Not the Impossible Faith

In this book Richard Carrier uses his historian’s skills to counter arguments from J. P. Holding that Christianity was so unlikely to succeed without it being true, so it has to be true. Carrier shows that this assumption is not true. He presents lots of evidence for Christianity succeeding without Christ’s resurrection to have actually occurred. Holding claims that it had to for Christianity to be true. In the process of countering Holding Carrier ask a series of questions divided into eighteen chapters. Some of the questions asked are “Who Would Believe in a Crucified God?”; “Was Resurrection Deemed Impossible?”; “Was Christianity Vulnerable to Disproof?”; “Who Would Want to be Persecuted?”; “Did No One Trust Women?”; and “How Successful Was Christianity?”I have about a handful of comments based on specific parts of the text. Kindle locations are in brackets in front of a quote [].[159] “J. P. Holding is something of a dark horse [not Trojan?] in the in apologetics community. He is very popular online. I have traveled the country, speaking to humanist groups near and far, and I always meet people who know his work.” However, I have never heard of him before reading this book. Then again I do not belong to any humanist groups, and I am not in the habit of reading apologetic works. I find it sufficient to read the reasonable critiques of these works and their authors from qualified scholars, such as Carrier.[846] In explaining why Jews would follow a carpenter [Jesus] Carrier states: “In the Mishnah [the core of the Talmud], Rabbi Gamaliel said, ‘Fitting is learning the Torah along with a craft, for the labor put into the two of them makes one forget sin.’ Indeed ‘all learning of Torah which is not joined with labor is destined to be null and cause sin.’” Modern yeshiva students and rabbis seem not to pay attention to Gamaliel even though they must know about what he said. This would also be true of most priests, ministers, and preachers, but they have the accuse that they never read him. This does not let them of the hook though because Paul set them an example of working at a trade while doing his missionary work.[3307] “It’s human nature to long for peace, love, justice, and the control of your own life. Take all that away from millions of people, and it’s just a matter of time before rebellions break out.” This maybe true of some societies, but if you considered most modern totalitarian states, change often comes about from within the government, as with Gorbachev in the USSR, or force upon them by victors in a war, as with Germany and Japan after World War II.[5118] Speaking of the supposed evidence of Acts, Carrier says: “All that is needed was the same three-point sales pitch: “scripture says Jesus would rise, our ability to prophecy, heal, and speak in tongues proves we’re not lying . . .” He goes on to say: “That would not fly today. Scripture is hopelessly ambiguous, and can be used to prove anything—especially if you cherry-pick . . .” Evidently it does fly for many Christians today.I think Carrier does an excellent job of demolishing Holding’s case. He shows how he either misused or did not understand other scholars whose works Holding believed to support his case. In my opinion Carrier is a very good scholar and is well worth listening to. He is also a good writer, and so the book never really bogged down in the reading of it, seeing this I enjoyed the book a lot.If you are interested in the debunking of a group of apologetic works, whether Holding’s or others, or you would just like to read a good scholar in action, than I think you would like the book.

Dr. Richard Carrier, an expert on ancient history, philosophies, religions and myths, takes on the claim of J.P. Holding that Christianity required a miracle to succeed because what it taught was so foreign and objectionable to people in the first few centuries AD.Holding made the fatal mistake of taking on Carrier publicly and in his writings. He picked a fight with someone who knows much, much more about the subject than he, and as a result, Carrier tears him a new one in "Not the Impossible Faith."Carrier successfully demonstrates that, contrary to Holding's arguments, Christianity, as a syncretist (Jewish-pagan) invention, already propounded ideas that were very familiar to diaspora Jews and pagans in the Roman world. Among many direct hits, Carrier correctly points out that early Christian fathers such as Justin Martyr actually USED THIS VERY ARGUMENT in their sales pitch.On Holding's contention that early Christians would "investigate" the claims of Christianity prior to converting, Carrier correctly asserts that the populace that was most influenced by Christian claims - the poor and downtrodden - had neither the literacy, nor the time, nor the resources to do such. Furthermore, Holding's argument sinks even deeper into the abyss when one considers that MODERN Christians, with all their literacy and informational resources at their disposal, still do not "test" any claims made by Christianity. And as Dan Barker has pointed out, 95 percent of church-going Christians are BIBLICALLY illiterate, much less literate in the realm of any research or fact-checking.One common (and weak) rebuttal on the part of apologists is that scholars like Carrier have an apologetic agenda as well - as atheist apologists. The problem with this argument is that historians such as Carrier rely on documentary evidence whereas the religious apologist argues from "faith" and superstition, special pleading, ad hoc arguments, etc. For my money, I'll base my epistomology on the people with hard evidence over the defenders of superstition any time.

I cannot recommend this book strongly enough. When I am reading anything by Richard Carrier I feel I am traveling back in time. The author is truly generous in the way he shares his deep knowledge and understanding of the ancient world with his readers.

Good

Superbly written, scholarly and straight to the point!

Very interesting

An interesting book but as has been said it is rather repetative. A problem with it is that it is rather like trying to follow a conversation when hearing only one side. The book is Carriers answer to a Christian apologist who I've never heard of quoting from other historians who I've not heard of either.For me the most interesting part of the book was the insight it gave into the social organization of the ancient world and the way they thought and saw the world, particularly where it concerned religion. For that I think it is worthwhile. It is not an easy read and it is probably too long. Its a book to read for information and not enjoyment but the argument that Christianity must be true because it is too improbable to succeed if it wasn't is answered in spades and then some.