Ian’s Review of Carrier’s Proving History and Carrier’s Reply

An atheist named Ian with a deep background in math and science has written a critical review of Carrier’s Proving History.

A Mathematical Review of “Proving History” by Richard Carrier

Among other things, Ian complains that Carrier uses a version of Bayes’s Theorem (BT) that is “unduly complex” and “highly idiosyncratic.” I disagree. I think one’s assumptions can play a huge role in historical Jesus studies, so it valuable to use a version of BT which explicitly includes background knowledge (B).

Other critical posts on Ian’s site:

 Carrier’s reply may be found here.

"Good questions. These are important issues that need exploration in order to properly evaluate Kreeft's ..."

Kreeft’s Case for God – Part ..."
""I appreciate this whole series. It is difficult to deconstruct some of these logical arguments, ..."

Kreeft’s Case for God – Part ..."
""Well, I took a look at the first point, and I am not sure why ..."

Kreeft’s Case for God – Part ..."
"There is a little bit of reasoning/evidence provided in support of (1), but I don't ..."

Kreeft’s Case for God – Part ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment