tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5071813.post8301110091749038610..comments2024-03-25T02:16:16.247-07:00Comments on Christ the Tao: Richard Carrier's bizarre preemptive personal attacks: my responseUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5071813.post-40921235065105999312014-07-29T01:06:04.167-07:002014-07-29T01:06:04.167-07:00Hey on the support for atheism+ from Carrier, anot...Hey on the support for atheism+ from Carrier, another good criticism is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95LG9crl3yo&src_vid=yZ69BhfiC6g&feature=iv&annotation_id=annotation_599507<br /><br />It shows how Carrier shows his support for his 3 moral principles: "compassion", "integrity", and "reasonableness". He sure knows how to divide "us" from "them" as he noted on his blog. I definitely have seen how nice Mr. Marshall, William Lane Craig, Bart Ehrman, and others whom Carrier has insulted, are. Now perhaps a few impolite remarks may come out, but Carrier is a factory for this kind of irrational and unreasonable commentary. His sarcastic way of expression also does not support the idea that he is simply trying to reason and help people see his perspective. Humility is something I have not seen from him when he talks about things he disagrees with in public. It does go beyond reason and into hardcore atheistic apologetics. For sure he can be intense, however, he really should show that he can be civil with those he disagrees with. He is hurting his reputation more by getting too personal when clearly there is no need for that. I hope he can come to see that one day.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5071813.post-60748142174921173012014-07-29T00:15:31.743-07:002014-07-29T00:15:31.743-07:00I thoroughly enjoyed this post by Mr. Marshall sin...I thoroughly enjoyed this post by Mr. Marshall since I was one of those Richard Carrier attacked recently. It was a quite funny to see him flinch at my criticisms when we wrote a review of my online shopping mall review in his blog without knowing anything about me. I got to see how his mind works with dealing with "unknowns". He of course was off the mark often since I actually agreed with some of the points he thought I was denying, but it sure was a first hand look at how he interprets "sources" and also how much he impresses his own biases into what he reads. For sure he has some issues since he should be more professional and disagree like academics often do - in a respectable fashion. The fact that even Bart Ehrman, an agnostic, and other freethinkers have been abused by him is telling that we should obey the infallible word of Carrier's metaphysical naturalistic apologetics, even though it contaminate his reliability on history, society, and even religion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5071813.post-83379884765282498912014-07-27T06:47:24.492-07:002014-07-27T06:47:24.492-07:00That should say his lack of scholarly rigor in his...That should say his lack of scholarly rigor in his arguments defending his Mythicist position. <br /><br />Has anyone asked whether the Holocaust is a myth? Is the official death toll a gross exaggeration in Carrier's opinion? <br />Denying Jesus, the man (fully God and fully human), ever existed is confirmation bias of his contempt and hatred of Christians just like Holocaust denial is rooted in antisemitism. Laurahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01240988489934778309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5071813.post-29548455490827618962014-07-26T11:16:55.354-07:002014-07-26T11:16:55.354-07:00https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ69BhfiC6g I hope...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ69BhfiC6g I hope that works. Jump to 7:30 mark to skip the long summary of atheist vs. atheism+ drama that lead up to it. <br />I hope you aren't disappointed that he put a lot more effort into smearing Thunderf00t.<br /><br />Here's an atheist blog http://atheiststoday.com/blogs/reapercussions/?p=108 taking Carrier to task. Can you see how much of the online atheist community thinks about him? Carrier also graciously offered to provide his allies with the "intellectual artillery". <br />Read the comments on the blog. Somebody brings up his lack of scholarly rigor his Christ Denier position;)<br />Just getting caught up on my blog reading. Sorry to jump in late!Laurahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01240988489934778309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5071813.post-21026055374555134042014-07-23T16:03:00.707-07:002014-07-23T16:03:00.707-07:00WOE: Like Carrier, I work with one foot in the sch...WOE: Like Carrier, I work with one foot in the scholarly world, though I prefer to publish for ordinary readers. If scholars as a whole choose to assume that no religion can possibly be true, that God cannot act in the world, then to my mind, that will be a narrowing of scholarly interest and what we can learn about the world, indeed. But many of my acquaintance to not choose to beg the question in that way. <br /><br />As for Carrier's scholarship, is appears impressive at a glance, but much less so when you dig deeper and examine the sources that he cites. I have shown that again and again on this site. I am finding it is just as much true of his long new book, and intend to demonstrate that over the coming month on this site, and then elsewhere. <br /><br />What Carrier thinks about me is really not important to me: he hasn't read my work, and doesn't know what he's talking about, when he makes guesses. (As, I noticed yesterday, another totally false guess he made about me on Amazon.) Which is just as well, because it makes my job so much the easier. Maybe even a little too easy. I am enjoying his book in more than one way. David B Marshallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04029133398946303654noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5071813.post-1739132313689881952014-07-23T15:55:16.044-07:002014-07-23T15:55:16.044-07:00Crude: Richard Carrier is like a box of chocolates...Crude: Richard Carrier is like a box of chocolates. I'll be opening and sampling over the coming month, the sweet and sour. What can I say? I happen to like the ones that are partly nuts. David B Marshallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04029133398946303654noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5071813.post-79449424166862187792014-07-21T00:31:44.176-07:002014-07-21T00:31:44.176-07:00Actually, Carrier's perspective seems largely ...Actually, Carrier's perspective seems largely to be less about concerns for 'scholarship' and more about defending his very tiny island of relevance and authority against anyone who would challenge him. It doesn't particularly matter if the source is religious or not - see his dealing with Ehrman.<br /><br />As for whether Carrier thinks the ideas has serious merit, I think it's far less a matter of 'what Carrier thinks' and far more 'what Carrier wants others to think', or even 'what Carrier wants to be known as wanting others to think'. There's no getting around the fact that he is a pretty small fish in an increasingly big sea, and that he's forever trying to be a big fish - often with unintentionally comedic results. Does anyone remember when he tried to rush to the front of the crowd with the apparently short-lived 'Atheism+', only for the same crowd to metaphorically jump on him and beat him into submission?<br /><br />I suppose the short version is - whatever his intellectual accomplishments are (Note: They're pretty few), as a man Carrier leaves much to be desired. Most people can tell this at a glance, but then again, most people just don't bother glancing at him to begin with. There's more important atheists around, both measured in terms of intellectual weight and public prominence. And, in Carrier's case, there likely always will be.Crudehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5071813.post-21426640850744365752014-07-17T19:52:25.692-07:002014-07-17T19:52:25.692-07:00David, your reaction is understandable from your p...David, your reaction is understandable from your perspective. However from Carrier's perspective his efforts are primarily geared towards secular scholarship. And few in that camp seriously wrestle with whether or not miracles or fantastic claims in general count against a source material or whether or not the normal rules of evidence and inference apply to the NT documents we happen to have without holding out for implausible excuses to save face for divine inspiration of one sort or another. Its all dimishing returns from there making nuance for nuance engagement fairly meaningless. For at least another decade mythicism won't have much use for the religious culture wars Carrier cares deeply about because he has a secular consensus to change. It's happened for Moses and Abraham. We'll see how Jesus fares. I don't expect you to share Carrier's investments along those lines but they more likely model his motivations and priorities. Much more so than thinking maybe he's afraid of your sense of humor. He just doesn't care. Engaging Christian apologetics is an exercise in public education. It's not because Carrier thinks the ideas have any serious merit.Benhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14479224236264150172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5071813.post-31709907847118696012014-07-13T21:56:54.058-07:002014-07-13T21:56:54.058-07:00I thought Carrier's aggressive stance in his d...I thought Carrier's aggressive stance in his dustup with Bart Ehrman awhile back was uncalled for as well.Epicurushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18124103337123692415noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5071813.post-71706139776313765902014-07-12T14:04:13.036-07:002014-07-12T14:04:13.036-07:00I just bought Richard Carrier's new book "...I just bought Richard Carrier's new book "Not the Impossible Faith," and I was struck by the pure, casual nastiness of his commentary. He raked the author of the book he was critiquing over the coals and seemed to be enjoying the experience. He may be a great scholar, and when he is on his own subject matter he is wonderful (to my way of thinking), but I can see that it is definitely not a nice experience being the object of his scathing criticism. I wish I hadn't bought the book, because it brings those negative aspects to the forefront and degrades his character in my eyes.Frank Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04991651335454699100noreply@blogger.com