G / H / I / J




G




Author: Norman Geisler

Updates: (custom google search, http://www.normangeisler.net/articles.htm)

Title: A Critical Review of The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond the Grave.
Location: http://www.normangeisler.net/articles/theResurrection/2005-ACriticalReviewOfBookTheEmptyTomb.htm

Type: Web article
Merit: So-so
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapters 5, 9, and 10




Author: Neil Godfrey (atheist, "Vridar")

Updates: (http://vridar.wordpress.com/?s=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: Doherty answers McGrath and others (continuation of ch. 6 criticisms)
Location: http://vridar.wordpress.com/2011/05/29/doherty-answers-mcgrath-and-others-continuation-of-ch-6-criticisms/
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: ???

  • Content: The post is mainly about other issues, but Godfrey disagrees with Carrier's preferred translation of Philippians 1:14 and claims rather that the usage of "in the Lord" with "having confidence" is ambiguous.



Author: Mariano Grinbank ("True Freethinker")

Updates: (http://www.truefreethinker.com/search/luceneapi_node/richard%20carrier, RSS)

Title: Fundamentalist Theologian, Richard Carrier, Speaks Out About the Resurrection
Location: http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/fundamentalist-theologian-richard-carrier-speaks-out-about-resurrection
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: William Lane Craig vs Richard Carrier on Faith Under Fire

  • Consult:
  • Argument: 1. Grinbank claims that Carrier ignores William Lane Craig's five points with mere speculation, 2. claims Carrier contradicts himself by saying we don't know when the gospel authors wrote, but somehow we know Mark came first, 3. says Carrier is dogmatically incredulous to insist that the Christian god follow Carrier's preferences that he would communicate clearly with everyone, 4. claims all atheists are the worst fundamentalist theologians of all, and quotes from Norman Geisler's review of Carrier's chapter 10 in The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave.
  • Content:
  • Response: 1. Carrier addresses Craig's points in regards to how insufficient the evidence presented is to justify belief in such an extraordinary claim that in no way corresponds with any of our modern background knowledge. 2. It is possible to know that one of the gospels came before another because of how literary dependence works, but not know when any of the gospels are pegged down on the calendar, just like you might be able to tell that the engine of a train is in front of all the other cars in a photograph of the train even if you don't necessarily know where the photo was taken. 3. Carrier's "preference" is a moral preference that a good god would share since communicating a saving message clearly and effectively (and universally) is what good moral agents do. Grinbank is free to believe in some kind of negligent deity if he so chooses, but that's not the underlying principle that Christians typically believe they believe in (1 Timothy 2:3-4). 4. Having an opinion about theological matters does not make one a dogmatic fundamentalist any more than having an opinion about anything else necessarily makes you a dogmatic anything. Christians will have their own opinions when in confrontation with other theologies of other religions (i.e. conflicts of how they think their god would or wouldn't do things) and will need to actually be able to defend those opinions against the merits of others (like Carrier's) rather than conveniently blaming atheists for having a defensible unfavorable opinion about their particular religion. If Christians want to convince nonbelievers that it's a great idea not to think critically about a worldview before they accept it, good luck with that.


H




Author: James Hale ("Calvinism Examiner")
Updates: (custom search, http://www.examiner.com/x-35125-Calvinism-Examiner~topic706039-Richard-Carrier, RSS)

Title: Skeptics' idea of conspiracy, find no logic - part 6
Location: http://ww.examiner.com/x-35125-Calvinism-Examiner~y2010m3d9-Skeptics-idea-of-conspiracy-find-no-logic--part-6,http://www.lincolnjournalinc.com/link.asp?smenu=184&sdetail=4881&wpage=1
Type: Web news article
Merit: So-so
Target: Why I Don't Buy the Resurrection Story

  • Consult:
  • Argument: The Christian god doesn't need to carve "Jesus Lives" into the moon, because he has already provided abundant evidence of his existence in creation itself that speaks to the hearts of every person, just as the Bible says. The interpretation of the same evidence (such as geological strata indicating ages of evolution or Noah's flood) is subjective and requires faith. The seven day week points to creation. J. P. Holding says that "Jesus Lives" in Greek wouldn't make sense to anyone and they'd just interpret it wrong. Hale says that scientists would explain the rock formations that spelled out the letters away as natural phenomena. The Christian god could have done a lot of worldly things to get attention if he wanted, but their god doesn't have to save anyone at all. It would have been just to end the human race after Adam and Eve sinned. The real problem is the hindrance of sinful human will, rather than a lack of evidence. Carrier is wrong to think that the Christian god's plan is to save everyone. It is a more reasonable question to ask why a god saves anyone at all. Either this god doesn't know what people will do, or the human rejection of salvation must be a part of the Christian god's will. The longer Jesus waits to return to earth, the more people end up in hell. Calvinism is the answer. Salvation isn't up to humans, but instead their god has a plan to save only the elect.
  • Content: (parts 1-5 don't have to do with Carrier, and part 7 is just a reposting of Holding's article)
  • Response:



Author: James Hannam ("Quodlibeta")

Updates: (http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/search?q=Richard+Carrier, RSS)

Title: Richard Carrier on Christianity and Science
Location: http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2006/11/richard-carrier-on-christianity-and.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Science and Medieval Christianity

Title: The Purpose of Greek Philosophy
Location: http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2007/05/purpose-of-greek-philosophy.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Why the Bizarre Avatar?

Title: Stirrups, horse harnesses and Richard Carrier
Location: http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2007/08/stirrups-horse-harnesses-and-richard.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target : Experimental History


Title: In Reply to Richard Carrier
Location: http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2007/08/in-reply-to-richard-carrier.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Lynn White on Horse Stuff

Title: Human Vivisection and Dissection
Location: http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2010/02/human-vivisection-and-dissection.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Flynn's Pile of Boners

Title: Was Christianity Responsible for Modern Science? A Chapter from The Christian Delusion
Location: http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2010/09/was-christianity-responsible-for-modern.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails, chapter 15

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Hannam: "Dominican physicist and theologian Stanley Jaki [...] cannot be blamed for the superficial accounts of his work that have proliferated in recent years [...] I don’t find Jaki’s to be a convincing argument [...] But neither do I think Jaki is being tendentious, as Richard suggests. [...] Richard references a critique of Stark from The Objective Standard. That one of Ayn Rand’s disciples thinks a book is no good is not actually valid evidence of its deficiencies. [...] A very good case can be made that Christianity’s net influence on science has been beneficial."
  • Content: Hannam generally agrees with Carrier on various aspects of his case. Appears to want to say that Carrier has exaggerated some elements.
  • Response:

Title: Was Christianity Responsible for Modern Science: Carrier's Counter Argument
Location: http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2010/09/was-christianity-responsible-for-modern_09.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails, chapter 15

Title: Richard Carrier on Ancient Science
Location: http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2010/09/richard-carrier-on-ancient-science.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails, chapter 15



Author: Randy Hardman

Updates: (custom google search, RSS, http://randiss1.blogspot.com/search?q=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: Thallus: A Response to Richard Carrier
Location: http://randiss1.blogspot.com/2007/07/thallus-response-to-richard-carrier.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Thallus: An Analysis

