Debate #13 The Historicity of Jesus with Dr Richard Carrier 

Yep! I do see all the old timers who got triggered because their fairy tale got demolished.

Which kid is Carrier?

Heck, I'm a believer and I agree with you! Lol... carrier makes meat of anyone he goes up against.

It's not a waste of time at all. It firmly establishes the fact that Jesus is a mythical character even as Apollo, Osiris, Mithra and the rest of the religious myth characters of that time, and that there is not even a scrap of historical evidence to "prove" that he ever existed in any other form. It won't convince the Christians whose only focus is to make it to the Big Party In Heaven When I Die! but it removes the aura of Jesus as somehow "special" or an exception to the well established pattern of mythical dying and rising gods. Why some atheists still cling to the notion of some form of a "historical" Jesus is beyond my understanding.

exactly my thoughts, he's the man

@Theseustoo Astyages In a way it's reassuring to someone who is constantly hit with responses ranging from dissembling to outrage when I let it be known I'm atheist. Favorite is the ones who protest that it doesn't matter until a throw a bit of shade at their imaginary "Lord" and the fangs are bared! And I live in "godless" Maskachusetts. (Yeah, we're still locked down.)

i guess im randomly asking but does someone know a tool to log back into an Instagram account..? I stupidly lost the password. I love any help you can offer me!

@Nickolas Gus instablaster =)

No, he is disingenuous and many of his arguments are really weak

@@thomassenbart please elaborate on which arguments of his you believe are weak and why.

@@Kennylou29 That would likely take a tome. I think his initial concepts of Jewish angelology and connecting that the Jesus movement is weak and not in keeping with Jewish tradition or thought. Not that the Jews did not believe in angels, they did but there really is no connection to Jesus in this regard. The fact that Carrier dispenses with the Gospels as historical primary sources is also bizarre. He misunderstands Ehrman, perhaps deliberately and disingenuously so, when discussing his counter arguments and in general the tenor of the Mythicist claims, seem to center in a widespread bigotry against religion and need to denigrate it, as opposed to any real scholarly or academic gravitas. Here are some issues I have on another Carrier video: Carrier's first comment is inane. Christianity profoundly changed and impacted Western civilization, in all of the areas Ehrman outlined and more. Denial of this, is simply ignorant. No, Ehrman is not saying because some historical figures have been mythologized therefore all mythologized figures were historical. He says nothing of the sort. What Ehrman actually states is that you cannot dismiss someone as historical because he has been mythologized, the contrary of this dishonest reinterpretation. None of the primary sources for Alexander the Great, Arrian, Plutarch, Diodorus Siculus, Quintus Curtius Rufus, and Justin, knew Alexander and all lived long after, (hundreds of years) after his death. So, assuming that Alexander was an actual human, seems problematic, using the logic of Carrier. Pontius Pilate is referenced by Josephus and Philo of Alexandria, in Annals of the Roman historian Tacitus (early 2nd c.), who simply says that he put Jesus to death. Also, the Pilate stone is a damaged block of carved limestone with a partially intact inscription attributed to, and mentioning, Pontius Pilate, a prefect of the Roman province of Judea from AD 26 to 36. It was discovered at the archaeological site of Caesarea Maritima in 1961. Josephus also writes of Jesus of Nazareth, ...Of the two passages, the James passage in Book 20 is used by scholars to support the existence of Jesus, the Testimonium Flavianum in Book 18 his crucifixion.[10] Josephus' James passage attests to the existence of Jesus as a historical person and that some of his contemporaries considered him the Messiah. Modern scholarship has almost universally acknowledged the authenticity of the reference in Book 20, Chapter 9, 1 of the Antiquities to "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James",[23] and considers it as having the highest level of authenticity among the references of Josephus to Christianity. The Roman historian and senator Tacitus referred to Christ, his execution by Pontius Pilate and the existence of early Christians in Rome in his final work, Annals (c. AD 116), book 15, chapter 44.[38][39][40] The relevant passage reads: "called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus." The Roman historian Suetonius (c. 69 - after 122 CE) made references to early Christians and their leader in his work Lives of the Twelve Caesars (written 121 CE).[67][72][73][74] The references appear in Claudius 25 and Nero 16 which describe the lives of Roman Emperors Claudius and Nero.[72] The Nero 16 passage refers to the abuses by Nero and mentions how he inflicted punishment on Christians - which is generally dated to around AD 64.[75] This passage shows the clear contempt of Suetonius for Christians - the same contempt expressed by Tacitus and Pliny the Younger in their writings, but does not refer to Jesus himself.[73] The earlier passage in Claudius may include a reference to Jesus but is subject to debate among scholars.[74] In Claudius 25 Suetonius refers to the expulsion of Jews by Claudius and states:[72] "Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome." Mainstream biblical scholars point out that much of the writings of antiquity have been lost[147] and that there was little written about any Jew or Christian in this period.[148][149] Ehrman points out that there is no known archaeological or textual evidence for the existence of most people in the ancient world, even famous people like Pontius Pilate, whom the myth theorists agree to have existed.[148] Robert Hutchinson notes that this is also true of Josephus, despite the fact that he was "a personal favorite of the Roman Emperor Vespasian".[150] Hutchinson quotes Ehrman, who notes that Josephus is never mentioned in 1st century Greek or Roman sources, despite being "a personal friend of the emperor".[150] According to Classical historian and popular author Michael Grant, if the same criterion is applied to others, "We can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_myth_theory ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pSY0f9-ZBxI.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-GzjYmpwbHEA.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-rSai7u64QXM.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-celbC4xvwwk.html

