DEBATE on the Historicity of Jesus – Dr. Richard Carrier vs Trent Horn

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

by Neil Godfrey

I may be one of the last to know about this but for the record here it is. Now why can’t all tenured academics learn how to debate this topic civilly and respectfully like these two guys? Such a refreshing — and very informative — debate.


The following two tabs change content below.

Neil Godfrey

Neil is the author of this post. To read more about Neil, see our About page.

Latest posts by Neil Godfrey (see all)

If you enjoyed this post, please consider donating to Vridar. Thanks!

8 thoughts on “DEBATE on the Historicity of Jesus – Dr. Richard Carrier vs Trent Horn”

  1. That really was a pretty good debate. I love how at one point they both admitted that they were “nerding out.” Also, I thought it was curious that Horn, as a Catholic, argued that “brother of the lord” means biological brother. I thought Catholics traditionally interpret that phrase as referring to apostolic brotherhood.

    1. The standard Catholic understanding of “brother of the Lord” is that it means James was a half-brother of Jesus — supposedly, the progeny of Joseph from a previous marriage. Other “brothers and sisters” were understood to be cousins of Jesus. The perpetual virginity of Marriage, which is an article of faith in Catholicism, requires that no other human was a full sibling of Christ.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Discover more from Vridar

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading