In which case Carrier should be attempting to counter Bermejo-Rubio seditious Jesus hypothesis via offering a reality based, terra-firma based, interpretation of relevant gospel narratives/allegory. In other words, an interpretation based on history not an interpretation of Greek words. His article, '''Like, Can You Rebel Against Rome with Only Two Swords?'' simply demonstrates how far away he is from offering an historically based interpretation of the gospel story. Yet what did he write in ''On the Historicity of Jesus''I disagree with the "crucified in space" position myself, but that's not really what this post by Carrier was about. The real issue here is about interpreting the Gospel narratives as literal history vs allegorical midrash. Over and over and over and over again is can be decisively shown that the narratives were created as allegorical midrash.
If 'Jesus Christ began as a celestial deity' is false,
it could still be that he began as a political fiction, for example (as some
scholars have indeed argued-the best examples being R.G. Price and
Gary Courtney).
Gary Courtney).16 But as will become dear in following chapters (especially Chapter 11), such a premise has a much lower prior probability (and
thus is already at a huge disadvantage over Premise 1 even before we start
examining the evidence), and a very low consequent probability (though it
suits the Gospels well, it just isn't possible to explain the evidence in the
Epistles this way, and the origin of Christianity itself becomes very hard
to explain as well). Although I leave open the possibility it may yet be vindicated, I'm sure it's very unlikely to be, and accordingly I will assume its
prior probability is too small even to show up in our math. This decision
can be reversed only by a sound and valid demonstration that we must
assign it a higher prior or consequent, but that I leave to anyone who thinks
it's possible. In the meantime, what we have left is Premise 1, such that if
that is less probable than minimal historicity, then I would be convinced
historicity should be affirmed (particularly as the 'political fiction' theory
already fits historicity and thus is not really a challenge to it-indeed that's
often the very kind of fiction that gets written about historical persons).
it could still be that he began as a political fiction, for example (as some
scholars have indeed argued-the best examples being R.G. Price and
Gary Courtney).
Gary Courtney).16 But as will become dear in following chapters (especially Chapter 11), such a premise has a much lower prior probability (and
thus is already at a huge disadvantage over Premise 1 even before we start
examining the evidence), and a very low consequent probability (though it
suits the Gospels well, it just isn't possible to explain the evidence in the
Epistles this way, and the origin of Christianity itself becomes very hard
to explain as well). Although I leave open the possibility it may yet be vindicated, I'm sure it's very unlikely to be, and accordingly I will assume its
prior probability is too small even to show up in our math. This decision
can be reversed only by a sound and valid demonstration that we must
assign it a higher prior or consequent, but that I leave to anyone who thinks
it's possible. In the meantime, what we have left is Premise 1, such that if
that is less probable than minimal historicity, then I would be convinced
historicity should be affirmed (particularly as the 'political fiction' theory
already fits historicity and thus is not really a challenge to it-indeed that's
often the very kind of fiction that gets written about historical persons).
(my formating)
Political fiction and allegory are just that, fiction and allegory. These stories and allegories are not themselves historical.
Allegory interpretation is not just about moral or spiritual ideas - it can involve a political meaning. (Animal Farm for instance) The gospel story and its allegory/fiction can be viewed as a political allegory. As Carrier notes above, if 'Jesus Christ began as a celestial deity' is false, then a political fiction - a political allegory - is a possibility. However, political fiction or political allegory does not equate to a historical gospel Jesus (of whatever variant). This, methinks, is where Carrier's blind spot lies....
Contrary to Bermejo-Rubio, there is no historical gospel Jesus. There is, however, a seditious element to the gospel Jesus allegory. So - knock down Carrier's Jesus from Outer Space - knock down Bermejo-Rubio's historical Jesus. Instead use history, Jewish/Hasmonean history as a tool by which to interpret the fiction and the allegory within the gospel story.
Carrier needs to come down to earth - he needs to turn around from the brick wall into which he has driven the mythicist/ahistoricst position on the gospel Jesus literary figure. Intellectual philosophising/ spiritualizing is one thing - but it's not a bread and butter issue. History comes before 'salvation history'......
Statistics: Posted by maryhelena — Tue Feb 06, 2024 6:26 am