Did Jesus really exist?

This came up in another thread and I thought it was worthy of its own thread. Googlefudge pointed us to Richard Carrier's work on the historicity of Jesus. This youtube video is by Richard Charier and basically gives his argument that Jesus probably didn't exist:
YouTube

Prior to watching it, I was of the opinion that Jesus probably did exist but that it wasn't very certain. Having watched the video, I now fell that it is likely Jesus didn't exist.

Can anyone here find fault with Richard Carriers claims?

Originally posted by twhitehead
This came up in another thread and I thought it was worthy of its own thread. Googlefudge pointed us to Richard Carrier's work on the historicity of Jesus. This youtube video is by Richard Charier and basically gives his argument that Jesus probably didn't exist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUYRoYl7i6U

Prior to watching it, I was of the opinion th ...[text shortened]... hat it is likely Jesus didn't exist.

Can anyone here find fault with Richard Carriers claims?

Jesus did, does, and will always exist.

Originally posted by josephw
Jesus did, does, and will always exist.

That is not what I am asking. I am not asking for statements of belief. I am asking if anyone has counter arguments to what Richard Carrier says, or if they can point to anything he gets wrong.

Originally posted by twhitehead
That is not what I am asking. I am not asking for statements of belief. I am asking if anyone has counter arguments to what Richard Carrier says, or if they can point to anything he gets wrong.

I am not motivated to watch the video but found this in an Amazon review:

5.0 out of 5 stars The book Jesus Mythicism has been waiting for. July 2, 2014
[review by ] By Quentin D. Jones
Format: Paperback | Verified Purchase
This is an excellent book, highly recommended for anyone interested in the historical vs mythical debate over Jesus.

Firstly - my paperback version is of generally good physical quality, both in the printing and the binding - and survived a first read and some wide opening for scanning just fine.

The book is well argued and his points are logical and well supported with plenty of foot-notes, and a comprehensive bibliography. It is a companion volume to his work "Proving History" where he argues for using Bayesian probability in the study of history, especially Jesus. This methodology is breath of fresh air in Jesus studies - instead of ad hoc or even apologetic arguments, Carrier has a method that is based on probability and not just possibilities and wishful thinking.

First carrier sets up two mininal Jesus theories to test :

Mythical :
1. At the origin of Christianity, Jesus Christ was thought to be a celestial deity much like any other.
2. Like many other celestial deities, this Jesus 'communicated' with his subjects only through dreams, visions and other forms of divine inspi­ration (such as prophecy, past and present).
3. Like some other celestial deities, this Jesus was originally believed to have endured an ordeal of incarnation, death, burial and resurrection in a supernatural realm.
4. As for many other celestial deities, an allegorical story of this same Jesus was then composed and told within the sacred community, which placed him on earth, in history, as a divine man, with an earthly family, companions, and enemies, complete with deeds and sayings, and an earthly depiction of his ordeals.
5. Subsequent communities of worshipers believed (or at least taught) that this invented sacred story was real (and either not allegorical or only 'additionally' allegorical).

Historical :
1. An actual man at some point named Jesus acquired followers in life who continued as an identifiable movement after his death.
2. This is the same Jesus who was claimed by some of his followers to have been executed by the Jewish or Roman authorities.
3. This is the same Jesus some of whose followers soon began worshiping as a living god (or demigod).

Then, in a lengthy and valuable section, he explains the background - both of Christianity, and of it's the general context. I found this one of the best parts of the book, having many concepts laid out in detail that formed the matric from which Christianity formed. Some may disagree with parts of this material but I found it well argued and well sourced.

Then he discusses the prior probability that Jesus existed, including Jesus' fit for the Rank-Raglan Hero Archetype, concluding that Jesus has a 33% prior chance of existing.

Next he describes the primary sources and their value - extrabiblical, Acts, Gospels and Epistles - then goes on to evaluate each in detail by comparing the probabilities that each piece of evidence would look as it does, given each theory.
He concludes Acts has little historical value, nor do the Gospels, nor does the extrabiblical evidence, and the Epistles contain at best some small historical evidence.

He comprehensively discusses all the items usually cited as evidence for Jesus such as the Gospels, 'seed of David', 'born of woman' and 'brother of the Lord' and many more.

Finally in conclusion he brings all his probabilities together and concludes that Jesus had at best a 32% chance of existing by taking the highest possible historical probabilities, with a more likely figure being a 1 in 12500 chance of existing - i.e. essentially zero.

This book is the one that Jesus mythicism has been waiting for - with a logical methodology that is well supported by facts and should set the new benchmark for all Jesus studies. Apologists will no doubt hate it, but it will hopefully inform a whole new look at the question of Jesus. Carrier certainly knows and cites the relevant material very well - both the Bible and the various extra-canonical works.

It has 3 helpful indexes - scripture, author and subject, making it handy for reference.

Originally posted by twhitehead
That is not what I am asking. I am not asking for statements of belief. I am asking if anyone has counter arguments to what Richard Carrier says, or if they can point to anything he gets wrong.

He got it all wrong. Jesus is alive forevermore. And that's a fact.

It's a no brainer!

Originally posted by JS357
I am not motivated to watch the video but found this in an Amazon review:

5.0 out of 5 stars The book Jesus Mythicism has been waiting for. July 2, 2014
[review by ] By Quentin D. Jones
Format: Paperback | Verified Purchase
This is an excellent book, highly recommended for anyone interested in the historical vs mythical debate over Jesus.