Title: Thallus, part 2
Location: http://randiss.blogspot.com/2007/08/thallus-part-2.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Thallus: An Analysis



Author: Bryan Harris ("Firm in the Faith")

Updates: (http://thetruthofthebible.blogspot.com/search?q=carrier, RSS)

Title: Specific Perceived Biblical Contradictions Addressed
Location: http://thetruthofthebible.blogspot.com/2009/05/specific-perceived-biblical.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: The Date of the Nativity in Luke (5th ed., 2006), Newman on Prophecy as Miracle (1999, 2005),The Problem of the Virgin Birth Prophecy (2003)

  • Consult:
  • Argument:
  • Content:
  • Response:



Author: Steve Hays ("Triablogue")

Updates: (http://triablogue.blogspot.com/search?q=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: This Joyful Eastertide
Location: http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/JoyfulEastertideAnswerToEmptyTomb.pdf
Type: Online book
Merit: Important
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapters 5, 9, and 10


Title: Cooking the books
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2006/11/cooking-books.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Why I Don't Buy the Resurrection Story

Title: The harrowing of hell
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2006/11/harrowing-of-hell.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Infidelguy interview part 1, part 2, part 3, and part 4


Title: Can't keep a good man down!
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2006/11/cant-keep-good-man-down.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Infidelguy interview part 1, part 2, part 3, and part 4


Title: Secular credulity
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2006/11/secular-credulity.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Plausibility of Theft FAQ and The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 9

  • Argument: Hays claims (quoting G. K. Chesterton) that when someone stops believing in the Christian god, they will believe anything. He then quote mines Carrier to attempt to show that Carrier believes in space aliens.
  • Response: See the response to Hays' "Richard Carrier: Exopsychologist, PhET" below.

Title: Richard Carrier: Exopsychologist, PhET
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2006/11/richard-carrier-exopsychologist-phet.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Plausibility of Theft FAQ and The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 9

  • Argument: Hays quotes Carrier saying this: "Of course, ‘God performed a miracle’ is even less plausible than ‘Space aliens healed Jesus,’ because we do have credible evidence to believe that there could be space aliens with the means and the motive to heal Jesus," and then makes fun of Carrier for pretending to know the motives of extra-terrestrials.
  • Response: Hays fails to quote what Carrier is basing that off of which comes in the next few sentences: "...the existence of a spacefaring species is well attested in at least one case: us; the technology to travel through interstellar space and restore life to a corpse is within the realm of known physics (faster-than-light travel would not be necessary for a species that has conquered death); etc. Yet we do not have the same quality of evidence to believe that there could be a supernatural disembodied mind with magical powers capable of reversing the known laws of physics. Though we could have that evidence, we don't. Instead, for every proposed piece of evidence one might care to offer for the existence of a God with the required means and motive, we can offer more evidence, of at least the same quality, for the potential existence of aliens with the required means and motive. Therefore, if the hypothesis that "space aliens healed Jesus" is not credible, the hypothesis that "God performed a miracle" is even less credible. In other words, if we are allowed to grant that such a being existed and cared and acted in this case, we would be just as warranted in granting that those aliens existed, too. But if we think the latter absurd, we must also conclude the former is absurd." [emphasis mine] In terms of analogous motive (in addition to analogous technology), it seems Carrier is either saying that humans with the proper technology would naturally want to provide medical attention to those in need or perhaps he's even implying that aliens might be willing to take advantage of religious movements in a manner similar to what is portrayed in the Stargate movie and TV series since humans take advantage of the gullible through deception often enough.

Title: Getting Carriered Away
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2006/12/getting-carriered-away.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Plausibility of Theft FAQ and The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 9

Title: Infidelity for dilettantes
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/10/infidelity-for-dilettantes.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Calling All Benefactors and Ignatian Vexation

  • Argument: Carrier cannot come up with an objective historical method to investigate the NT because he is an a priori naturalist, Carrier admits that he is biased by pointing out that the conclusion will make religious people uneasy, says there is no reason to fact check a pre-determined conclusion, says Bart Ehrman cannot write a forward to a book whose conclusion is supposedly up in the air, implies that Carrier would not be soliciting atheists if the conclusion of the book was not already pre-determined, blasts Carrier's use of Eerdman's Dictionary of the Bible, The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, and The New Interpreter's Bible as N00Bish, blasts the minimal time Carrier allotted for investigating NT dating and for giving up, claims "AD 70 is not the lower threshold for the composition of Matthew," that Carrier refuses to investigate secondary literature, insults Carrier's intelligence and accuses Carrier of running a scam.
  • Content:
  • Response: An alternative hypothesis is that Carrier is not an a priori naturalist and citing the conclusion of a book that defends just such a version naturalism (link) certainly does not prove the contrary. With that in mind, consistent and objective historical criteria can plausibly be achieved even if Hays doesn't like it (because of his own supernatural bias?). Addressing squeamish Christians was framed in a hypothetical sense. Fact checking implies that the conclusion could change if certain facts fall through and hence would be disconfirmation for Hays's hypothesis rather than a perplexing and vain bout of going through the motions on Carrier's part. Bart Ehrman could have certainly read and reject a manuscript before publishing if he wanted to. No one is going to twist his arm if the book is nonsense. I for one would still have given Carrier the same amount of money if in fact he came to the conclusion that orthodox supernatural historicity were the best explanation, because I'd want to see what changed Carrier's mind (just like theists want to see what changed Anthony Flew's mind). Though I am not qualified to judge, it seems that Carrier's idea of research is about going beyond the preliminary reference material as the very passage quoted implies. Carrier's evaluation of the futility of the hypothetical seven years of research seems reasonable enough. Can Hays or anyone else for that matter blast Carrier on the CONTENT of what is claimed rather than the time frame allotted given such a situation? By the time research gets to historical miracle claims, after modern investigations are a bust, miracles are extremely improbable explanations (but still not impossible). As a result, Carrier's book is framed as a discussion between naturalistic historicity and naturalistic ahistoricity. Blaming Carrier for this evidential situation is fruitless since the academic and scientific consensus backs Carrier and not Hays, regardless of whatever personal miracle anecdotes Hays may be charged up on or fringe theories he embraces.

Title: Plato, Paul, & Philo
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/10/plato-paul-philo.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5


Title: Miracles: now and then
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2009/04/miracles-now-and-then.html
Type: Blog
Merit:
Target:

Title: Hurtado on historical scholarship
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2010/07/hurtado-on-historical-scholarship.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target:

  • Content: Hays claims that Carrier is paranoid.

