Daniel Gullotta on the Obscure but Historical Jesus

Daniel Gullotta has been busy online defending the historicity of Jesus against internet pseudoskeptics who don’t understand how historical studies works, and so draw problematic conclusions. In a recent blog post he explained why it is unsurprising that Jesus doesn’t get mentioned by his contemporaries. And then he engaged David Fitzgerald in a debate on the [Read More...]

Mythicism, Creationism, and other Conspiracy Theories

I was made aware of a post by John Anthony Dunne, asking whether there is any parallel in Judaism for what Richard Carrier and other mythicists claim that Paul believed, namely that a celestial being died in the celestial realm. Presumably the closest Carrier can offer is his claim that Adam was buried in the third [Read More...]

Daniel Gullotta to Debate Mythicist David Fitzgerald

Daniel Gullotta shared on his blog that he will be having a debate with mythicist David Fitzgerald. Click through for more details. I’ve blogged before about Fitzgerald’s arguments in his book Nailed: Ten Christian Myths That Show Jesus Never Existed At All, as well as those found elsewhere online. Others have also tackled his claims. [Read More...]

Anyone Can Publish Anything

Chris Skinner posted on his blog a follow-up to his post about citing online sources, and in particular blogs. I thought this excerpt was worth sharing with a wider audience. By and large, those who appear to reject peer review or find it objectionable seem to be those who want a broad hearing for their ideas [Read More...]

The Criterion of Damage Control

In a conversation about mythicism I had recently, some points came up that I want to share here. In addressing the claims of mythicism, I think a key point is to get the criterion of embarrassment right. I do not think anyone has ever said, as mythicists sometimes claim, that the principle is “this makes me [Read More...]

Horus Manure

I’m not sure how I missed it, but a few years ago, Catholic apologist Jon Sorensen came up with a very clever title for a post about alleged Jesus-Horus parallels: Horus Manure. Whatever you think of the post, that’s a pun that was too good not to share. More up to date, Gakusei Don (who [Read More...]

Theoretical Cosmoses and Historical Jesuses

I almost opted for the alternative plural forms of both words in the title of this post – “Theoretical Cosmoi and Historical Jesi.” Just in case anyone was wondering. But I figured it was better to have the words in the title be recognizable. I am constantly surprised when mythicists regard the number of theories about the [Read More...]

Review of Maurice Casey’s Jesus: Evidence and Argument or Mythicist Myths?

My review of Maurice Casey’s book Jesus: Evidence and Argument or Mythicist Myths? has been published in Review of Biblical Literature.  Below is an excerpt from the end of the review. Please click through to read the rest. I suspect that many will find the tone of Casey’s volume rather too acerbic—especially if they have never had [Read More...]

Pay To Hear Bart Ehrman and Robert Price Debate

Daniel Gulotta drew to my attention that a Kickstarter campaign has been started to raise money to pay Bart Ehrman and Robert M. Price’s fees to appear together and debate whether there was a historical Jesus. If you think that would be money well spent, then feel free to contribute to it! [Read more...]

Myths, Messiahs, and Minimalisms

Simon Joseph blogged about the myth of the dying Messiah. He writes: The myth of the Dying Messiah originated in and was generated by the suffering and death of a messianic Jesus… Jesus’ first followers suffered from cognitive dissonance. The predominant model of early Jewish messianism was the militaristic Davidic warrior-king. The fact that Jesus did not “fulfill” the role [Read More...]

A Jesus Agnostic Star Trek Robot

I had to share this cartoon from Evolving Perspectives. It brings together Jesus-mythicism and Star Trek, after all. First, if you are wondering about the hat, that is because this is…wait for it…GNOMAD! But now, about the substance, it seems to me to use “agnostic” in a rather bizarre way. We are not “agnostic” about [Read More...]