Because that’s rational.

You have introduced to a rigor in history that I have never understood previously. Certainly, this all mostly new to me. But it is very interesting to read a thorough and intellectually honest case.

They all suck in various ways. There simply is no translation that can substitute for reading the original language. But I tend to prefer the ASV and NIV, because they are usually (but not always) more literal and researched. Sometimes it doesn’t matter (as when I can confirm that what, say, the RSV says is correct, I might cite it just for convenience).

I developed a liking for the ESV, English Standard Version, but have tried others, finding it difficult to choose because I can’t appreciate the subtle differences between them as a professional would.
Any guidance or explanations would be tremendously appreciated.

I’m aware of his rebuttal. It is not very intelligible, and when it even makes sense it fails to respond to what I actually argued. I think anyone who reads my article and then his rebuttal won’t need to be told which is sound.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/eric_laupot/re-carrier.html

Kind of funny how the both of you seem to write respective criticism with six years intervals. 🙂

Only if he has no regard for the truth and doesn’t believe in owning up to his mistakes and correcting them. And if that is who he is, that’s precisely the kind of enemy I want to have. Because they always lose. But if he is a better man than that, then he won’t like me, but he won’t be so petty and immature as to make himself my lifelong enemy. He’ll just do a better job next time. And admit that he did a lousy job this time.

Hector Avalos at Iowa State might be regarded as a mythicist…? At least a skeptic as to the actual historical existence of Jesus of Nazareth.