• In total there are 2 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 789 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 5:08 am

Carrier on historical methodology

#133: Sept. - Nov. 2014 (Non-Fiction)
User avatar
Interbane

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 7203
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
19
Location: Da U.P.
Has thanked: 1105 times
Been thanked: 2166 times
United States of America

Re: Carrier on historical methodology

Unread post

If they fabricated a fictional account,it makes no sense that they would die for something they knew they had fabricated.
People die in suicide bombings or cult mass suicides because they believe what they are told by leaders and writings of these religious groups.
Yet in so many of those cases, the leaders die with the members. People are crazy with their beliefs.

The same issues all exist. How do you explain why the first copies of the "eyewitness testimonies" didn't appear until decades after Jesus died? Either they waited way too long, casting doubt on the entire works. Or they wrote some of it during the time of Jesus, and it was edited and harmonized during the following decades. Why else would we be missing any and all manuscripts from earlier? What historian uses methods that allow this deviation?

Regarding dying for something they claim to be eyewitness to, it still hasn't been shown that they were eyewitness to an actual man Jesus. Has it been shown that the authors of the gospels truly died for what they wrote? Their deaths can be confirmed with more rigor than that of Jesus?

I'm chiming in as ignorant of much of the scholarship, but these are the questions I would ask.
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
User avatar
Flann 5
Nutty for Books
Posts: 1580
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
10
Location: Dublin
Has thanked: 831 times
Been thanked: 705 times

Re: Carrier on historical methodology

Unread post

Interbane wrote:Yet in so many of those cases, the leaders die with the members. People are crazy with their beliefs.

The same issues all exist. How do you explain why the first copies of the "eyewitness testimonies" didn't appear until decades after Jesus died? Either they waited way too long, casting doubt on the entire works. Or they wrote some of it during the time of Jesus, and it was edited and harmonized during the following decades. Why else would we be missing any and all manuscripts from earlier? What historian uses methods that allow this deviation?

Regarding dying for something they claim to be eyewitness to, it still hasn't been shown that they were eyewitness to an actual man Jesus. Has it been shown that the authors of the gospels truly died for what they wrote? Their deaths can be confirmed with more rigor than that of Jesus?

I'm chiming in as ignorant of much of the scholarship, but these are the questions I would ask.
Thanks Interbane. I think you have to compare like with like. What mass suicide and death of a cult leader is comparable to the new testament accounts and Christian accounts of persecution and execution of such as Stephen, Paul and Peter? In fact Paul appealed to Caesar when tried, though he was prepared to die if necessary,and eventually was beheaded by Nero.
When the Christians were persecuted in Jerusalem many fled and were dispersed as in fact Jesus told the apostles to do in the gospel account.At the same time when the issue was forced about worshiping Caesar as God ,many did in fact die.
I don't see why your either/ or distinction must apply concerning how much of the gospels(entire or partial) were written early though it's thought they were written probably two,three and more decades later. Christian accounts place John's gospel in the 90s which is late but if in fact John wrote it,what is the problem?When Luke wrote his gospel he mentions that other accounts had already been written.
I don't think the waited far too long argument is valid.The apostles initially preached the teachings of Jesus and later the gospels were written down.If Matthew and Mark wrote gospels even thirty years later,Matthew was an eyewitness and the early Christians who were still alive would know if they were historically accurate or not and their enemies would have quickly pointed out if these were myths or fabrications.
As I've said before, it's simply a matter of physical reality that papyrus is perishable and this applies to all writings using papyrus.This is why original versions of all ancient historic writings don't exist unless written on animal hides or engraved on stone or other materials that are not as perishable.
That such as Polycarp writing very early in the second century quotes extensively from the gospels indicates they already existed and those in the church he wrote to, possessed copies of them as they did of Paul's much earlier letters.

Were they witnesses to an actual man? They certainly claimed they were.Just as historians distinguish between Julius Caesar and Apollo and writings concerning them the same kind of criteria should be applied to the historicity of Christ.
I'm not a scholar on all this myself Interbane. Certainly there are recorded accounts from Christians relating to the executions of Paul and Peter in Rome and Tacitus for one records the persecution of Christians at that time by Nero.

I think the whole editing and harmonising argument has not been proven. Sceptics never weary of pointing out what they consider to be glaring contradictions between the gospels. Either the harmonising editor was a complete bungler and not a Machievellian genius or in fact there was no such editing.
In reality though, the transmission of the gospels by copying indicates varied streams of manuscript traditions from all over the world and no such centralised editing and harmonising would have been possible in these circumstances.
Here's a link to an article by textual critic Dan Wallace and another on new testament transmission by Jeffrey Krause on the reliability of the biblical text. http://www.appliedapologetics.wordpress ... l-wallace/
I fear I may be turning you into a theologian,Interbane!
Last edited by Flann 5 on Mon Sep 22, 2014 2:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Interbane

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 7203
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
19
Location: Da U.P.
Has thanked: 1105 times
Been thanked: 2166 times
United States of America

