The Difficulty in Responding to Richard Carrier

Richard Carrier is one of the most well known Jesus Mythicists, that is a person who argues that Jesus was never a historical figure. I regularly get questions asking me to respond to some article that he wrote.

Most recently, I was asked to respond to his journal article, “Origen, Eusebius, and the
Accidental Interpolation in Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 20.200.”

I really wanted to respond to this article as someone was really concerned about it. But I ran across the same problem that I often do when it comes to Richard Carrier.

Responding to Richard Carrier, for me, feels like nailing Jell-O to a wall.

That probably sounds like I am insulting him rather than interacting with his arguments. That is not my intention.

But when I read his “scholarship” I get frustrated. He comes across so certain in his conclusions but when you read what he says, it comes across as an assertion intersecting with a supposition, all wrapped in a lot of imagination.

What I mean by that is that he does argue from actual evidence. He often relies on supposed interpolations, found in the New Testament or Josephus or elsewhere, that are not supported by textual evidence.

He will explain how his argument fits of the passage is an interpolation but cannot give any actual evidence. He argues that if you assume this and assume that and see things from his perspective, his argument can seem compelling.

Going back to this Josephus article, he makes statements like, if Origen was actually using Josephus, he would have done this. But how would Carrier know what Origen would do? Plus, when we look at how other ancient authors used sources, it is rarely as Carrier claims.

Or he argues that a certain phrase is an interpolation because it is the kind of phrase that someone would add if they were going to add something. We do not have any textual evidence that it was an inetrpolation, but we do have Carrier’s assertion that it is an interpolation.

What I am saying here is not what the person who sent me the article was looking for. They wanted a list of reasons of why Carrier was wrong.

If you want a specific response, check out this post by Colin Green.

I cannot prove that Josephus definitely identified James as the brother of Christ. I believe it that Josephus probably did because there is no compelling evidence against it.

I can say that Carrier’s arguments, while completely possible, are not near as probable as he makes them out to be. His followers will read these articles and be convinced. Perhaps some scholars will be as well.

But for as long as he relies on assertions and possibilities, I find his work painful to read.

For more on this topic, check out my Jesus Myth Theory page.