Carrier actually does his due diligence right from the start:Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Mon Mar 27, 2023 5:59 pmMaybe Carrier is conflating two different things:GakuseiDon wrote: ↑Mon Mar 27, 2023 5:20 pm Some quotes from Justin's Trypho showing he is arguing that Justin can't prove that Jesus didn't [sic] exist would be useful here. I just don't trust Carrier's citations anymore.
(1) Trypho expresses skepticism about... (leaving this blank deliberately, because it requires careful interpretation)
(2) Justin's replies to Trypho's skepticism aren't what we would consider historical evidence (talking about the stories having power, about prophecy, about contemporary miracles)
I can find a couple places where Trypho qualifies his statements in a skeptical way, to the point where it's a credible view that he's not really bought into the story of Jesus at all.
I can't find anything so specific as "arguing that Justin can't prove that Jesus did exist."
No, I don't know why Carrier does things like this.
In Dialogue with Trypho 8.4 Justin depicts his imagined Jewish opponent Trypho saying (emphasis mine), “after receiving groundless hearsay,” ματαίαν ἀκοὴν, “you invent a Christ for yourselves,” ἀναπλάσσετε, “and because of him you’re heading to a pointless destruction.” To which Justin responds, “we have not believed empty fables,” and the word here is indeed myths (κενοῖς μύθοις), “or stories without any proof,” ἀναποδείκτοις λόγοις, “but stories filled with the Spirit of God, and bursting with power, and flourishing with grace!” (Dialogue 9.1).
Justin of course offers no evidence any of that is true, or even epistemically relevant. How does a story being “powerful” and “full of grace” evince any of it is actually true? This indicates Justin actually has no relevant evidence (and indeed, across the entire Dialogue, he will never present any); so he has to fall back on a mere Affective Fallacy. But our concern is with the charge Justin is trying to rebut, and what Justin’s reply tells us that was: Justin responds to what Trypho said by insisting his beliefs are not based on myths but true stories. Which tells us Justin did indeed mean Trypho’s remark to be accusing Christians of believing untrue myths. Which proves Justin knew there were some who suspected Jesus was mythical, that the Gospels are just made-up stories—and he was keen to “rebut” that accusation by simply forcefully gainsaying it. He doesn’t try to cite Tacitus or Josephus or Paul or any other source but the Gospels for evidence Jesus existed. Indeed, his only attempt to defend even the Gospels as historical is wildly fallacious, as we’ll see shortly. So Justin had no evidence Jesus existed either.
Justin of course offers no evidence any of that is true, or even epistemically relevant. How does a story being “powerful” and “full of grace” evince any of it is actually true? This indicates Justin actually has no relevant evidence (and indeed, across the entire Dialogue, he will never present any); so he has to fall back on a mere Affective Fallacy. But our concern is with the charge Justin is trying to rebut, and what Justin’s reply tells us that was: Justin responds to what Trypho said by insisting his beliefs are not based on myths but true stories. Which tells us Justin did indeed mean Trypho’s remark to be accusing Christians of believing untrue myths. Which proves Justin knew there were some who suspected Jesus was mythical, that the Gospels are just made-up stories—and he was keen to “rebut” that accusation by simply forcefully gainsaying it. He doesn’t try to cite Tacitus or Josephus or Paul or any other source but the Gospels for evidence Jesus existed. Indeed, his only attempt to defend even the Gospels as historical is wildly fallacious, as we’ll see shortly. So Justin had no evidence Jesus existed either.
The answer allegedly is in CHAPTER IX -- THE CHRISTIANS HAVE NOT BELIEVED GROUNDLESS STORIES.
viewtopic.php?p=41232#p41232
And that chapter starts with
"I excuse and forgive you, my friend," I said. "For you know not what you say, but have been persuaded by teachers who do not understand the Scriptures; and you speak, like a diviner whatever comes into your mind. But if you are willing to listen to an account of Him, how we have not been deceived, and shall not cease to confess Him,--although men's reproaches be heaped upon us, although the most terrible tyrant compel us to deny Him,--I shall prove to you as you stand here that we have not believed empty fables, or words without any foundation but words filled with the Spirit of God, and big with power, and flourishing with grace."
and ends with
And when we were come to that place, where there are stone seats on both sides, those with Trypho, having seated themselves on the one side, conversed with each other, some one of them having thrown in a remark about the war waged in Judaea.
And Justin doesn't do anything, as usual he makes empty promises and then distracts, deflects, and never returns to it again unless it is to reiterate his empty promises. He does the same thing with the virgin birth being predicted, literally, in the Tanakh. It's all plain rhetoric and mere bullshit bingo, it's so genuinely Christian