Firstly - my ...[text shortened]... rks.

It has 3 helpful indexes - scripture, author and subject, making it handy for reference.

What do you think the odds are that Jones will die and meet Jesus face to face?

It's no use giving thumbs down to posts simply because one does not like what is written. Other than "You're wrong, Christ really existed.", a contrary argument, even a bad one, hasn't been made here. I realize that without reading the book (I've only read the review that JS357 posted) it is difficult to criticize his assessment of, first the historicity of the Gospels and Acts, and second the extra-biblical evidence - although I tend to agree regarding the extra-biblical evidence it's both scant and not evidence of anything other than the existence of the religion rather than the person - but even so it should be possible to do better than: "No, no, it's all true, really it is!"

Originally posted by twhitehead
This came up in another thread and I thought it was worthy of its own thread. Googlefudge pointed us to Richard Carrier's work on the historicity of Jesus. This youtube video is by Richard Charier and basically gives his argument that Jesus probably didn't exist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUYRoYl7i6U

Prior to watching it, I was of the opinion th ...[text shortened]... hat it is likely Jesus didn't exist.

Can anyone here find fault with Richard Carriers claims?

Keep thinking.
You're more or less likely to stumble upon something at some point.

Originally posted by JS357
I am not motivated to watch the video but found this in an Amazon review:

5.0 out of 5 stars The book Jesus Mythicism has been waiting for. July 2, 2014
[review by ] By Quentin D. Jones
Format: Paperback | Verified Purchase
This is an excellent book, highly recommended for anyone interested in the historical vs mythical debate over Jesus.

Firstly - my ...[text shortened]... rks.

It has 3 helpful indexes - scripture, author and subject, making it handy for reference.

Painful.
From step one, nauseatingly painful.
What passes as scholarship is an embarrassment to the term.

Originally posted by josephw
He got it all wrong. Jesus is alive forevermore. And that's a fact.

It's a no brainer!

As in "you need no brain to believe it" ? ...

Belief, while required for knowledge, is not sufficient for knowledge.

To know something you have to be able to sufficiently justify that belief.

Simply believing really really hard does not turn that belief into knowledge.


[Blind] Faith is not a valid or viable method of determining what is true.
It is not evidence of anything other than the strength of your beliefs.

It says nothing [good]about the validity of those beliefs.


If Jesus was real, and it was justifiable to believe he existed, then that claim should
stand up to skeptical enquiry. The fact that it doesn't, and that your response is simply
to try to shout down your opponents with unproven statements of belief simply shows
how empty and bankrupt your position is.

If you [any of you] had reasonable evidence then you would be shouting it from the
rooftops.

Originally posted by josephw
What do you think the odds are that Jones will die and meet Jesus face to face?

"What do you think the odds are that Jones will die and meet Jesus face to face?

If, as you say, it's a no-brainer, thinking is not called for.

Originally posted by twhitehead
This came up in another thread and I thought it was worthy of its own thread. Googlefudge pointed us to Richard Carrier's work on the historicity of Jesus. This youtube video is by Richard Charier and basically gives his argument that Jesus probably didn't exist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUYRoYl7i6U

Prior to watching it, I was of the opinion th ...[text shortened]... hat it is likely Jesus didn't exist.

Can anyone here find fault with Richard Carriers claims?

It is ridiculous to claim Jesus did not exist as an historical character after about 2000 years of evidence that he did exist. This has been argued to death and there is no point in going into it again here, because anyone can find much material on his own that proves Jesus did exist.

All I am going to point out today is the Shroud of Turin with the Sudarium of Oviedo as proof of his crucifixion, as described in the New Testament. They did not have photography in those days, but this is as good and probably better than having an actual photograph of Him after His crucifixion.

It is better than having a photograph of the dead criminals Jessie James or Billy the Kid to prove they existed. Does anyone doubt that Pontius Pilate, Cleopatra, or Nero existed?

Why are you all so agitated over a few simple statements I made? I can't believe what I've read here. So many judgemental assessments without a shred of proof for your conclusions. Talk about bigotry! Your emotions have gotten the best of you. Because you have nothing you can believe in, except in the mathematical probability that you may have stumbled upon a fragment of certainty, you have an emotional tantrum and prop yourself up on the derision of another.

Like animals seeking out the weak to prey upon. You don't know whether the Jesus of the Bible exists or not no matter how many books you've read much less whether or not He is who He said He is.

The unbeliever's problem is he just doesn't know Jesus, and rather than being honest with himself and admit that he doesn't posses the knowledge of God in the person of Jesus Christ, he searches in vain for evidence to the contrary, and when he doesn't find it he calls the one who does know God delusional.

Your intellectual snobbery phases me not one whit. Get real!

Romans 1:16-22
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,..

Embolden mine.

Originally posted by josephw
Why are you all so agitated over a few simple statements I made? I can't believe what I've read here. So many judgemental assessments without a shred of proof for your conclusions. Talk about bigotry! Your emotions have gotten the best of you. Because you have nothing you can believe in, except in the mathematical probability that you may have stumbled upon ...[text shortened]... sh heart was darkened.
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,..

Embolden mine.

This isn't emotion. This is the spirituality forum on RHP and you've been contributing for long enough to understand the environment. You haven't provided a single argument. Even RJHinds has managed to produce a better argument than you have.