Title: The Infidel Delusion, chapter 11 (PDF pages 155-170)
Location: http://www.calvindude.com/ebooks/InfidelDelusion.pdf
Type: Online book
Merit: So-so
Target: The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails, chapter 11

  • Argument/Response: Hays does his very best to be incredulously confused about the nature of requiring appropriate levels of evidence for fantastic claims that are by their nature categorically beyond a reasonable scope of personal experience, analogy, or logical extension. He makes every effort to assure us (without demonstrating it, of course) that he has good reason to believe miracles and supernatural events happen and that Carrier is a dogmatic close-minded skeptic for not accepting his anecdotes and appeal to scientific minority status on those claims. Similarly he constantly complains in vain that Carrier does not interact with the claims of conservative scholarship as though Carrier is obligated to reinvent the consensus wheel. Hays fails to put the collective case for doubt and uncertainty together at many turns and always seems to manage to find some conspiracy in presenting differing levels of ambiguity and probability (where some naturalistic explanations are possible, but still not as likely as others). Hays deftly sweeps all the would-be helpful evidence we could have had confirming Biblical events under the rug as though it's just no big deal to not have any of it and he bizarrely tries to underplay the fantastic elements in the gospels as though they are any different than the mythical elements in the gospels the most successful early Christian church eventually rejected. He reminds us that pretty much everything a skeptic says "begs the question" and that of course he rejects atheist, John Loftus' "outsider test for faith" without telling us that in fact he just doesn't think anyone is an outsider to his theistic worldview (and he won't bother proving that his "crystal ball" that tells him so is legitimate). Along the way Hays denies climate change and evolution all the while appealing to the Christian god's unknown rationale for ancient miracles. Hays' case is just as superficial, logically twisted, and hypocritical as ever. Whatever limited value can be pulled from this mess is more constructively stated and elaborated upon by his fellow Triablogger, Jason Engwer.

Title: The Infidel Delusion, chapter 15, "Oedipal Science" (PDF pages 203-204)
Location: http://www.calvindude.com/ebooks/InfidelDelusion.pdf
Type: Online book
Merit: Lame
Target: The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails, chapter 15

  • Argument/Response: Though fellow Triablogger, Jason Engwer claims that it is "understandable" to focus on the issue of the origin of science and then laments that there are more important things that were neglected, Hays, as is his way, defaults to a conspiracy of willful "misdirection" to divert attention away from what he also thinks is the deeper issue. What are these more important issues? Hays wants to explain a "rational world" with a "rational Creator" without explaining why that creator gets to be arbitrarily rational in the first place. In reference to the problem of induction, he wants to add theistic assumptions to our natural assumptions and hope that we can't figure out he's just added more assumptions that can't be any more justified than the original assumptions. Who knew we could just make stuff up to make epistemology more convenient? Hays then fallaciously assumes that "aimless" processes cannot in some contexts (like biological evolution) generate apparent aims (which would be a type of "fallacy of composition" on Hays' part). Hays wants to claim any and all levels of teleology on behalf of his arbitrary belief system (where the laws of physics for instance could be designated "low teleology" and our minds would include "high teleology"), but to eliminate metaphysical naturalism on philosophical a priori grounds is a fallacy of composition (again) as though we could not hope to find at least small pockets of metaphysical order in perhaps an infinite scape of chaos. Hays concludes that, "Secular science commits patricide against the worldview which underwrites science," neglecting that it commits fairy-cide and leprechaun-cide (and many other "mythicides") as well. We're not going to weep for all these imaginary "bases" of science that don't actually explain anything in that intended ultimate sense.

Title: The Infidel Delusion, Appendix II: "Extraordinary Claims" (PDF pages 228-229)
Location: http://www.calvindude.com/ebooks/InfidelDelusion.pdf
Type: Online book
Merit: Lame
Target: The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails, chapter 11

  • Argument/Response: Hays questions Carrier's claim that rejecting "extraordinary evidence requires extraordinary proof" equals rejecting logic itself. Hays may have a point about practice vs. principle, but his counterexamples do not hold up: "...there seem to be obvious counterexamples. Suppose I throw a die and it rolls out of sight. The probability that I‘ve thrown a 3 or higher is approx. 0.67. Should I believe that I‘ve thrown a 3 or higher? Surely not." Hays fails to understand that the strength (or weakness) of your premises needs to match your conclusion. It is rational to withhold *absolute* judgment, but it is irrational to withhold the judgement that it is "probably true that you rolled a 3 or higher" since it is an entirely factual (yet not particularly potent) statement. Why does Hays feel free to reject it (and hence toss out logic as Carrier claimed he'd have to do)? More importantly Hays fails to realize when he says: "Naturally you're skeptical, so I invite you over to my house, where you see with your own eyes both my ticket and the newspaper reporting the winning numbers. I‘d say that would be sufficient for you to rationally believe that I‘ve won the lottery. But did you have *extraordinary* evidence? Hardly. The evidence you had was of the most ordinary kind," he all but admits that we don't have "ordinary" evidence that we should have for the resurrection of Jesus. Ordinary evidence in that case would have to equal a resurrected Jesus showing up and discussing the matter with Carrier in person (rather than listening to Hays hairsplit his way out of the obvious) just as Carrier originally claimed, "If Jesus was a god and really wanted to save the world, he would have appeared and delivered his Gospel personally to the whole world. He would not appear only to one small group of believers and one lone outsider, in one tiny place, just one time, two thousand years ago, and then give up. But if Christianity originated as a natural movement inspired by ordinary hallucinations (real or pretended), then we would expect it to arise in only one small group, in one small place, at just one time." What else would be analogous to producing a winning lotto ticket or an interstellar spacecraft? Misguided semantics can't paper over that.

Title: The Infidel Delusion, Appendix VI: And your old men shall dream dreams. (PDF pages 242-243)
Location: http://www.calvindude.com/ebooks/InfidelDelusion.pdf
Type: Online book
Merit: Lame
Target: The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails, chapter 11

  • Argument/Response: Hays rightly points out that Carrier's target audience is not someone who believes they have actually experienced something like predictive dreams (or any other anecdotal miracle claim). However, does Hays think (given his example of "this one time" dreaming about women walking their dogs) that he has a really lame precog power that lets him know really mundane things randomly that you could just find out in a normal way (like looking) instead? Or that maybe 999 other dreams didn't just so happen to coincide with a wakeful event? Will good coincidences just never happen? How coincidental is "too coincidental" especially given how we know humans are sucktacular statistics machines by default? Hays claims he's not being dogmatic here with his dream, but that he's just trying to point out how pretensious Carrier is with his audience (though Carrier dogmatically insists he "suspects" you'll agree with him about his rule of thumb, GASP!). But then if we are left at agnosticism and no definitive POSITIVE reason to suppose that miracles are a real normative part of our lives where is the argument? Carrier lives in a world where there are all sorts of fantastic claims coming out of the realm of hearsay and I "dogmatically" suspect that he's not alone. Many of those types of claims could be justified via the principle of analogy or extension by a simple definitive proof of concept (how hard would it be to verify the reality of out of body experiences, for example, if it wasn't all in the head?). Science has investigated thousands and thousands of such cases and types of claims and come to no definitive positive conclusion in favor of supernaturalism. Again, it all "may be true" (and we're not just talking Christian theism here) but that is not a responsible conclusion for someone to come to and Hays has given no reason to think otherwise. It is common for people like Hays to claim that certain theological or supernatural claims are true (or "normal" in their experience), but it is just as common for them to have lame reasons for believing in them.

