Neil Godfrey has taken Richard Carrier's use of Bayes to task i.e. that Bayes is not a method for either estalishing or negating the assumed historicity of the gospel figure of Jesus. Years ago, when Carrier's big book was published, there was a long thread on this forum (89 pages). here I just had a quick look at a few pages.
At that time I offered my own criticism of Carrier's mythicist theory. The years since publication of that big book (2014) I've not seen any attempt by Carrier to dig himself out of the hole he made for himself.
Neil Godfrey is criticizing Carrier's use of Bayes for historical research into the assumed historicity of the gospel Jesus figure. Carrier's use of Bayes has not provided an answer to this basic Jesus question. Yes, Carrier has worked hard to establish doubt - but the question remains open. It's a question that cannot be answered by overlaying a Pauline interpretation on top of the gospel Jesus story. Imagination does not alleviate doubt - all it does is change the context - crossing fingers that the 'spiritual' placebo will work - that the spiritual can alleviate, can take away the pain, the tragedies of life, of history - it has failed.
At that time I offered my own criticism of Carrier's mythicist theory. The years since publication of that big book (2014) I've not seen any attempt by Carrier to dig himself out of the hole he made for himself.
What use is a Pauline celestial christ figure that becomes a mythical gospel figure? It's imagination, pure and simple. Such a theory does nothing for any attempt to search for early christian origins. It's dug a hole for itself.
Even if the author of Mark was writing with a copy of Paul's writings in front of him - that does not translate into Mark transferring Paul's celestial, spiritual, christ figure into a story about a gospel Jesus figure active in the time of Pilate. Mark's Jesus is crucified with a King of the Jews sign above the cross - and Paul says there is neither Jew nor Greek! So, 1) Mark is attempting, post Paul, to turn the clock back and create a very Jewish story......or 2) the very Jewish story was ground zero and Paul's ideas are a development on the very Jewish story.
.........one can propose that Mark created a time conditioned Jesus out of Paul's timeless celestial christ figure. Problem is that one can't support this idea with any physical evidence ie it's all imagination. It's purely an idea. As such it's no better than the historicists idea of a flesh and blood gospel, somehow, Jesus. The historicist v ahistoricist debate cannot be settled by ideas. There is going to have to be some element of reality brought into the debate. Historical reality. History. One has to be able to point to something in reality, in history, to support ones gospel interpretation. Interpretation has to be, like prophetic interpretation, connected to what is known, not what is imagined. However, arbitrary such linkage might appear to be - without it interpretation becomes void of any meaningful usage.
.........one can propose that Mark created a time conditioned Jesus out of Paul's timeless celestial christ figure. Problem is that one can't support this idea with any physical evidence ie it's all imagination. It's purely an idea. As such it's no better than the historicists idea of a flesh and blood gospel, somehow, Jesus. The historicist v ahistoricist debate cannot be settled by ideas. There is going to have to be some element of reality brought into the debate. Historical reality. History. One has to be able to point to something in reality, in history, to support ones gospel interpretation. Interpretation has to be, like prophetic interpretation, connected to what is known, not what is imagined. However, arbitrary such linkage might appear to be - without it interpretation becomes void of any meaningful usage.
Neil Godfrey is criticizing Carrier's use of Bayes for historical research into the assumed historicity of the gospel Jesus figure. Carrier's use of Bayes has not provided an answer to this basic Jesus question. Yes, Carrier has worked hard to establish doubt - but the question remains open. It's a question that cannot be answered by overlaying a Pauline interpretation on top of the gospel Jesus story. Imagination does not alleviate doubt - all it does is change the context - crossing fingers that the 'spiritual' placebo will work - that the spiritual can alleviate, can take away the pain, the tragedies of life, of history - it has failed.
All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake up in the day to find it was vanity, but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. T.E Lawrence.
Statistics: Posted by maryhelena — Sat Dec 14, 2024 2:17 am