In lieu of my forthcoming page with links containing relevant studies on the figure of Jesus, I thought I should post up some very important PDF’s from Richard Carrier.
The first link is a paper Richard gave at the Jesus Project conference and is an introduction to Bayes Theorem and how it relates to the study of the figure of Jesus.
He addresses these criteria:
Example List of Popular Historicity Criteria
Incomplete List (names often differ, criteria often overlap – here are 17; there are two or three dozen):
- Dissimilarity – dissimilar to independent Jewish or Christian precedent
- Embarrassment – if it was embarrassing, it must be true
- Coherence – coheres with other confirmed data
- Multiple Attestation – attested in more than one independent source
- Contextual Plausibility – plausible in a Jewish or Greco-Roman cultural context
- Historical Plausibility – coheres with a plausible historical reconstruction
- Natural Probability – coheres with natural science (etc.)
- Explanatory Credibility – historicity better explains later traditions
- Oral Preservability – capable of surviving oral transmission
- Fabricatory Trend – isn’t part of known trends in fabrication or embellishment
- Least Distinctiveness – the simpler version is the more historical
- Vividness of Narration – the more vivid, the more historical
- Crucifixion – explains why Jesus was crucified
- Greek Context – if whole context suggests parties speaking Greek
- Aramaic Context – if whole context suggests parties speaking Aramaic
- Textual Variance – the more invariable a tradition, the more historical
- Discourse Features – if J’s speeches cohere in style but differ fr. surrounding text
In his chapter in the collection Sources of the Jesus Tradition, Richard shows how these criteria cannot hold up to logical scrutiny. In this PDF, however, he only addresses a few to show the value of Bayes Theorem as a tool by which historians can determine whether their arguments are as strong as they think they are.
His second paper is on the twelve axioms of historical method. He writes:
Though the following axioms pertain specifically to the theories and work discussed in my book On the Historicity of Jesus Christ, they apply generally to all historical inquiry. These twelve axioms represent the epistemological foundation of rational-empirical history.
To which he clarifies:
For the epistemology underlying these axioms and the concepts and assumptions within them, see my book Sense and Goodness without God (esp. pp. 21-62 and pp. 211-52) and my essay “Epistemological End Game” (29 November 2006) at http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2006/11/epistemological-end-game.html. I further discuss the epistemology of history in my essay “Experimental History” (28 June 2007) at http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2007/07/experimentalhistory.
Richard also reminds us of the value of using formal logic in historical studies:
Proper historical argument consists of seeking this growth of consensus, and entails everything this requires (diplomatically, rhetorically, and procedurally—hence the purpose of peer review, and my recommended twelve rules below). This process cannot be bypassed, as specialists in a field are the most qualified to assess an argument in that field, so if they cannot be persuaded, no one should be (unless their resistance can be proven, not merely assumed, to have other motives than truth-seeking). Conversely, if they are persuaded, everyone else has a very compelling reason to agree (unless, again, their acceptance can be proven, not merely assumed, to have other motives than truth-seeking). This is the social function and purpose of having such experts and specialists in the first place.
These papers are highly recommended and will get some level of prominence on the forthcoming page. I would like to note that Richard’s position on the historical figure of Jesus is one of agnosticism and, as far as I am concerned, the most appropriate. However, that does not mean that a historical Jesus scholar can’t use Bayes Theorem and develop an argument which is sound for the historicity of the figure of Jesus, that is to say, it is possible that, using Bayes, Jesus’ historicity can be established. As of this time, however, it has not been done.