi Ali, Dennett
It's beautiful to follow your inner light. This guy kept the faith. My favorite part is when he talks about the Romulans at the end.
FYI they do speak Greek in the whole Levant area it’s the international language of the time in that area Josephus speaks and writes fluent Greek that means he was educated in Greek and all the translations in Latin are synoptic
Josephus was an educated man. The son of a carpenter and fishermen would only have spoken Aramaic.
I've never put together that the gospels are a response to 70ad. This makes a lot of sense. Good show.
Love that the library he talks about has now had the first book decoded
2 minutes in and I already love this video.
Thank you
Cool, I used to read Richard Carrier’s blog all the time and checked out his Historicity of Jesus stuff. Kind of amazed to see him on video, though, because I know he’s older than me but he definitely looks like he’s barely out of high school.
I've just recently finished Ehrman's Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, and this was a fantastic listen!!
Thank you.
Watching this 3 years later, this is a better explanation of his own version of Mythicism than I feel like I ever get in the debates with historicists. Dr. Carrier clearly states here that Christians were preaching that Jesus from Outer Space came down to Earth and was killed and rose again and went back to outer space. But that's by the time the church is established in the 2nd century. Saying early messianic Jews actually believed the events occurred on a low level of heaven (not Earth) seems silly from the 21st century, but in looking it up, turns out Paul's (and his contemporaries) understanding of heaven would have been a rather silly multi-level version. Seems like every time I try to check Carrier, I end up understanding him better.
Should have Dr. Michael Heiser on to point out some of the obvious flaws in a large part of Carriers positions. People really seem to want what this guy says to be true, its a fascinating study about people being bored with doctrine or misinterpreting what the scholarship actually says.
I have not made a serious study of Michael Heiser on Richard Carrier but all I could find was no more than sophisticated jeering.
He’s so brilliant I could listen to him all day….
You say clearly far too much if you have to explain it, and so to many I would say it isn't, and some of the aspects of your argument I do disagree with. But I do thank you for watching and your feedback.
The fact that most of the scriptures is “made up” doesn’t mean that Jesus was not an historical character. The Carter’s hypothesis makes sense only for the Protestants that that adopted the doctrine of “sola scriptura”.
So interesting! Especially the text reconstruction he talks about at the end. Always, around the Easter, I listen to Richard Carrier :P
Thank you for watching :)
It's funny that Jesus mythicists are ridiculed when it all boils down to what one believes is most plausible. A man who rose from the dead and fed the 5,000? Or a mythical amalgam of all the pre Christian gods? I believe the latter.
Thanks for the video.
"It's like we have a hero's tale of the USA written in Italian..."
Columbus just sprang to mind for some reason...
Columbus has really nothing to do with the US tho
@@juanjoseph Right, and that would exemplify how much a figure can be ahistorically mythologized - even with the figure’s exploits fully recorded in the early modern period, and a fairly clear archaeological and written record of the continent, along with a fully operational educational system ensuring that >95% of the current population is literate and exposed to “history”, there is a common understanding in the US that Columbus “discovered and founded America”, and is thus an “American hero”. There are statues of him everywhere, and Columbus Day was declared a national US holiday.
@@jamesfrancese6091
It is a bad example because italian to the US is not the same as koine greek to the ancient mediterranean world.
Also, Columbus is a "hero" whereas Jesus is quite more than just a hero or even a profet.
There's a reason why you need to know greek and latin when studying the ancient medieterranean...
@@juanjoseph Well, the process of Columbus’ contemporary “heroization” was spurred mostly by the political advocacy of Italian immigrants in the US, who came to exert a huge influence on American culture in the 20th century. So it is true to say that Italian cultural influence was necessary for Columbus’ later stature in US historical narrative, but yes, not via linguistic hegemony as you point out. I don’t think we’re going for an overwhelming equivalence here; there are just amusing similarities which make for an analogy.
