If you mean CHRESTUS, it is linked with an ad in the right margin somewhere.

G’day Richard, you were talking about an app. Is that nonetheless searchable on this site?

I do not believe Eisenmann is sane. But regardless of how that may turn out, his work is as atrociously illogical and delusional as we might find from any any intelligent but whackadoo conspiracy theorist. And completely useless in result. It’s in the same class as Joseph Atwill (they use many of the same bogus methods), the only difference being Eisenmann actually knows the ancient languages, so he can spin even wilder webs of nonsense than Atwill can.

Hi Dr. Carrier, what do you think of the quite hefty work of Dr. Robert Eisenman and the historicity of James, the brother of Jesus, (the Christ)?

One should take them in the order of their own greatest interest.

But if all else is equal in that score, then one logical order would be to first decide which general subject to cover first, history or philosophy, and then do the order as follows (removing duplicated courses accordingly):

Philosophy:

1. Critical Thinking for the 21st Century
2. Developing & Defending Naturalism as a Worldview
3. Science & Philosophy of Free Will
4. Moral Reasoning from Theory to Practice
5. Counter-Apologetics: Debunking Christianity & Islam

History:

1. Historical Methods for Everyone
2. Ancient Atheism: Our Western Freethought Heritage
3. Ancient Science & Technology
4. New Testament Studies for Everyone
5. Counter-Apologetics: Debunking Christianity & Islam
6. Questioning or Defending the Historicity of Jesus

For someone who wanted to take more than one of the courses above. Would you suggest any particular order? Thanks.

Obsolete and outdated, methodologically, factually, and in its conclusions.

What do you think of the body of work of Joseph Campbell?

Thanks
Arun

Answering that question occupies a significant part of my book On the Historicity of Jesus (see, particularly, chapters 4, 5, and 10). And my answer is thoroughly evidence-based, and indeed even mainstream: because historians have already answered this question for every other religion this exact same sequence of events happened to (Euhemerism was actually fashionable at that time). “Why would Egyptians invent the ethereal god Osiris? Why would they then later invent the claim that he was once a historical pharaoh who died and was resurrected on Earth? Why would they then teach initiated members that this was all just a metaphor for a cosmic execution and resurrection that never happened on Earth?” The answers to those questions, are entirely the same as for Jesus. Likewise numerous other gods with similar religious histories. Indeed, in context, Jesus isn’t in any way unusual in these respects; he is actually a late comer to what was already a going fad of the time. The rest comes from already-existing trends in Judaism, which I likewise document.

I am a lifelong Catholic, who went to a Catholic school where we were always taught about history, and well some of the blatant contradictions that were apparent. (i.e. Jesus’s resemblance to other savior Gods)

However, in adulthood, and as a person who is a professional criminal investigator, it is the why that gets me. Why would Paul, whoever the author is write such stories as history celestial or not? Why would others propagate such stories, because surely Paul was not alone, and why then does Mark adopt such authoritative narratives on it? What was their end goal?

As a Christian in free fall of his faith how could it be that so many people bought into these narratives in antiquity?

-Jay