Jesus Mythicist Scholars
Posted on: November 1, 2007 - 10:09pm
Offline
Jesus Mythicist Scholars
I hope someone here can help me. I'm trying to find some professional academics in the fields of history or Biblical studies (or something related) who support the Jesus Myth thesis. So far I can only come up with Robert Price. I'm talking about academics in these fields who hold faculty positions at universities or equivalent research institutes. Is there anyone else other than Price?
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Philip K. Dick
- Login to post comments
Thanks for showing up, I like your question.
Be patient, more will come.
In the mean time check this out, Nietzsche', The Antichristhttp://www.infidels.org/library/modern/travis_denneson/antichrist.html
Atheism Books.
More responses, more professional academics who are Mythicists or both? I hope the latter, since I was expecting lots of people here would be able to give me names of such scholars.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Philip K. Dick
I`ll forward your message to Rook, I'm sure he'll know a few.
Many thanks. I'm new here, so I'm not sure who Rook is. Is he an academic at an appropriate institution with relevant postgraduate qualifications, publications in credible journals and other high level research training in history or other relevant fields? If he is and he knows other Mythicists who are that would help me a lot.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Philip K. Dick
So, no-one?
A well known book on the Christ Myth Theory is "The Jesus Puzzle" by Earl Daugherty. Historian Richard Carrier is also a mythicist. I believe a writer by the last name of Wells also wrote on this as well. Theese authors may be teaching somewhere. I know Richard Carrier used to teach at Columbia.
Thanks Bahana. I'm already familiar with Doherty, but he doesn't really fit my criteria. I'm looking for professional scholars in relevant fields. The same for G.A. Wells, who has good qualifications in his own field (German) but not in ancient history or Biblical studies. Richard Carrier is closer to the mark, but as a post-graduate student who is still completing his PhD, he doesn't fit my criteria either.
So it does seem that Price is the only professional scholar who does fit the bill. Unless someone can think of any others.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Philip K. Dick
You only consider someone with a PhD in history to be a professional historian?
Occams, your criteria is a bit deceptive and naive. There are many scholars who publish in academic journals who have absolutely no credentials, but are accepted widely by the community. If you are looking for a reason to attempt to dismiss the claims of mythicism outright, than I guess you're going to do that regardless. But if you're really curious, I suggest you pick up the books and read them, instead of just saying "Ah, not my criteria..." - G.A. Wells is a historian, who has published in Monographs. The same goes for J.R. Hoffmann, Richard Carrier (who has TWO Masters in classical studies, and studied under the worlds foremost papyrologist), Bob Price, Thomas L. Thompson, and Doherty has his masters in Classical Civ. Especially when considering the opposing side, the Strobels, Geislers and Wrights of the world with degrees in Theology and Apologetics.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)
I'm more interested in learning the grounds upon which experts in biblical studies use to justify holding that there was a Jesus, the Christ. There doesn't seem to be... any.
"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'
If a set is defined with enough parameters, the person defining the set can make certain that the set is void. For instance, I could require that for the discussion of physics, only individuals who had successfully completed a PhD in Physics, produced in the appropriate journals, and held a tenured faculty position could partake. We would be forced to ask Einstein to stay at home. He only had an undergraduate degree from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology at Zurich.
My point, M. Razor, is that your request is mildly offensive. My degrees are in law; so, by your terms, I would err if I participated in discussions of philosophy, even if tangential to the law. My fathers PhD's are in MIS and Mathematics. Oddly, he helped pioneer Chaos theory. He probably should have kept to his expertise and left chaos to those with degrees in it.
In conclusion, I have seen enough of your sort to know someone blinded by the "brilliance" of academia. For those of us who were raised amongst academics, we find this a riot. A PhD, particularly is the Humanities, is only proof that someone has the patience to wade through a lot of hogwash. I have known too many PhD's and abd PhD's in history, theology and philosophy who were unsuitable to any task but setting up criteria for sets that would be deifinitionally void to take your request seriously.
"Tis better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven." -Lucifer
He did indeed. Though he also had the advantages that (i) at that stage in the history of physics things were rather less advanced, diversified and (in many parts of the field) high-tech as today and (ii) he was a bona fide genius.
But that aside, the reason I asked my original question is that someone else asked it of me. So it was they who actually set the parameters, not me. I'm well aware that non-professionals can make excellent contributions to many fields (and probably far more easily in this particular field than in, say, particle physics). The question was more driven by an interest in how widely accepted by professional scholars the Jesus Myth idea is. I can't see how that can be measured by looking outside the "set" of "professional scholars in relevant fields".
Actually, all you've done is made a series of assumptions about my question, almost all of which were wrong.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Philip K. Dick
Occam's, Well's has abandoned the mythicist theory as of 1990 I believe. He accepts Jesus' existance due largely to the "Q" document. He is not a mythicist anymore. And he is not even a biblical scholar anyway so it means nothing. It's also important for you to know that there are NO historians or Jesus scholars alive today who buy into the "mythicist" theory. This theory has been utterly rejected by the scholarly community. The only ones holding to it today are a small handful of desparate atheists.