Good day to you! 21:30, I love the idea that the Gospel of Mark was similar to Mark Twain in its use of colloquial style. In fact, we know from that Twain was a time-traveler, so in my new alternate reality the second book of the New Testament is The Gospel According to Mark Twain.
Thanks!
Thank you so much for watching and your support. It is appreciated.
Very interesting just the final carrier interview remaining before i complete the christianity playlist and on to the next 🐎
Avowed atheist estimates historicity of Jesus at 33%. Not bad.
Rockstar... Wish more were ready to hear truth
He's just told me he wants to talk more in January, so look out for more truth then!
ok, but what about Jesus on a toast bread??? isn't that the strongest proof that Jesus is real and alive,you never mentioned that,probably you don't have any argument against that. Appreciate your research and your work.
Good point, well made :)
Awwwwe, I miss his curly hair..I know that is a flippant and superficial thing to say but I really liked his hair when it was long and curly...I think he is an awesome guy..charismatic and great communicator ...I'd love for him to visit Ireland touring Humanist, Secular and Freethinking groups here..😁 Thankyou for uploading this..☘️💪🏻😁
Great topic I've found a Jerusalem bible in a yard sale i was shocked about the wording in this book keep up your good work peace to all
This was my thought as well. Bring back the curls! Edit: I think he's brought them back. 🥳
Loved it! Thanks 😊
Thank you
The man knows his stuff.🤯🤔
I have learnt so much about how Christianity was created watching his work. I hope you enjoyed it
@ He’s telling the truth. That’s at least more than the Bible does.🤪🤓
@ One day you’ll understand.
@@lelandstronks319 There are other historians with Phds that don't believe Jesus was mythical. If you are atheist it will influence your way of thinking in every area of your life - it's inevitable.
@@stuart3178 Most of those PhDs are people that would lose their tenure at major Christian universities if they told the truth.
The rest are bias being that they’re Christian apologist anyway. Wise up,Jesus is a myth.🤪😫
Always brilliant
I love the listing from minute to minute.
Great interview!
I get frustrated listening to hosts and debaters interrupt Dr. Carrier in other podcasts.
Nice work man!
Thanks for supporting the channel and the feedback, that's really appreciated. He's on again in a few weeks and I'll carry on letting him talk lots :)
Subscribed
@@chadwagoner7056 Thank you :)
@@Crecganford can we post questions for you to ask him?
@@inquisitivemind007 Of course, although I have plenty right now, but if I can fit some more in I will, if not we can get him back for a third time, it's no problem :)
The argument that the similarities of the savior God myths shifts the burden of proof for Jesus' historicity feels misguided. Why isn't it just as likely Jesus was a real figure who's narrative was blended with popular myths of the time?
That's certainly possible. But the use of other stories to form the Jesus story makes Jesus's existence more superfluous to the existence of his religion. Thus it does move the needle towards greater uncertainty in his existence. But it is only one piece of the puzzle.
I think a better question would be, why is Jesus the only Euhemerized god who is taken as historic?
I agree with Arcane Mormon. It's far too strange to accept that of all the euhemerized Gods, that the last on the list is real when his predecessors aren't. If anything the first would be real, and the rest a copy. But we know that even the first (Inanna) was also not considered real
Therefore, neither can Jesus
It's because of all the _other_ weird things. Like how Paul doesn't know or talk about knowing a single detail of Jesus's life and deeds. Or how, if Paul is telling the truth about never having met Jesus, it means he _hallucinated Jesus_ after Jesus was already dead.
If Jesus is historical but not miraculous, yet Paul can still hallucinate him, then that makes it more likely that _everyone_ could get away with hallucinating him.
At some point, the needle moves enough.
Thanks for a great interview! Liked and subscribed. For the next interview, please please please PLEASE ask Dr. Carrier about:
1. Other Jewish faith literature written contemporary to the gospels (inter-war period 70 CE - 132 CE) such as 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch.