Title: Justified rape
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2010/07/justified-rape.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails

Title: Religious Trends
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2010/07/religious-trends.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: News Pleas

  • Consult:
  • Argument: None.
  • Content: Hays takes Carrier's request for financial help to a skeptical organization, juxtaposes it with the apparent stats for climbing unbelief, and plugs that into his "Carrier is a con-man" narrative.
  • Response: *sigh*

Title: Truth by definition
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2010/08/truth-by-definition.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails

Title: Tina! Bring me the ax!
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2010/08/tina-bring-me-ax.html
Type: Blog
Merit:
Target:

Title: Inside Richard Carrier's padded cell
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2010/09/inside-richard-carriers-padded-cell.html
Type: Blog
Merit:
Target:

Title: Carrier's foot-in-mouth disease
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2010/09/carrier-foot-in-mouth-disease.html
Type: Blog
Merit:
Target: The Christian Delusion

Title: Premonitions
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2010/10/premonitions.html
Type: Blog
Merit:
Target: The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails, chapter 11

Title: Ne'er shaw yir teeth unless ye can bite!”
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2010/10/neer-shaw-yir-teeth-unless-ye-can-bite.html
Type: Blog
Merit:
Target: http://war-on-error.xanga.com/726542356/book-review-the-christian-delusion---the-outsider-test-for-faith-revisited/


Title: Name that atheistlogic_dude_bigotry_(0;00;00;00).jpg
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2011/02/name-that-atheist.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target:


Title: Extra! Extra! Read all about it!
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2011/05/extra-extra-read-all-about-it.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Mark 16:9-20

  • Content/Argument: Hays briefly makes fun of Carrier's case against Biblical inerrancy: "...Richard Carrier has just uncovered hitherto unsuspected evidence that scribes make mistakes when they copy the NT." Hays also seems to imply (as he has argued erroneously elsewhere) that Bart Ehrman doesn't agree with Carrier's basic position.
  • Response: The case against the ending of Mark we have isn't just about "making mistakes." It could be a serious philosophical issue about inerrancy (beyond "typos") depending on how big of chunks are missing (or added) from the received texts.

Title: Jack of all trades
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2011/06/jack-of-all-trades.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Pauline Interpolations

Title: The End of Infidelity, Chapter 2 (PDF pages 27-31)
Location: http://www.calvindude.com/ebooks/The_End_of_Infidelity.pdf
Type: Ebook
Merit:
Target: The End of Christianity

  • Response: See Ben Schuldt's, "Re: Steve Hays, 'The End of Infidelity,' Chapter 2"

Title: The End of Infidelity, Chapter 12 (PDF pages 165-168)
Location: http://www.calvindude.com/ebooks/The_End_of_Infidelity.pdf
Type: Ebook
Merit:
Target: The End of Christianity

Title: The End of Infidelity, Chapter 14 (PDF pages 183-189)
Location: http://www.calvindude.com/ebooks/The_End_of_Infidelity.pdf
Type: Ebook
Merit:
Target: The End of Christianity

Title: Gospel harmonization
Location: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2012/02/gospel-harmonization.html
Type: Blog
Merit:
Target: An Interview With Richard Carrier About His Book, "Proving History"



Author: David Heddle ("He Lives")

Updates: (http://helives.blogspot.com/search?q=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: Richard Carrier: Worthy winner of the Jerry Coyne Lidless Eye Award
Location: http://helives.blogspot.com/2011/12/richard-carrier-worthy-winner-of-jerry.html
Type: Blog
Merit:
Target:

Title: Bad to Worse
Location: http://helives.blogspot.com/2011/12/bad-to-worse.html
Type: Blog
Merit:
Target:

Title: I am Richard Carrier. I have demonstrated this. I have refuted that.
Location: http://helives.blogspot.com/2012/01/i-am-richard-carrier-i-have.html
Type: Blog
Merit:
Target:



Author: Landon Hedrick (atheist)

Updates: (http://landonhedrick.blogspot.com/search/label/Carrier, RSS)

Title: Sense and Goodness Without God
Location: http://landonhedrick.blogspot.com/2011/08/sense-and-goodness-without-god.html
Type: Blog
Merit:
Target:

Title: Richard Carrier's Grand Claims
Location: http://landonhedrick.blogspot.com/2011/08/richard-carriers-grand-claims.html
Type: Blog
Merit:
Target:



Author: Servidor Hernandez Ibn Musa (and Bismika Allahuma)

Updates: (http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/search/richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: Cosmology and the Holy Qur’an: A Response to Richard Carrier
Location: http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2006/cosmology-and-the-holy-quran-a-response-to-richard-carrier/
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Cosmology and the Koran: A Response to Muslim Fundamentalists



Author: Paul Herrick

Updates: (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/paul_herrick/)

Title: Contra Carrier: Why Theism is Needed to Make Sense of Everything (2006)
Location: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/paul_herrick/contra.html
Type: Web article
Merit: So-so
Target: Ten Things Wrong with Cosmological Creationism (2000)



Author: Joe L. Hinman ("Metacrock")

Updates: (http://metacrock.blogspot.com/search?q=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: Traces of God
Location: http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2006/02/traces-of-god.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target:

Title: Richard Carrier and The Supernatural
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2007/01/richard-carrier-and-supernatural.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Defining the Supernatural

Title: None so blind as the atheists on CARM
Location: http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2008/09/none-so-blind-as-atheists-on-carm.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target:

Title: Traces of God: Answering the Reverse Design Argument
Location: http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2010/05/traces-of-god-answering-reverse-design.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Why I Am Not a Christian: 1. God is Silent. and Fine Tuned Universe?

  • Consult: iPope, http://www.doxa.ws/Theology/My_theo.html
  • Argument: Carrier creates a straw man expectation of a god who communicates in definitive ways. Only through the thousands of hints from the natural world and from mystical union with the Christian god can we know of the kind of god who would create a universe just like this.
  • Content:
  • Response:

Title: So, Atheism is Not an Organized Movement Hu?
Location: http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2010/12/so-atheism-is-not-organized-movement-hu.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: The Jesus Project



Author: Garren Hochstetler (atheist, "Words, Ideas, and Things")

Updates:(http://wordsideasandthings.blogspot.com/search?q=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: On 'Moral Facts Naturally Exist (And Science Could Find Them)' (Pt. 1)
Location: http://wordsideasandthings.blogspot.com/2011/08/on-moral-facts-naturally-exist-and.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target:

Title: On 'Moral Facts Naturally Exist (And Science Could Find Them)' (Pt. 2)
Location: http://wordsideasandthings.blogspot.com/2011/08/on-moral-facts-naturally-exist-and_30.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target:

Title: A Response to Richard Carrier
Location: http://wordsideasandthings.blogspot.com/2011/09/response-to-richard-carrier.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target:



Author: R. Joseph Hoffmann (atheist, "The New Oxonian")

Updates: (http://rjosephhoffmann.wordpress.com/?s=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: Play Mythty For Me? Dr Carrier Carries On
Location: http://rjosephhoffmann.wordpress.com/2011/05/31/play-mythty-for-me-dr-carrier-carries-on/
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Sources of the Jesus Tradition


