Daily Archives: March 22, 2012

Richard Carrier Takes On Bart Ehrman

Richard Carrier has posted on his blog a response to Bart Ehrman’s article over at the Huffington Post discussing Jesus Mythicism. Here is an excerpt from Ehrman’s peice:

With respect to Jesus, we have numerous, independent accounts of his life in the sources lying behind the Gospels (and the writings of Paul) — sources that originated in Jesus’ native tongue Aramaic and that can be dated to within just a year or two of his life (before the religion moved to convert pagans in droves). Historical sources like that are pretty astounding for an ancient figure of any kind.

I couldn’t believe when Ehrman said this, because it’s simply not true. We don’t have multiple “independent” accounts of Jesus’ life; all accounts of Jesus’ life comes from one context: Early Christianity. And none of the gospels are independent because they all derive from Mark in some fashion, and Paul is useless for recovering the historical Jesus.

And then there is a problem with appealing to hypothetical documents behind prima facie sources. It would be fine if the hypothetical source had 100% certainty of existence, but anything less than that drags down the probability of any hypothesis that depends on the hypothetical. That’s why it’s called hypothetical. There’s a chain: Probability that Jesus exists * probability of the hypothetical source * probability of the main source. If the prior probability of Jesus’ existence was unknown, say 50%, and the hypothetical source had a probability of 80%, then this drags down Jesus’ probability of existing to 50% * 80% = 40%. The more hypothetical sources you add to that chain, the less probable Jesus becomes (which is why we need something like Bayes’ theorem to have a responsible way of adding hypothetical sources along with their probability of existence).

Anyway, this is a snippet of Carrier’s response:

He actually says we have such sources. We do not. That is simply a plain, straight-up falsehood. I can only suppose he means Q or some hypothesized sources behind the creedal statements in Paul or the sermons in Acts, but none of those sources exist, and are purely hypothetical. In fact, barely more than conjectural. There is serious debate in the academic community as to whether Q even existed; and even among those who believe it did, there is serious debate about whether it comes from Aramaic or in fact Greek sources or whether it’s one source or several or whether it even goes back to Jesus at all. The background to the creeds and sermons are even more conjectural (the creeds might go back to Aramaic sources, but none attest to a historical Jesus in the required sense of the term; and the sermons almost certainly do not go back to Aramaic sources, but are literary constructions of the author of Acts, writing in a Semitized Greek heavily influenced by the Septuagint

Don’t be too alarmed of a falling out. At least hopefully. Carrier has glowing praises of Ehrman’s other works. But…

Comments Off on Richard Carrier Takes On Bart Ehrman

Posted by on March 22, 2012 in jesus myth

NeuroLogica Blog

My ὑπομνήματα about religion

The Wandering Scientist

What a lovely world it is

NT Blog

My ὑπομνήματα about religion


Understand your mind with the science of psychology -


Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science

Maximum Entropy

My ὑπομνήματα about religion

My ὑπομνήματα about religion

My ὑπομνήματα about religion

Skepticism, Properly Applied

Criticism is not uncivil

Download PDF

My ὑπομνήματα about religion

Research Digest

My ὑπομνήματα about religion

Disrupting Dinner Parties

Feminism is for everyone!

My ὑπομνήματα about religion

The New Oxonian

Religion and Culture for the Intellectually Impatient

The Musings of Thomas Verenna

A Biblioblog about imitation, the Biblical Narratives, and the figure of Jesus

The Syncretic Soubrette

Snarky musings from an everyday woman