These show us what else was written at the time to cope with temple loss, and they look remarkably similar to the gospels: a miracle-working leader who promotes Torah adherence, shows conventional wisdom to establish spiritual authority, advises how to enter the kingdom of heaven, speaks of a coming Messiah, commutes with God in the desert for 40 days, and after his mission ascends to heaven.
They are each set in the past with fictional characters in real settings, and come complete with their own fake epistles. What do they teach us about the gospels' authorship? Please discuss!
2. Thomas L. Brodie's "Beyond the Quest for the Historical Jesus" puts the nail in the coffin on Historicity, both of Jesus and of Paul. Any comments? And where is the scholarship headed? Who will continue Brodie's work?
3. Can someone please use AI to more efficiently identify all the sources of the gospels?
4. Where else should we be digging to find more archeological evidence? Yavneh?
5. What about 2 Corinthians, 11:32 -- this is the only date stamp in the "authentic" Pauline epistles, and a plain-text reading puts authorship in the time of Areras III, between 87 and 62 BCE, a century before the crucifixion story.
6. What can we extrapolate about the gospel authors? Are they the philosophies of the school of Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai, his students, or their contemporaries?
Thanks!
I will certainly try to ask some of these! Thank you for watching and supporting the channel
I'm no genius but I know to question things that don't make sense. Not saying a creator is fake but I choose to be an Agnostic. I don't know if there is a God or not.
Me too, except that due to the lack of evidence, I cannot believe. So I call myself an agnostic atheist.
@@Shake69ification that makes sense the way people die everyday makes me the same Agnostic Atheist. All u have to do is start watching shows on the ID channel to question God's existence. I'm an unbeliever now I believe in Evolution similarly to Charles Darwin
@@thenobleone-3384 I don't like to say I _believe_ evolution, but rather I _understand_ it.
My point above is that the agnostic label refers to knowledge whereas the atheist label refers to belief. There _are_ those who will admit to bring agnostic theists. They are theists I hold in greater regard for being more humble.
@Random Thoughts I agree I feel stupid all my life God doesn't talk back not only that I have been going through Racism my entire life. I'm of mixed race and I know just by how much I have dealt with Discrimination that God isn't real. I believe firmly in Darwin's theory as well as Richard Dawkins. You're right the older I get I see that God and Satan were made up by the Roman Catholic church back then
Loved it
Xians the fabricators!! Well, i didn’t realise by how much re gospels. Very enjoyable
Well, I think Carrier didn't find the truth he hungered for when he was into Taoism and turned his announce instead to oppose the Christian Gospel. "When a man's folly brings him to ruin his heart rages against Jehovah." (Prov. 19:3) Why didn't he go get his doctorate in eastern religions ?
@@jackwilmoresongs
Provide credible evidence that Jesus actually existed and Richard Carrier will change his mind.
@@jackwilmoresongs
No one’s “heart rages against jehovah” because there’s no good evidence that he exists. Theists are always accusing atheists of being “angry at god”, but you can’t be angry at someone that doesn’t exist. We can be angry at the harm religion does, but not at an invisible, undetectable, imaginary deity.
@@judyives1832 Sure they do. One expression of this displeasure is to claim God imaginary. Another expression is to twist the mentality around in pretzel shapes imagining things like a DNA molecule is the result of lucky accidents. Rage, annoyance, desperation, lampooning, ridicule, caricature, - other forms of suppressing the conscience.
@@jackwilmoresongs “The burden of proof regarding the truthfulness of a claim lies with the one who makes the claim; if this burden is not met, then the claim is unfounded.” So let me know when you find some evidence to support absurd claims about an *INVISIBLE MAGIC SKY GENIE* , or that he impregnated Jesus’ mother 2,000 years ago, or that Jesus was a *VIRGIN-BORN DEMIGOD WITH SUPERPOWERS* and that his *ROTTING CORPSE MAGICALLY RETURNED FROM THE DEAD* before levitating bodily into outer space, or evidence for the talking snake, talking donkey, 900-year-old men, etc.