Title: π -ness Envy? The Irrelevance of Bayes’s Theorem
Location: http://rjosephhoffmann.wordpress.com/2011/06/06/%CF%80-ness-envy-the-irrelevance-of-bayess-theorem/
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: "Baye's Theorem for Beginners: Formal Logic and Its Relevance to Historical Method" in "Sources of the Jesus Tradition: Separating History from Myth"


Title: Mythtic Pizza and Cold-cocked Scholars
Location: http://rjosephhoffmann.wordpress.com/2012/04/23/mythtic-pizza-and-cold-cocked-scholars/
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Ehrman Trashtalks Mythicism

Title: News from the Freethought Ghetto
Location: http://rjosephhoffmann.wordpress.com/2012/04/29/news-from-the-freethought-ghetto/
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Ehrman’s Dubious Replies (Round One)

Title: The Jesus Process: A Consultation on the Historical Jesus
Location: http://rjosephhoffmann.wordpress.com/2012/05/22/the-jesus-process-a-consultation-on-the-historical-jesus/
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Not the Impossible Faith


Title: Proving What?
Location: http://rjosephhoffmann.wordpress.com/2012/05/29/proving-what/
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Proving History and Sources of the Jesus Tradition

Title: The Case: 13 Key, Unarguable Principles
Location: http://rjosephhoffmann.wordpress.com/2012/06/08/the-case-13-key-unarguable-principles/
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Proving History



Author: James Patrick Holding ("Tektonics")

Updates: (custom google search)

Title: Alexander of Abonuteichos and Christianity/Jesus
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/alex01.html
Type: Web article
Merit: So-so
Target: Kooks and Quacks of the Roman Empire: A Look into the World of the Gospels

  • Argument: Holding: "Had Alexander stopped asking for drachma, and started seriously asking for pledges of souls and proclaimed himself sole and universal deity to the exclusion of Roman gods, we can be sure he would have had to pass some higher level of muster. Alex's story also illustrates what happens to flash-in-the-pan religions -- and leads us to note that this obviously did not happen to Christianity, while it clearly should have if indeed there was nothing substantive to it."
  • Response: Carrier claims we know more about Alexander of Abonuteichos than we do about Jesus and Holding presupposes that there is a direct comparison of the two even going so far as to quote someone else incredulously asking how one hides 5,000 loafs of bread under their cloak to pull of the feeding of the thousands. The overall point is that of general credulity. Jesus may well have pulled off much more "tame" miracles than the stories we have about him. People can be duped in person or urban legend style (and other ways as well). Holding notes the different styles of success for various religious movements that have been successful, but Christianity's method seems to be one that merely got away with some appealing tall tales about its founder that probably didn't have a lot to do with the actual events. In a world where a god does not exist, surely one flavor of religion could pull this kind of thing off.

Title: Why I Don't Buy Skeptical Excuses for Disbelief
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/uz/vector01.html
Type: Web article
Merit: So-so
Target: Why I Don't Buy the Resurrection Story

Title: Why I Don't Buy Skeptical Excuses for Disbelief, Part 2
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/uz/vector02.html
Type: Web article
Merit: So-so
Target: Why I Don't Buy the Resurrection Story

Title: Why I Don't Buy Skeptical Excuses for Disbelief, Part 3
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/uz/vector03.html
Type: Web article
Merit: So-so
Target: Why I Don't Buy the Resurrection Story

Title: On a Skeptic's Hero
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/qt/rufus.html
Type: Web article
Merit: So-so
Target: On Musonius Rufus: A Brief Essay

Title: Did Luke Copy from Josephus?
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/lukeandjoe.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: Luke and Josephus

Title: Thallus By Two
Authors: "Wildcat," J. P. Holding, and Glenn Miller
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/qt/thallcomp.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: Thallus: An Analysis

Title: A Comparison on the Census Issue
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/af/censuscheck.html
Type: Web article
Merit: So-so
Target: The Date of the Nativity in Luke

Title: On the Rubicon Crossing and the Resurrection
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/qt/rubicon.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: Why I Don't Buy the Resurrection Story


Title: Introduction
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarrx.html (see also: http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/carrierindex.html)
Type: Web article
Merit: So-so
Target: Was Christianity Too Improbable to be False?

  • Argument: Holding sets out to poison the well in his framing of his exchange with Carrier by dredging up past misrepresentations of his exchanges with Carrier.
  • Response: Holding merely demonstrates his propensity for unnecessary slander (I actually have a PDF of this with all the slander highlighted in red like Christmas tree lights), his ability to be be amazingly uncharitable to the understanding of his opponent's actual arguments (which is abysmally easy to demonstrate), and his gross bias in approaching the issue. Who in their right mind expects to be taken seriously in the history of arguing about history with a claim like this: "...it is not true that even I, as [Carrier] says, 'must admit that the odds of Christianity becoming successful without being true could not be zero even on all of his own assumptions.' I admit no such thing and never will." He seems to be saying subsequently that the odds are 99.99% in favor of the resurrection being true and might as well be 100% (to attain the status of a genuine "impossible" faith), but even so, what other historical conclusion can hope to achieve such probability? The resurrection wouldn't just be a miracle, his case for the resurrection in and of itself would be a miracle! There's hardly even a reason to continue reading his defense against Carrier's criticisms.

Title: Point 1: Crucifixion
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr1.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/1cruc1.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 01. Who Would Buy One Crucified?

  • Argument: Carrier is making things up when it comes to showing a cultural diversity where a crucified savor could possibly be appealing without overwhelming evidence of vindication for that claim.
  • Response: In order to establish the hold of his argument Holding must maintain (against Carrier's appeal to common sense and evidence from the time period) that a collectivistic honor/shame society was rigidly unanimous in their values to an extent that would make Orson Welles' thought police (from the book 1984) blush.

Title: Point 2: Geographic Associations
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr2.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/2loc1.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 02. Who Would Follow a Man from Galilee?

Title: Point 3: Resurrection
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr3.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/3rez.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 03. Was Resurrection Deemed Impossible?


Title: Is the Story of Zalmoxis a Parallel for Christianity?
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/zalmoxis.html
Type: Web article
Merit: So-so
Target: Why I Don't Buy the Resurrection Story: The Main Argument, and 03. Was Resurrection Deemed Impossible?

  • Argument: Holding: "Carrier's parallel remains simplistic and vastly overstated."
  • Response: Carrier: "In this case, his argument against me is simply bizarre. He says that a story about a man who died and came back to life and founded a religion wherein believers went to eternal paradise has no parallel with Christianity. That is to engage in some pathetic special pleading, and I think it is patently absurd to any reasonable observer." So rather than blame his own obtuseness, Holding in another place claims: "...Carrier decreed that he "saw no reason" to respond to me any further. This decree was transparently self-serving, as Carrier had repeatedly shown himself incapable of even the most basic defenses of his arguments or of understanding those I put forward in response. (You can see the classic example of this here.) However, in time Carrier "saw" a "reason" to reply to me that involved dollar signs..." Holding has pulled some amazing feats of hairsplitting to get out of the brute connections here. Remember when Holding said it wasn't "really" a resurrection? And that it wasn't "really" the same kind of heaven? Remember when he expected every element to correspond and for "Zalmoxianity" to be equally successful as Christianity? Yeah...so lame... Most reasonable people would equate "place where they would live for aye in the enjoyment of every conceivable good" with the *gist* of the generic term "heaven" or "eternal paradise" without assuming some insidious conspiracy on Carrier's part to disprove Christianity. Yet Holding insists: "The details are in the devil: they show that there is no comparison, other than by illicit collapsing of terminology and by unsubstantiated speculation." Apparently you just have to arbitrarily see HUGE differences where there aren't any to agree with Holding and find Carrier grossly dishonest and just out for the big skeptical bucks. At WORST, it's just a difference of opinion on how close is close enough to matter, and hardly the grounds for Holding's accusations here. See this PDF for a highlighted and point by point commenting tour of Holding's article and judge for yourself (you'll have to download it to view the comments).

