Posted: Jul 19, 2013 2:19 pm
by Blood
neilgodfrey wrote:
Blood wrote: I can already think of one excuse: the peer reviewers Carrier recommended were liberals or radicals who were already sympathetic to the Christ Myth theory.


Isn't it the argument of the likes of Ehrman, McGrath, Hurtado, et al that "no-one" qualified in the area believes Jesus didn't exist. So if there really are are indeed liberals or radicals sympathetic to the Christ Myth theory and who are qualified to peer review the book then we have to think that we were being misinformed all along . . . . .


Thomas L. Thompson is one who is sympathetic to the Christ Myth theory. I'm sure there are other European scholars who are open to the idea. The defenders of the faith will try to belittle the book by saying that the peer review must have been done by radicals in Europe, not sensible and moderate scholars in the USA.