Like Dr. Carrier, I have never encountered any credible evidence for the historicity of Jesus or any of the events surrounding him as depicted in the gospels. I researched this topic exhaustively for 15 months defending my thesis (MDiv, Ecumenical Studies).
Please investigate the Shroud of Turin. The last examination confirmed the person appearing on the Shroud confirms what was written in the Bible. The image cannot be explained using the latest technology. A group of people including Jewish scientists carried out the examination. An earlier examination took a sample of the cloth but it had been contaminated due to the cloth being mended due to fire and water damage. The image is 3 dimensional. The person on the cloth has all the markings of crucifixion. Unfortunately, the teachings of Jesus have probably been controlled and manipulated by those seeking power and control. Earlier claims that the Shroud are a fake from the middle ages does not stack up with the evidence. I understand how people can believe this author. Evidence is not always forthcoming in all situations. Traditions and beliefs can be passed down by each generation without written evidence. Consider the Australian Aborigines, they did not record details as we do but their knowledge about their environment and ancestors cannot be matched.
A fascinating man and a brilliant talker. What a shame more people don't read his "On the Historicity of Jesus" then they would understand where he is coming from and raise there are indeed reasons to doubt.
Agreed. The greatest tale ever sold.
My big issue is that modern "pure science" doesn't offer any sort of acceptable explanation for how it is that we are actually consciously self-aware. I don't know what the "right" answer is, but I think is going on that is more than our scientific theories cover. I just think there are still things we have yet to understand in this domain. These days I lean toward some kind of idealism - I particular find some of Dr. Bernardo Kastrup's ideas interesting, and I don't find those ideas incompatible with science at all.
I think the best way to utilize Carrier's ideas is not to argue that Jesus never existed (though that's possible) but rather to appreciate how all the mythical characters and beliefs current at the time were borrowed to shape the Jesus of Christianity.
Great conversation
53:00 - The power that detailed modern Christian beliefs have to "insert themselves" into a topic is hard to overestimate. It even happens in fiction. I am a fan of an urban fantasy book series by Jim Butcher called The Dresden Files. Christian-related themes appear to a limited extent in the series, along with elements of Norse mythology and more. Jim is kind of an equal opportunity writer in that regard. Anyway, I help moderate the Reddit community devoted to the series, and I am constantly amazed at how people will import Christian ideas and apply them to the story in ways that are *not* justified by the published words themselves. But you just can't argue with these people in a rational way - they're dead set and they will not budge. So it's a really strong effect.
Excellent talk.
Dr. Carrier is broadcasting from the Ringworld! 😊
Christianity won because Constantine had an amazing mom!
I just want to let people know that while Dr. Carrier is very thorough and smart and studious (dude knows what he’s talking about), the “Jesus as Myth” theory is not the historical consensus. He has biases, as any scholar does. His methods are very good, but I just want people to know this is a very well studied topic with lots of good (and bad) research on it.
Also if you’re gonna write a book called “Jesus from Outer Space”, at least make it about Heavens Gate lol
Personally, I think there was some form of a historical Jesus, most likely a follower of John the Baptist who took over a group of his followers upon his death (imo obviously). And, imo, the greatest piece of evidence of this is the myriad of different Christian sects in the 1st and 2nd centuries, which I think resembles more historically verifiable deaths of religious figures (Muhammad and Joe smith come to mind)
Do you have an example of "good" academic research on the historicity of Jesus that supports historicity?
One thing for certain we know about the historical Jesus: He was not physically born to a literal "virgin". Nor did He literally "die" and then literally rise again. All of those physically impossible stuff would have to have "spiritual" meaning.
40 gospels! So basically gospels are fan fiction.
One thing I would ask any academic with a fringe theory or controversial stance is where does their opinion deviate from other respected scholars. There must be some key points that one side sees totally differently or just ignores. What are those key things.
That is a sign of a good listener, to what the person who disagrees with you knows that you do not.
Interesting that Carrier said Pilate committed suicide, which is a dubious claim from Eusebius rather than a reliable earlier source.
This is for Al!
Thank you, that is much appreciated :)
@@Crecganford just found your content. Always up for promoting good content any way I can. Thank you. Your content is very much appreciated. Respect
So... Real question... Does anyone here happen to know specifically the reasons why he shrugs off Acharya S's work on mythicism as "crank"? I ask because I've not seen much from her work directly besides a couple of interviews and whatnot, but all I know mostly is that she was criticized with some of the exact same criticisms Carrier still even gets today, even from some of the same people (looking at you Bart Ehrman, lol). And I plan to read her work at some point just out of curiosity regardless. However, the only criticism I've seen him give is that she was wrong specifically about the birth story of Jesus as it would pertain to a comparison she made with Horus, because I know he's real big on getting everything right with Horus misinformation that's widespread on the internet lol, but is there more to it than that?
I've been a huge fan of Carrier's work on mythicism for several years now, and I'm just curious what it's about, I guess. Because it just seems like it would be weird and out of character for him to point out one mistake she made and then debase the rest of her work as bogus, particularly when after making that mistake she couldn't have even self-corrected it because she died not long after due to cancer... And from what I know of her, she knew several foreign languages including ancient Greek, she specialized in Greek classics, among other credentials and experience. I would be super disappointed and surprised to think that it would be anything along the lines of having to do with her not having a PhD or having access to certain source materials or anything like that alone, and I would seriously doubt any of these cases to be true. But, as much as I honor his work, I know he can also sometimes put too much weight on things like asserting that peer-reviewed research is unbiased and can put it on a pedestal at times as the end-all-be-all with academic research (when having been a peer-reviewed author under my maiden name, I can say it's *definitely* not unbiased, lol) among other sometimes overly rigid assertions when it comes to research and historical methodologies I've noticed here and there, though I appreciate his thoroughness and realize that's a major burden that does fall on Atheist scholars or activists within a Christian hegemonic society... So I'm just curious...
But again, I don't know much about her work beyond that, as well as how most of her criticisms are just about verbatim the same Carrier gets himself all the time. So does anyone here happen to know more about this...?
Dr. Carrier should own his opinion expressed in his Book On The Historicity of Jesus that the odds are one in 12,500 against historicity and not just mention his view that the most favorable odds are one in three if you look at all the factors most favorably to the historicity view.
First of all, great interview. Honest feedback: I'm not a native speaker and despite I understand 100% of Carrier's words, I quite struggle with your questions, would be great if you slow down a bit and try to improve clarity. Not sure if it's just me though
Yes, I agree. I do not interview very often, and so will get better.
@
Luciano Calboni, Why can't you make use of subtitles/closed captions?
@@ejv1963 because I listen to RUclips driving
@@lucianocalboni5500 Okay 😣
Am I the only one that is bugged by the differences in the audio levels for the speakers?
Audio will get better as I can afford better gear. I'm doing my best with what I've got for now
@@Crecganford Just to clarify I think your audio is fine, it is the level. You are fairly quiet while your guests are usually louder. I listen to a lot of these types of videos in my car if I want to hear you clearly I have to blast it.
Glad to hear Richard speaking. I am curious if he could comment about the Jesus of Jewish angelology and if he could expand on that evidence.
Thanks for watching the interview Bruce, I'm hoping to speak to him again in the new year so if I get a chance to ask him I will.
He has lectures on RUclips going into this. Jesus is first identified in the written record by Philo before Paul in the pages of Zecharia (sic) .
Have you ever watched the video on RUclips, "Caesar's Messiah:The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus"? It's quite interesting.
I haven’t but that does sound interesting, thank you for the suggestion.
this is the BOGUS nonsense mythicism that Carrier and other REAL scholars have been dismissing as not properly vetted or even rigorously researched.
it’s by atkins.
