journal for the study of the historical jesus 15 (2017) 310-346 brill.com/jshj On Richard Carrier’s Doubts A Response to Richard Carrier’s On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt Daniel N. Gullotta Stanford University, Stanford, ca, usa
[email protected] Abstract The Jesus Myth theory is the view that the person known as Jesus of Nazareth had no historical existence. Throughout the centuries this view has had a few but notable ad- herents such as Bruno Bauer, Arthur Drews, G.A. Wells, and Robert M. Price. Recently, Richard Carrier’s work On the Historicity of Jesus (Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2014) has attempted to reexamine the question in a rigorous academic fashion. According to Carrier, within the earliest days of Christianity, Jesus was not understood as a historic- human figure, but rather as a celestial-angelic being, akin to Gabriel in Islam or to Moroni in Mormonism, and only came to be understood as a historical person lat- er. While Carrier’s hypothesis is problematic and unpersuasive, there are several key points related to his work that this article specifically challenges and critiques. * The author would like to express his thanks to the numerous scholars who assisted in the preparation of this response-article, particularly Hector Avalos, Matthew C. Baldwin, Roland Boer, James G. Crossley, Bart D. Ehrman, Ian J. Elmer, Craig A. Evans, Larry W. Hurtado, Simon J. Joseph, Fergus J. King, M. David Litwa, Dale B. Martin, James F. McGr ath, Hugo Méndez, Robert Myles, Judy Stack-Nelson, Robert E.