Title: Point 4: Newness
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr4.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/4new.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 04. Was the New Always Bad?

Title: Point 5: Ethical Demands
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr5.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/5moral.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 05. Who Would Join a Moral Order?

Title: Point 6: The Intolerance of Christianity
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr6.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/6intol.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 06. Who Would Join an Intolerant Cult?

Title: Point 7: Historical Connections
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr7.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/7hist.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 07. Was Christianity Highly Vulnerable to Inspection and Disproof?

Title: Point 8: Martyrs and Persecution
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr8.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/8mart.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 08. Who Would Want to be Persecuted?

Title: Point 9: Incarnation
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr9.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/9incar.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 09. Was the Idea of an Incarnate God Really Repugnant?

Title: Point 10: Class Distinctions
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr10.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/10class.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 10. Would Groupthinkers Never Switch Groups?

Title: Point 11: Women as Witnesses
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr11.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/11women.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 11. Did No One Trust Women?

Title: Point 12: The Bumpkin Factor
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr12.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/12bump.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 12. Did No One Respect the Opinions of Uneducated Laymen?

Title: Point 13: Secrecy and Privacy
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr13.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/13sec.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 13. Would the Facts Be Checked?

Title: Point 14: The "Ignorance" of Jesus
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr14.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/14ig.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: Was the Apparent Ignorance of Jesus a Problem?


Title: Point 15: Other Factors
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nowayjose_CC2.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/15misc.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Lame
Target: 15. Who Would Follow an Executed Criminal?

Title: Point 16: Miscellany
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr16.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/16misc.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 16. Were Christian Teachings Too Radical for Anyone to Buy?

Title: Point 17: Critical Examination
Authors: "Jezz"
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr17.html, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/17crit.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: 17. Did the Earliest Christians Encourage Critical Inquiry?

Title: Point 18: Conversion Numbers
Authors: Jason, John Sparks, J. P. Holding, and others
Location: http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43795, http://www.tektonics.org/ezine/tifz/18numb.html
Type: Web forum
Merit: Important
Target: 18. How Successful Was Christianity?

Title: Conclusion
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarrz.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Lame
Target:

Title: Point 19 --
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr19.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Lame
Target: 19. Responses to Critics

Title: The Exegetical Absurdity of the "Two Body" Thesis
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/tomb/carrier11.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5


Title: The Monumental Manipulation of the Empty Tomb Story
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/tomb/carrier12.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5


Title: The Impossibility of Theft
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/tomb/carrier10.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 9


Title: Richard Carrier's Fight With a Demon!?
Location: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?s=b7d7352013c3c93b2c6c78ee844fe138&p=1086131&postcount=1
Type: Web forum
Merit: Lame
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, pg. 185

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Carrier's rejection of his encounter with a demon demonstrates how biased he is.
  • Content: Hypocritically rejects Carrier's eyewitness testimony in favor of his Preteristic worldview.
  • Response: J. P. Holding's Leaning Tower of Preterism

Title: King Me!
Location: http://jpholding.blogspot.com/2008/12/king-me.html
Type: blog
Merit: Lame
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5

  • Consult:
  • Argument: A Christian fiction writer uses the same "awful" argument Carrier does as a spin on a rapture plot device where the bodies of Christians everywhere drop dead and Carrier should be ashamed.
  • Content: It's Holding's laundry list of things he's done that day and briefly takes a moment to slander Carrier.
  • Response: Should Carrier also be ashamed of the folks in antiquity like Origen that share the interpretation as well? Slander and the genetic fallacy will not do. No new non-fallacious counter-argument was made and so nothing further needs to be addressed. If the argument is not "awful," then Holding should be ashamed that he cannot recognize even more validation for Carrier's perspective since more people, including "unbiased" Christians can easily get the "wrong" idea about what the passages in Paul mean.

Title: Debate: Textual Reliability of the New Testament
Location: http://www.tektonics.org/textual.html
Type: Web article.
Merit: Important
Target: Debating J. P. Holding

Title: Debating the Textually Critical
Location: http://tektonforge.blogspot.com/2011/05/debating-textually-critical.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Debating J. P. Holding

  • Argument: Holding claims that Carrier's side of the debate even if completely true had no impact on his views and that secular scholars like Bart Ehrman agree with him that no fundamental doctrine is in jeopardy because of textual issues. He also claims Carrier was free to bring up a doctrine or two if he had wanted.
  • Response: [pending]



Author: Anthony Horvath ("Athanatos Christian Apologetics Ministry")

Updates: (http://sntjohnny.com/front/?s=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: A kick in the shins of Christian ‘Internet Bloggers’ too
Location: http://sntjohnny.com/front/a-kick-in-the-shins-of-christian-internet-bloggers-too/67.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target:

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Horvath reports that Lee Strobel records that Mike Licona seems to be saying that Carrier should be laughed at for trusting the information taken from a 16th century Jewish mystic.
  • Content: Overall, a remarkably honest and fair assessment of the "trust your favorite scholar" politics in apologetic reading.
  • Response:

Title: Will Antony Flew Become a Christian? Will He come to Christ?
Location: http://sntjohnny.com/front/will-antony-flew-become-a-christian-will-he-come-to-christ/74.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Antony Flew Considers God...Sort Of, Antony Flew's Bogus Book , and Craig the Annoyed

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Claims to have settled the issue of whether Carrier has special access to Anthony Flew, because of his own letter correspondence with Flew.
  • Content: Anticipates Flew's book, brings up meaningless point against Carrier, mockingly suggests the neoatheists can't come up with their own arguments with Flew out of the picture, and then claims the real issue is about saving Flew's soul.
  • Response:

Title: Antony Flew Under Attack by Atheists
Location: http://sntjohnny.com/front/antony-flew-under-attack-by-atheists/95.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Antony Flew Considers God...Sort Of, Antony Flew's Bogus Book , and Craig the Annoyed

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Claims Carrier's interview with Flew is "desperate" and doesn't count as Flew speaking for himself
  • Content: Blasts an atheist site for coming to premature value judgments about Flew's conversion before his book comes out.
  • Response:

Title: In Defense of Antony Flew’s Positions Against Richard Carrier’s Slanderous Chutzpah
Location: http://sntjohnny.com/front/in-defense-of-antony-flews-positions-against-richard-carriers-slanderous-chutzpah/223.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Antony Flew Considers God...Sort Of, Antony Flew's Bogus Book , and Craig the Annoyed

