Two Atheists Will Soon Debate the Historicity of Jesus

[rug]

March 15, 2014
By Hemant Mehta

Here’s an interesting concept for a debate: Get two scholars to debate “Jesus of Nazareth: Man or Myth.” Oh, and they’re both atheists.

Richard Carrier says Jesus never existed. Zeba Crook says he did.

The event takes place Saturday night, April 5, at the Centrepointe Theatre in Ottawa, Ontario. More information right here. I’ll post the video if/when it becomes available!

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/03/15/two-atheists-will-soon-debate-the-historicity-of-jesus/

http://www.meetup.com/CFI-ottawa/events/163741862/

http://www.richardcarrier.info/about.html

http://carleton-ca.academia.edu/ZebaCrook

[pinto]

1. Sounds like it could be interesting. I see Crook is in Religion Dept. at Carleton, secular pov.

[longship]

2. I'd like to get Robert M. Price's take on this debate.

He's in the Jesus myth camp, too. He says that there is no proof, but if some evidence came up, he'd change his mind.

Yup! He's a Republican, but I still like his take on the Bible and on atheism.

[struggle4progress]

3. I can't see any definite way to resolve the historicity question: the available textual sources

are limited, and most are at best copies of earlier texts, with relatively few dating from as early as the second or third century, so that the missing originals can be reconstructed and dated only by indirect methods; and the entire endeavor is complicated by the indifference of the early Jesus movement to any careful biography or history

Beyond that, one has the irregular spread of the religion into portions of the ancient world in the period before Constantine, which indicates wide-ranging proselyte activity with uneven success. The original proselytes must have been rather motivated, since they did not always meet with local approval

[okasha]

4. With the very underplayed acquittal of Oded Golan

two years ago, the "James Ossuary" should now be available for further study. Expert testimony at the trial established that language and orthography are correct for the 1st. century CE, and that mineral accretions in the "brother of Jesus" portion of the inscription are also ancient.
The results of further testing will be significant as to whether the ossuary constitutes genuine inscriptional evidence oof the historicity of Jesus.

[struggle4progress]

5. ... "The prosecution failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt what was stated in the indictment:

that the ossuary is a forgery and that Mr. Golan or someone acting on his behalf forged it," the judge stated. "This is not to say that the inscription on the ossuary is true and authentic and was written 2,000 years ago.... <T>here is nothing in these findings which necessarily proves that the items were authentic" ...
Faith, forgery, science -- and the James Ossuary
The particulars of science matter little to zealots defending a creed
March 25, 2012|By Nina Burleigh

[okasha]

6. The judge was wiser than

many journalists in declaring that the authenticity or fraudulence of the 80+ artifacts in question could not be determined by the court. The ossuary, at least, and the "Jehoash Tablet" should both be made available for further study. I hope they will be. As it stands now, the dispute is pretty much a he-said/she- said affair.