1:06:16 - How much would it cost to recover that library "right"? Is it something one could envision funding via a Kickstarter campaign or something like that? I would contribute to that for sure.
Work is just starting on it now, the first lines of the first scroll were recovered earlier this year. And so perhaps in the next ten years something may happen, very exciting times.
But what about the Holy Pagan texts and Scriptures that were written and were popular and strong during the fourth century AD or CE and fifth century CE ? Huh I'd love to see those.
I would have lived to see him dissect some of the actual sources that people cite as proof that there probably was a historical Jesus. For example, I've seen ppl cite roman execution records. Most of the time he speaks about the possibility of creating a figure like Jesus without any historicity, which I don't doubt is possible. But surely there must be some form of possible evidence that the majority of scholars point to when they say, he most likely was a historical figure.
I’ve always been curious. If churches didn’t exist yet then how was Paul writing to a church? I am having trouble even believing the letters were even sent at all and not written right there in Corinth etc.
That is a good point, I hope to have Richard back soon, so can ask him that :)
@@Crecganford my understanding is that a"church" was anywhere a teacher taught(theology.)
The churches started in people's homes. They evolved from there
@@cageragepodcast2795 wait. So let me get this straight? The letters were supposedly sent to regular people that already believed the stuff he was talking about? Not to an actual institution? This is getting fishier and fishier.
@@dpell3543 Right. So these letters are like personal stories sent to people that already believe it. And he wrote these things “so that you may believe” 🤦🏾♂️😂😂
Suppositional thinking is one of the great strengths of mystics "channeling" visions, making prophecies and writing scriptures that speak to people profoundly, many of which bare the style of a folk-religion of culture-hero allegories. Historic literalism was the downfall of Christianity's relevance.
1:02:23 If Paul sent the letters that he wrote to the different congregations, why would he have copies of them? Unless, he wrote them out twice, which seems unlikely.
Good question, and thanks for watching. I don't actually know if we have the original letters, but I'll be putting a question to Richard this week about this. Thank you
I have been reading the bible for years without believing it because I have found it very useful for understanding and investigating the paganism upon which it is based which I also don't believe in but find interesting.
Considering Celsus lived in the 2nd Century, is it likely any of his works would be buried by the AD 79 eruption at Herculaneum?
Is that a Lagrange point space habitat in Dr. Carrier's background? I'm unsure - it looks more like it might be a torus-shaped thing, as opposed to the cylindrical ones I've seen previously.
Witness Lee explains the two ministries of Christ. This may help some who misunderstand Dr. Carrier's Jesus in outerspace concept.
CHRIST’S TWO MINISTRIES
At this point we need to see that the Lord Jesus has two types of ministries, His ministry on earth before His resurrection and His ministry in heaven. When the Lord Jesus was on earth, He carried on a tremendous ministry and did a great deal. In the course of this ministry, He accomplished redemption for us. According to Hebrews 1:3, having finished His ministry on earth, the Lord sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. Although His earthly ministry has been completed, His ministry in heaven is still going on.
Christ today is ministering in a higher and more extensive way. As the High Priest, He intercedes for us and cares for all the churches, transmitting into them the heavenly supply. Christ is more busy now than when He was on earth. On earth He cared mainly for His disciples. But in heaven He is caring for a great many churches and for millions of saints. Not only does He intercede for us as the High Priest, but He ministers on our behalf as the heavenly Minister. Furthermore, according to Revelation 5, He as the heavenly Administrator is executing God’s universal government. He is the Lamb with seven eyes carrying out God’s administration. As the High Priest He intercedes; as the heavenly Minister, He ministers; as the Redeemer with the seven eyes of God, He administers the government of God for the accomplishment of God’s purpose. These are the things above on which we are to set our mind.