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Presents a fairly compelling case for Carrier's "conspiracy mongering" in regards to Flew's "bogus" book.
  • Content: Quotes Carrier vs. Horvath's own letter correspondence with Flew to show Flew knew what was going in each section of it.
  • Response:

Title: They’ve resorted to playing dirty: do they feel proud?
Location: http://sntjohnny.com/front/theyve-resorted-to-playing-dirty-do-they-feel-proud/231.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target:

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Claims that other atheists are pulling pranks to make google searches for his site mess up and wonders if Carrier will disown the behavior.
  • Content:
  • Response:

Title: The Silence of the Wolves: Atheists Turn Docile in Face of the Facts
Location: http://sntjohnny.com/front/the-silence-of-the-wolves-atheists-turn-docile-in-face-of-the-facts/752.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Antony Flew Considers God...Sort Of, Antony Flew's Bogus Book , and Craig the Annoyed

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Horvath: "...the book substantially reflects the actual views of Dr. Flew..." based on "...yours truly had been in correspondence with Dr. Flew even before I knew there was a book coming out and in those letters Dr. Flew recounted for me various things that he believed. Many of these showed up in his book." "...Carrier- who has been informed of my evidence (I informed him) – has not withdrawn his argument or even attempted to rebut it."
  • Content:
  • Response:



I





J



Author: Dennis Jensen ("Encounter")

Updates: (custom google search)

Title: Resurrection vs Caesar crossing the Rubicon and historicity of gospels
Location: http://home.earthlink.net/~enc11/Enc9.html#JExisted
Type: Web article
Merit: So-so
Target: The Rubicon Analogy



Author: Jime (non-Christian theist, "Subversive Thinking")

Updates: (http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/search?q=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: Sense & Goodness Without God. Philosopher David Wood critically review Richard Carrier's book
Location: http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2008/12/sense-goodness-without-god-philosopher.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Sense and Goodness Without God

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Carrier's monkey butt argument doesn't apply because a god is supposed to be immaterial, makes an analogy to illustrate the point, and Carrier's claims about the multiverse lack extraordinary evidence.
  • Content:
  • Response: The Biblical god would have many physical manifestations even if his default state is immaterial (see response to 5th Jime entry). Jime's "if Carrier is a good person, he'd donate money to Africa" argument fails to take into consideration that a more charitable reading of Carrier's argument against the prima facie non-existence of the Christian god would entail that we know about Carrier's activities in general (rather than just one isolated random test for a person of limited abilities). If we are confronted with the fact that Carrier never demonstrates any discernible good behavior, it doesn't mean anything to call him a good person. Despite Jime's misreading of Carrier's comments on the multiverse, Carrier is not asserting dogmatically that any multiverse theory is true. He's explaining what it conceptually would entail if it were true, in terms of its relevance to the question of eternality. I'm assuming Jime has just read David Wood's review of Sense and Goodness, and not the book itself.

Title: Prometheus Books and the pseudoskeptical perversions: another insane and frightening possible consequences of metaphysical naturalism and materialism
Location: http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2009/01/prometheus-books-and-pseudoskeptical.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Sense and Goodness Without God

  • Consult:
  • Argument: A quote of Carrier's justifies suicide.
  • Content: Accuses Prometheus books of endorsing all kinds of immorality.
  • Response: Duh. Can't suicide be justifiable sometimes?

Title:The mind is a sofware and the brain a computer? A critique of computationist philosophy of mind
Location: http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2009/07/mind-is-sofware-and-brain-computer.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Sense and Goodness Without God

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Claims Carrier, "assumes that the mind-pattern is different from the brain," and that Carrier is wrong that in principle that the mind pattern can be made out of other materials. Jime says, "...try to make a fully functional computer with sand; or try to make a baseball bat with hot water." Also claims that atheists are trying to "steal" the beliefs of Christians by postulating immortality in a computer.
  • Content: Jime actually has the balls to say, "In fact, such view promotes unrealistic expectations, wild speculations and childish fantasies [...] Maybe Keith accepts Carrier's Star Trek fantasies of surviving and being immortal inside a computer..."
  • Response: Patterns are independent of any particular material they are assembled from, but this should not be mistaken for the idea that they are actually independent of matter entirely. So there is no inconsistency on Carrier's part and he's not advocating dualism. Jime is correct in a meaningless way that we can't necessarily make any pattern out of any material. Some materials incidentally won't allow for certain kinds of formations. But in principle, as Carrier said, all that is required for his claim to be true is that the brain could be made from at least some other applicable materials (although technically, there might be some pattern out there which incidentally can only be represented in explicitly only one material). Jime is being erroneously possessive of generic ideas that Christianity did not invent and does not own. It is no crime to want to live forever. If humans are one day clever enough to pull it off, what does that have to do with Christianity?

Title: Keith Augustine on Douglas Stokes' view on survival of conciousness
Location: http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2009/07/douglas-stokes-and-survival-of.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Sense and Goodness Without God

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Augustine is wrong "if Carrier is right, Keith's opinion that the mind-body dependence is so strong and consistent would be undermined, since that "the mind-pattern" could exist outside of a biological brain and, therefore, would be not wholly dependent (for its existence and functioning) on it."
  • Content: Claims Carrier inconsistently defends mind/body dualism, because mental patterns can be copied into computer brains.
  • Response: I agree that Augustine is wrong if Carrier is right. Btw, Carrier is right. (see the response to above entry)

Title: Richard Carrier and the Blue Monkeys Flying Out of My Butt argument for God' nonexistence
Location: http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2009/12/richard-carrier-and-blue-monkeys-flying.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Sense and Goodness Without God

  • Consult: Jime brings this up again in, "Comments by Laurence M. Krauss (now worldwide known as Mr. 2+2=5 atheist genius) about his recent debate with William Lane Craig"
  • Argument: Carrier's monkey butt argument does not apply to a god because gods are immaterial.
  • Content:
  • Response: Regardless of whether Jime appreciates Carrier's sense of humor, Carrier's argument is against the type of popular deity that has many physical opportunities to manifest in everyday life. For Christianity (Jime is not a Christian, btw), there is the Incarnation, the pre-Incarnate "angel of the Lord," and the various times Biblical characters like Moses had a visual encounter. There are also all sorts of opportunities for measurable physical effects of miracles which we also don't see. There is a whole cluster of physical claims that go along with Biblical Christianity regardless of whether the Christian god's default state is incoherently "immaterial." Hence, Carrier's argument applies. The obvious prima facie question, "Well where is he?" always confronts a long list of implausible excuses. Even if some of them (or even MOST of them) might be justified for whatever reason, they can't ALL be justified. Or at least, Carrier's argument is that this evidential state of affairs is unreasonable and it is more reasonable to dismiss this specified claim based on the no-show status, just like the blue monkeys that clearly aren't flying out of Carrier's butt. Jime also fails to understand that the Carrier's-butt-connection is relevant to characterizing exactly the type of monkeys we are talking about, just as the specific claims of certain brands of theism fail to sport any kind of up front confirmation. Jime got this correct the first time around. Not the second and I'm not sure why. Further, Jime is taking the opportunity to ridicule what he thinks is a childish argument that overly characterizes Carrier (even though he admits this isn't Carrier's foundational argument against theism), but he should be confronting Carrier's arguments against abstract entities (found elsewhere in Sense and Goodness, if he'd read it) rather than grinding his axes against atheists, imo.