Re: Carrier on historical methodology

Unread post

I don't think the waited far too long argument is valid.The apostles initially preached the teachings of Jesus and later the gospels were written down.
It is of course a logically valid argument. It is also a powerful argument. It is a well known fact that our memories are far more faulty that we believe. We trust in them without justification. Our minds edit the details of memories after we re-tell the story even a single time. Imagine retelling a story countless times. It would be impossible, after a while, to tell the embellishments from the truth.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2014/02 ... n-the-past

This is the way memory works, the way the world works. It isn't a conspiracy or a theory. If the authors of the bible waited 30 years to write things down, it is impossible that even a decent amount of the story did not change. What's even more alarming is that the stories have obviously been harmonized. Not only is the chinese telephone game of memory bad enough, but then the stories have a process of deliberate selection applied to them.

The very best stance you can take on the majority of the contents of the bible is to be agnostic. We don't have enough information to know they are true or know they are false. Only a select number of mundane facts and passages are corroborated.
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
User avatar
ant

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5935
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
12
Has thanked: 1371 times
Been thanked: 969 times

Re: Carrier on historical methodology

Unread post

What's even more alarming is that the stories have obviously been harmonized
No - this is incorrect and exposes your scriptural ignorance.
The accounts are not harmonized.

It is not uncommon for witness testimony to differ from person to person.
Actually, it is both natural and expected.
An entire event isn't dismissed because testimony is not in harmony or is too harmonized.

Ever been on a jury panel before?

The next time you are, pay close attention.
Last edited by ant on Mon Sep 22, 2014 2:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
geo

2C - MOD & GOLD
pets endangered by possible book avalanche
Posts: 4779
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
15
Location: NC
Has thanked: 2198 times
Been thanked: 2200 times
United States of America

Re: Carrier on historical methodology

Unread post

Flann, I would guess the reason you are devoting so much time to Carrier's mythicist theories is to poison the well against Carrier so you don't have to address the actual arguments being put forth. All this mythicist stuff is really a distraction. If this was a court of law, the other side might very well submit that Carrier is wrong simply because it's not relevant to the facts of this case.

At any rate, Carrier's argument above against the resurrection hasn't been touched with a ten-foot pole. What is relevant is that miracles have never been documented in all of human history except as a manifestation of belief or hallucination. Many religions feature miracles and/or divine intervention. Whether or not Christianity was inspired by a real person or a figment of someone’s imagination is not relevant to whether the beliefs of miracles are true. You are so willing to suspend disbelief when it comes to your own religion. But do you believe Muhammad was actually visited by the Arch-angel Gabriel? Do you believe Joseph Smith was guided by revelation from God? I'd be very interested in your thoughts on that.
-Geo
Question everything
User avatar
Flann 5
Nutty for Books
Posts: 1580
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
10
Location: Dublin
Has thanked: 831 times
Been thanked: 705 times

Re: Carrier on historical methodology

Unread post

Interbane wrote: This is the way memory works, the way the world works. It isn't a conspiracy or a theory. If the authors of the bible waited 30 years to write things down, it is impossible that even a decent amount of the story did not change. What's even more alarming is that the stories have obviously been harmonized. Not only is the chinese telephone game of memory bad enough, but then the stories have a process of deliberate selection applied to them.
I'm going to provide a link on biblical reliability by Craig Blomberg. He points out that the first century Hebrews had a tradition linked with the scriptures of practiced memorisation, and one individual was famed for his ability to memorise and recite the entire Hebrew bible.
The chinese telephone game is not an appropriate analogy.It wasn't one person whispering to one other person etc. Jesus chose twelve apostles who were with him continually for three years and he had many other disciples who followed him and heard his teachings and witnessed what he did. So it not relying on just one person's memory.

The gospels don't give descriptions of people's faces but record things Jesus did and said. Luke for instance consulted many different witnesses in compiling his account.
We also find in scripture a concern with meaning in words and sentences and not verbatim stenographic recording, so things may be phrased differently and incidents included or not included.
The writers do have a theological purpose in how they arrange the material which was a common practice at the time and not at all strange to them.
We tend to remember important and significant things in our lives and not what we had for breakfast six months ago. The accounts are clearly supernatural and momentous in their understanding that Jesus was the promised Jewish messiah.
There's also the supernatural aspect of the holy spirit in all this, though of course this would not be accepted on naturalist grounds.
Harmonisations which tend to be minor, show up because of the diverse manuscript sources and streams and as I've said centralised harmonisation and editing is simply not possible since copies spread throughout the world at that time.