RC's high-level discourse, a sample of RC's rebuttal of a leading scholar today: "The attacks are sustained throughout his lengthy post, and they often become personal. He indicates that “Ehrman doesn’t actually know what he is talking about,” he claims that I speak with “absurd” hyperbole, that my argument “makes [me] look irresponsible,” that I am guilty of “sloppy work,” that I “misrepresent” my opponents and “misinform the public,” that what I write is “crap,” that I am guilty of “arrogantly dogmatic and irresponsible thinking,” that I am “incompetent,” make “hack” mistakes, and do not “act like a real scholar.” High-level response? Jesus does get to you after a while!!!

Dr. Carrier is a good and important one due to the topics he researches. But because you don't know other 20, it does not make him the best one.

He's not even respected in his field😆

@@crazyrezreppa Its not the man that is important but wht he says. and i yet have to see debate in wich his points are proven wrong

@@O5AXD well how much time have you spent fact checking him? His arguments are not new. He's not accepted amongst scholars because the way he presents information isn't credible. It sure is fancy though. Looks slick.

@@JakubFerenc1911 Jakub I have read many other historians books on a daily basis ,but they don't see Carriers study that this Jesus came from Jewish angelology.

Now I have faith and i do believe in god. But i also love Richard Carrier and especially Christopher Hitchens as they don't lose debates.

@@3cs3hs god or God?

the guy with carrier wasn't much help

@@Meadows1719 Same thing!

Agree

He’d be wasted in law. We need him doing the exact work he’s doing,

Think there are better Christian debaters out there.

I suppose it's an uphill task defending the bible story.

Savage! 😂

felt just a bit sorry for the 2 christians

Carriers partner wasn't up to much.

That guy at 38:00 was an ass and completely wrong by his supposed "science".

Just thank yourself my people are not of middle eastern religious death cults or their would be no white people in Australia.

should have did it on his own

Think zombies leaving their graves was a bit of a giveaway.

Any Evangelical Christian will tell you religion is man made. We don't care for religion. We seek a relationship with God through the Holy Spirit not through religion. Religions is irrelevant to Evangelicals.

Frank fucking Turek.

If archeologists found a picture ID of Jesus in some archeological finding, atheists will STILL not believe. Even if they found a blood sample and finger prints. Simply put, THEY DO NOT WANT TO BELIEVE.

Ron Wyatt found a sample of the Blood of Jesus, that is, if you want to go that route.