Title: Richard Carrier on Alex Rosemberg article The Disenchanted Naturalist’s Guide to Reality (Part 1)
Location: http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2010/02/richard-carrier-on-alex-rosemberg.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Rosenberg on Naturalism

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Jime doesn't understand why evolution would give us "real" meaning in life. Claims Carrier only asserts that science has proven that psychological purposes are real. Claims science is unable to tackle the issue of meaning, purpose, and morality. Complains that we are not free to choose our purposes if evolution has done that for us. Implies that evolution generated purpose isn't real purpose if it happened on accident. Notes that animals have a similar purpose in life (to live it, and live it well) that does not require reason. Complains Carrier's definition of meaning in life is overly crude. Claims desires cannot be the basis for "real" meaning in life because they are subjective. Claims we have no way to justify certain desires over other desires.
  • Content:
  • Response:

Title: Richard Carrier on Alex Rosemberg article The Disenchanted Naturalist’s Guide to Reality (Part 2)
Location: http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2010/02/richard-carrier-on-alex-rosemberg_10.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Rosenberg on Naturalism

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Hume's guillotine disproves Carrier's moral paradigm.
  • Content:
  • Response:

Title: Richard Carrier on Alex Rosemberg article The Disenchanted Naturalist’s Guide to Reality (Part 3)
Location: http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2010/02/richard-carrier-on-alex-rosemberg_18.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Rosenberg on Naturalism

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Jime: (on point 4) "...saying that my choice is "free" because it was MY choice is a clear fallacy, a rhetorical sleigh[t] of hand inten[d]ed to fool unwary and unthinking people into the idea that determinism is actually compatible with free will." (on point 5) "...if the contents of consciousness are illusory (in the sense mentioned by Blackmore), and color experience is part of that illusion, is not logical Rosemberg's argument that we shouldn't take the results of introspection at face value? Is not the right position (like Rosemberg argues) tot take a pause when considering the qualia (including color) contents of such illusory experience?"
  • Content: Attacks Carrier for misrepresenting Rosemberg's points and praises naturalists like Rosemberg for being honest with the implications of naturalism.
  • Response:

Title: Richard Carrier on Alex Rosemberg article The Disenchanted Naturalist’s Guide to Reality (Part 4)
Location: http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2010/02/richard-carrier-on-alex-rosenberg.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Rosenberg on Naturalism

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Jime: (on point 6) "...essential to the epistemic notion of beliefs is that they're true or false in virtue of their intentionality and propositional content (not in virtue of being a brain phenomenon or physical fact). Therefore, if intentionally doesn't exist, and beliefs don't refer to anything outside of the mind, then it's impossible that the brain operates on beliefs (that is, in virtue of beliefs having an intentional content)." "But note that if the moon is defined and understood as the Earth's natural satellite composed of rock, then discovering that such satellite is not made of rock but of iron refutes the existence of the moon according to the previous definition. Such "natural satellite composed of rock" would not exist at all." "Precisely, this property of beliefs as being "about" something, and therefore true or false in virtue of the correspondence with such "something", it's essential to the epistemic evaluation of beliefs as beliefs (and not as psychological or neurophysiolocal phenomena alone)."
  • Content: Also takes some stabs at what Jime calls "pseudo-skeptics" in his pejorative analogies.
  • Response:

Title: Richard Carrier on Alex Rosenberg article The Disenchanted Naturalist Guide to Reality (Part 5)
Location: http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2010/05/richard-carrier-on-alex-rosenberg.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Rosenberg on Naturalism

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Jime: "Rosenberg identifies the person or "self" with a concrete non-spatial entity with a point of view, while Carrier identifies the person with a "pattern of arrangement of the brain". So Carrier is not refuting Resenberg's view but simply ASSERTING a personal alternative on the conception of the person."
  • Content: Claims 1. Carrier straw mans Rosenberg's argument, that Carrier quotes Rosenberg out of context (Carrier cuts off the part about naturalists having to pretend like a "concrete non-spatial entity" exists), that Carrier begs the question rather than even addressing Rosenberg's actual argument (by asserting that the person is the pattern, rather than proving it), that 2. Carrier is logically inconsistent when it comes to the claim that destroying the brain destroys the person (because Carrier also believes mental patterns may one day be uploaded into computers), similarly Jime claims that Carrier's definition of person (the pattern of the brain) and his claim that mental patterns being made out of any materials is contradictory, he claims that Carrier can't address Rosenberg's actual argument because naturalism is false, 3. goes off on a tangent about Richard Dawkins' inability to defend moral arguments, says he has no respect for naturalists, and that it is his moral obligation to oppose the intellectual fraud and moral abomination that is naturalism.
  • Response:

Title: Paul Kurtz resigns from the pseudoskeptical organization Center for Inquiry (CFI) due to that group's intolerance and dogmatism
Location: http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2010/11/paul-kurtz-resigns-from-pseudoskeptical.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Sense and Goodness Without God pg. 269

  • Argument: Jime: "This atheistic irrationality possibly also explain why atheists tend to become social outcasts in America and other societies, and this is not my opinion, but the own confession of Richard Carrier, a champion of atheistic apologetics and propagandist for metaphysical naturalism: "as atheists know better than anyone else on the planet, if you say you don’t believe you often become a social outcast" (Sense and Goodness without God, p. 269) Carrier is right, but the deeper question is: Why do atheists become social outcasts? My answer: because hard-core atheists, materialists and naturalistic ideologues, like the members of CFI that Kurtz is criticizing, are irrational, hostile, socially inept and spiritually negative people. Like it or not, this is the truth."
  • Response: The other half of the equation is that the majority of theists are not so tolerant of people disagreeing with them.

Title: According to William Lane Craig, Richard Dawkins made the worst argument against God in the History of Western Thought
Location: http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2011/06/according-to-william-lane-craig-richard.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Sense and Goodness Without God

  • Content: Jime still can't get over Carrier's flying blue butt monkeys argument that sought to show at face value not seeing any gods is a decent reason to suppose there aren't any gods and Jime asserts that it is worse than what William Lane Craig calls Richard Dawkins' worst argument against theism concerning who designed the designer.

Title: Agnostic New Testament scholar and historian Bart Ehrman humilliates The Infidel Guy about the existence of Jesus
Location: http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2011/12/agnostic-new-testament-scholar-and.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target:

Title: The nature of a Cumulative Argument and the existence of God
Location: http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2012/03/nature-of-cumulative-argument-and.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Sense and Goodness without God

  • Response: Jime isn't responding to Carrier directly, but he does quote from Sense and Goodness without bothering to note that Carrier's book actually provides a full refutation of the points for theism that Jime brings up in addition to providing a cumulative case for metaphysical naturalism.