JOINING THE LORD IN HIS HEAVENLY MINISTRY
To seek the things which are above and to set our mind on them is to join ourselves to the Lord in His ministry in heaven. We need to join ourselves to the very One who is interceding, ministering, and executing God’s administration. Our living should be a kind of living in which we seek these heavenly things and set our mind on them. This means that we live in such a way as to join our heavenly Christ in [525] His priesthood, ministry, and administration. If we all live in this way, the church life will be greatly uplifted.
Paul’s concept in the book of Colossians is that we should turn from everything earthly-from Judaism, Gnosticism, and asceticism-to the things above. We need to join ourselves to these things by setting our mind on them. Let us cooperate with Christ in His ministry in heaven. In our living our concern should be Christ’s heavenly priesthood, ministry, and administration. We should be concerned that the churches are supplied with the transmission from heaven. If this is our concern, we are seeking the things above and setting our mind on them.
Is there a timeline graphic anywhere that shows all the renowned people (historians, leaders, etc) that would have been present (temporally and spatially) during Jesus's time?
That's a good question, I'm not sure if I have one to hand, but I will look around and post it here if I find one.
@Thomas Payne, Check David Fitzgerald @ 38:04 in ruclips.net/video/57MRCF-Yah8/видео.html
@@ejv1963 thank you for that link and time stamp.
35:55 important thing to know about Pilate is that his position in Judia was a punishment, an exile. His career was basically ruined at this point. Also he was a hard-core quirites. So he had a very hard time putting together Jewish poverty and Perushim priests wearing literal kilograms of gold as ceremonial dresses. And keep in mind that those dresses were buried along with their owner, because it was sacrilegious to reuse this gold.
Mitchell's translation of the Tao te Ching is, imo, by far the best in English.
I got the Charles Johnston version
17:44 In 1 Corinthians 15 in the translations I grew up reading Paul talks about the appearances of Jesus to various people after his death, which are said to be evidence of his resurrection on the third day. Is Paul’s authorship of that passage in question? Is there translation errors? Or am I somehow misunderstanding something about the way that gets interpreted from this perspective?
I haven't seen a Dr. Carrier interview for years. Hehehe, is this the start of a come back or have I just been out of the loop for too long?
My knee-jerk feeling about the historicity of Jesus issue is that it really depends on whether you're going for the whole enchilada or not. If you are talking about a divine Jesus, then whether or not he existed matters a whole lot - it's the entire question in fact. But if you're debating between "didn't exist" and "existed as an ordinary guy," then... who cares? It doesn't really matter that much beyond general historical interest.
I don't mean to denigrate the study of the issue - it's certainly *interesting* as a historical question. But it really just becomes a question just like whether an individual named Homer existed. Interesting, but not terribly significant to us as a culture today. I would argue that the social factors in our culture today that make this a significant issue arise from people taking the other position - that Jesus was real and also divine.
If Jesus was Jewish how come he had a Mexican name? Lol
Are you a Frightened Rabbit fan by chance? They have a song about that
@@Crecganford No I actually stole that joke from," Lenny Bruce," a comedian from back in the fifties. I'm older than dirt.
Was there evidence in Roman archives about Pontius Pilot getting in trouble for letting Jews practice their law?
Or would that be too vague?
Magic mythical headphones yikes great drop back
The joys of the world of zoom!! :)
I'm so confused. Lately I've been reading the opinions of very smart educated scholars who claim that the Roman Flavians invented Jesus. They wanted to give the Jews a kinder, gentler savior instead of the conquerer warrior they had been expecting for all those centuries. What's a person supposed to believe?
You don't have to believe anything. I'm aware of several interesting hypotheses/perspectives and think several of these may be part of the true answer, but realise that we probably may never know the whole truth. But this puts me a position of being more open to new evidences and new perspectives, which is more exiting than being locked down to one static answer.
@Bill Lawrence, In my opinion, one glaring fault in that hypothesis is, Flavians could have easily built the 3rd temple and "apparently fulfilled the messianic prophecy" and could have taken the whole jews to their side with that single master stroke.
@@ejv1963 Interesting thought. Just another possibility.