If Islam was true, would you become a Muslim? Think hard on that one!

@@ELo-wi7vv Why don't they want to believe?

the Jews who expected a messiah to free them from the Roman Empire would invent a messiah who died executed by the Roman Empire?

@@leovere That was well-said.

Seems they couldn't.

About infinite regress? But the guy was correct and Carrier was wrong. Carrier misunderstands set theory and the mapping he tries to describe. He then sites Bertrand Russell’s PM, which has serious problems that Gödel conclusively deconstructed in 1931.

Not Ad Hominem , YEC followers are the result of religious influence on the gene pool which regresses the genealogy of god believers , making them throwbacks and anomalies on the gene pool.

@@ossiedunstan4419 Maybe it's 'Poisoning the Well?'

@Language and Programming Channel But not listening to their arguments because of who they are is.

I think the argument is that if you accept the evidence for christianity you have to accept the evidence for mormonism or islam. If you don't you're engaging in special pleading.

Seven: north, south, east, west, up and down.

I agree. The name in ZekarYah 6...is Yahshwa...or Joshua; not Jesus. There was no "j"....and yahshua or yahshwa into "iesus" or "je sus"...doesn't fly. Angelology existed, but not any of these "alleged malak/anchEls"...with that name. All of those names end in either "yh ... yah"...or "el ...Al". The letter is "A" for Alohym....not an E. MichaEl....or MikAl. GabriEl...or GabrAl. "j" is not a "y" and the point is the caveat in their little "wholly book" that tells the..."the lying pen of the Scribes...has been handling the word(s) falsely". This is evidenced by their own claim in both OT and NT......which tells them all...."EWE worship in vain because EWE take for commandments the doctrines of other men"....a.k.a.: the lying scribes.

Love God & Neighbor no, Burger King is king

King of all the euhemerized mystery cult savior deities

King of nothing but the imagination of fools.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Carrier

I'm not seeing it. Was that made up too like the Gospels?

@@clubadv someone has altered Wiki after I made this statement.

Upsetting the status quo has that effect

debates are propaganda?

Watching this again n seeing the dangerous copium lvls is wild

It was in the context of chiding the Christian for wasting his whole life focused on Jesus. Isn’t he also spending his life focused on Jesus as well. At least it makes sense for the Christian.

Nope you did not hear that correctly

@@friendo6257 he did say it but then modified his statement to mean details about his grandpa.

@@150FreeShrugs Glad we figured that out

@@friendo6257 lol, yep

Feel real sorry for the 2 Christians.

GoodDay2YouSir That’s right, and the question was irrelevant to the debate anyway.

Yeah, that guy made a total fool of himself.

I was afraid he was going to get violent.

He was just a dick. The world is full of religious people just like him.

Yeah he was doing the usual thing that angry god botherers do. They just want to fire off a series of questions, and if any cannot be answered they consider it a total win.

They're mostly Christians, that's why.

Then you are indeed hopeless.

Well the thing is Carrier and other atheists/naturalists do not credit any religion. You can look up talks by these folks refuting religion as a basic premises (they refute all religions) which is really the case, or you can find specific arguments against Islam or other religions/supernatural claims. The theists were Ill prepared for this debate.

I really really reccomend Carriers “Why I am Not A Christian” book. It’s very very smart

@Matthew Frazier at least i aint a flaming troll

@@justinbiddy7034 but they do pick christianity as the religion that they refute more than 95% of the time. i would love to hear an athiest try to get popular refuting islam or buddhism but since islam is protected from slander and buddhism isnt very popular christianity seems to always be the scapegoat.

The Boss ...there are plenty of debates and discussions regarding Islam available on RU-vid. Some particularly good ones involve the likes of Christopher Hitchens, Douglas Murray, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Richard Dawkins, and Sam Harris. The reason Christianity is the main target of atheists’ ire is simply that Christianity is by far the dominant religion in the West. Were some other religion dominant in the U.S. and Europe, that particular religion would be repeatedly torn to shreds by rational human beings much like Christianity is now.