God always is, nor has He been and is not, nor is but has not been, but as He never will not be; so He never was not -- Augustine
First, as last I can recall, Wells was still a mythicist. Second, the theory is not utterly rejected. I love how non-scholars and people outside academia claim things are "rejected" in scholarship. That is not accurate at all. In scholarship, we have a thing called consensus, whiuch can be overturned and has in many areas. At one time, scholarship thought at the very least the monarchy of Israel had to have happened. That has largely been proven inaccurate, and scholarship has been over the past twenty years working on determing exactly what history can be gleaned from the Israelites past, as of right now - we have no effective history of the Israelites pre-exile. Consensus is ONLY as strong as the argument for it. If the claims for an argument are shown to be fallacious, scholars will move on. It is only Christians and apologists who live in this fantasy world where things are "rejected" as if some team of people sit in a room and crumple up papers all day. The problem is, ever since Bultmann and Kasemann people have been doubting the existence of Jesus. One has to wonder if Bultmann even really though Jesus existed at all - at the very least he knew trhat no truth could be taken from the Gospel accounts.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)
Actually, Wells abandoned the mythicist theory in 1999.
"G.A. Wells has now abandoned the Christ-Myth hypothesis and has accepted the historicity of Jesus on the basis of the "Q" document" (The Jesus Myth, 1999).
Van Voorst said: : "Although Wells has been probably the most able advocate of the nonhistoricity theory, he has not been pursuasive and is now almost a lone voice for it. The theory of Jesus nonexistence is now effectively dead as a scholarly question" (Jesus Outside the New Testament,, p.14).
F.F. Bruce: "The historicity of Christ is axiomatic for an unbiased historian as the historicity of Julius Caesar. It is not historians who propagate the "Christ-myth' theories"(The New Testament Documents: Are they Reliable", 1972).
Otto Betz: "No serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non-historicity of Jesus" (What do We Know about Jesus," p.9).
Mail me if you want an extensive list of scholars and books on this subject.
God always is, nor has He been and is not, nor is but has not been, but as He never will not be; so He never was not -- Augustine
How about you present an argument for the existence instead. This game of "who has the bigger dick" is getting old, and I'd much rather you present an argument from one of these scholars on why Jesus' existence is axiomatic. Let's hear it.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)
Rook, I would challenge you on the pre-exile history if the Israelites. But this is not the place for it.
You are young and have enormous potential. I would encourage you to continue your studies, but hear both sides of the story. I appreciate your enthusiasm. We need people like you on our side. Most "Christian's" at your age don't even concern themselves with these issues and wouldn't even have a cluse what you are talking about. In terms of education and knowledge, you are light years ahead of most people at your age. I also don't agree that a person must have formal college degrees to be a scholar. I have a friend who has no degrees but is fluent in Greek, Latin, French and English, and is probably one of the greatest patristic scholars alive in the worl today. I don't have any degrees myself, but I don't claim to be a scholar. I'm just a lowly disciple of the Master.
God always is, nor has He been and is not, nor is but has not been, but as He never will not be; so He never was not -- Augustine
We will have to save the debate on the reasons I believe Jesus lived, for another time. It's late and I'm starting to make typos. I would tell you to keep it up. I think you're awesome because you care about these issues. Many, if not most "Christian's" in the world today don't even concern themselves with these things. I think God might even let you off the hook because you do concern yourself with these issues. You are a truth seeker. You are zealous for the truth. That is commendable.
God always is, nor has He been and is not, nor is but has not been, but as He never will not be; so He never was not -- Augustine
I would even say that you are not only light years ahead of people your age in knowledge, but light years of most people in general. Also, it was not a personal attack in the other thread when I referred to your articles as "garbage." While I don't agree with your position, I respect your right to believe it.
God always is, nor has He been and is not, nor is but has not been, but as He never will not be; so He never was not -- Augustine
You're talking to an apostate on the idea of historicity. I have heard both sides, and when one reviews both sides of the evidence, it is inextricably clear that the history talked about in the Old Testament never happened. I've actually listed several very big names and at least 30 monographs and text books which agree with me, and more important, Thomas L. Thompson who is the worlds leading Old Testament scholars. Lemche, Van Seters, Miller, Hayes, Smith, the late Ahlstrom and many others. These are people who have written text books and monographs on the subject - not passing scholars.
Please, don't patronize. Like I said, you're talking to an apostate. I've lived both sides.
I do appreciate that.
I wouldn't call myself a scholar. I'm a historian, and I prefer the term. =) Looking forward to those arguments.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)
There are two sides to the story: conservatives and liberals. Both sides have arguments. I think you have heard mostly the arguments from the liberals. I know there are good and scholarly arguments for the historicity of the Old Testament. I had a couple books years ago by Max E. Anders on biblical archaeology. There are many books, institutions, and scholars in favor of biblical history. All one has to do is google "biblical archaeology." Also, there are good websites that can lead one in the right direction on this subject. For example, apologetics.com. You can e-mail them and ask for resources on this topic.
As for the historicity of Christ, I'm not sure you are very familiar with the arguments in favor of this. You might be familiar with some of the arguments, but your bias toward atheism might be preventing you from seeing things as they really are.
On the historical Jesus subject, I recommend these books:
Barnett, Paul. Is the New Testament Reliable? A Look at the Historical Evidence.
Bruce, F.F. Jesus & Christian Origins Outside the New Testament.
Habermas, Gary R. The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ.
Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospel's.
Moreland, Jesus under Fire.
Also, google CADRE apologetics. They have many articles on the historical Jesus subject.
With that said, good night (or morning in some cases).
God always is, nor has He been and is not, nor is but has not been, but as He never will not be; so He never was not -- Augustine
I just learned today that John Warrick Montgomery debated G.A. Well's in 1993. See his debates here: http://www.ciltpp.com/tap_deba.htm
And I believe Well's has abandoned the mythicist position as of 1999.
God always is, nor has He been and is not, nor is but has not been, but as He never will not be; so He never was not -- Augustine
I believe Richard Carrier has completed his PhD