Here's Blomberg's article. http://www.4truth.net/fourtruthpbbible. ... 8589952775
User avatar
Flann 5
Nutty for Books
Posts: 1580
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
10
Location: Dublin
Has thanked: 831 times
Been thanked: 705 times

Re: Carrier on historical methodology

Unread post

geo wrote:What is relevant is that miracles have never been documented in all of human history except as a manifestation of belief or hallucination. Many religions feature miracles and/or divine intervention. Whether or not Christianity was inspired by a real person or a figment of someone’s imagination is not relevant to whether the beliefs of miracles are true.
Hi Geo,
It's hardly surprising that miracles are linked with religious belief in a supernatural God. Atheists don't tend to request anything from God since they don't believe in God. So what does it prove that believers in a supernatural God claim that he has worked miracles?
There are accounts of miraculous events which people testify to have seen. Carrier's statement is extreme as if he has omniscient knowledge of all events in history at all times.
I know of accounts of a Chinese pastor in the 1800's who prayed for healings for people who were instantly healed. This was Pastor Hsi a confucian scholar who had been an opium addict. This was quietly done and not in a trumpeted way.His biography was written by a presbyterian woman a Mrs Taylor who was not given to sensationalism and concerned with truth and not lying.Simply saying bias ignores the ethical standards many Christian's do aspire to.
I grant there is a sickly world of fraudulent televangelists and greedy fraudsters out there too.
I personally know a guy who was a chronic heroin addict who was instantaneously healed without any withdrawal symptoms when he turned to Jesus for help.
Miracles are not common but neither are they as rare as some sceptics believe either.

Carrier's mythicism is central to his understanding of history. He can't let go of it since he rejects the gospels on the basis of it. Like I said he debated the resurrection of Jesus with Lane Craig. I'm not avoiding his argument. It's just not as good as you think it is. Here's the debate. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akd6qzFYzX8
P.s I don't believe the Joseph Smith story or the angel jibrail story of Islam.
Last edited by Flann 5 on Mon Sep 22, 2014 5:46 pm, edited 5 times in total.
User avatar
Interbane

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 7203
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
19
Location: Da U.P.
Has thanked: 1105 times
Been thanked: 2166 times
United States of America

Re: Carrier on historical methodology

Unread post

The chinese telephone game is not an appropriate analogy.It wasn't one person whispering to one other person etc
I was referring to how the human mind works with experiential memories. It is like chinese telephone game. Did you read the link I posted, and have you read recent articles regarding memory? I'm pressed for time now, but can find some for you if you wish. When it is a memory of experience(rather than memorizing from a book), our memories are refreshed everytime we recall them, but with slight additions or deletions. This is not at all like a monk memorizing a book. Which is impressive, of course.

But then, even you admit that many of the details are potentially fabricated, which is the point I was going for. The authors would remember the important events, not the menial dialogue or interactions. Yet they include dialogue and menial events.

Beyond that, you believe their supernatural claims. I wasn't even referring to those. They are of course impossible to justify. What has so convinced you? A miracle healing of a heroin addict? Can you even prove to yourself that it was a miracle, rather than simply deciding that it was? Did you not know at the time that the argument from ignorance was a fallacy?
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
User avatar
Flann 5
Nutty for Books
Posts: 1580
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
10
Location: Dublin
Has thanked: 831 times
Been thanked: 705 times

Re: Carrier on historical methodology

Unread post

Hi Interbane,
I'm not saying things in the gospels were potentially fabricated. Sometimes if there was a short account in one gospel a copyist might add to it from a longer account. In the cases of a copyist's deliberate attempted alteration,this stands out like a sore thumb since there are so many different streams and copies unlike that one, and like each other.I'm saying it was not possible for this to be accepted. You need to look at textual criticism to understand the whole story of the transmission of the scriptures.It's a big subject.
I've given reasons why these events would have been memorable to the witnesses and the telephone whispers analogy is not appropriate.It is a supernatural religion and the apostles were promised the aid of the holy spirit.
I know the guy who was healed instantaneously of his heroin addiction and based on his character I have no reason to doubt his account of healing.You can't live in the real world with such extreme scepticism or we wouldn't believe anyone about anything. But we don't actually live this way.
Some people are credible witnesses and all the more so when they suffer and die for their testimony to what they witnessed.
User avatar
Dexter

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
I dumpster dive for books!
Posts: 1787
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 3:14 pm
13
Has thanked: 144 times
Been thanked: 712 times
United States of America

Re: Carrier on historical methodology

Unread post

Flann 5 wrote: You can't live in the real world with such extreme scepticism or we wouldn't believe anyone about anything. But we don't actually live this way.
Some people are credible witnesses and all the more so when they suffer and die for their testimony to what they witnessed.
But you don't actually live with the lack of skepticism that you have towards the Bible.

If someone claimed to be an eyewitness to something that goes against everything known about science, and it had nothing to do with Christianity, your default position would be disbelief, as it should be. Those eyewitnesses would automatically be noncredible, and it would take an extraordinary amount of evidence to convince you otherwise. Why don't you believe the mythology of every other religion? The answer is: why would you? You know the evidence is not good enough without even investigating it. Even though another God might torment you forever, you don't lose a moment's sleep over it.
Post Reply

Return to “Sense and Goodness Without God: A Defense of Metaphysical Naturalism - by Richard Carrier”