Richard Carrier’s Jesus mythicist position isn’t mainstream, but that’s irrelevant to the question of whether Christianity began as one of many mystery cults.
You say it’s ironic that I’m championing modernity here even though I’m not questioning my cultural assumptions in the modern manner. But that’s false. Around half of my hundreds of articles are criticisms of modernity. See, for example, my series on the quest for what I call “godless honour,” in which I criticize numerous aspects of secular humanism, including the humanist’s views on human nature, liberty, reason, and art. In my writings I criticize both political liberalism and conservatism. I criticize postmodernity (hypermodernity), hyperskepticism, consumer culture, neoclassical economics, scientism, new atheism, the happiness industry, mental health standards, secular political correctness, and on and on.
So there’s no irony there to speak of. Saying that theistic religion is preposterous relative to modernity isn’t the same as accepting all of modernity.
I agree that theists have offered rational justifications of their religious beliefs, but I’d deny that those defenses are formidable. I understand that the article upset you, but your personal attacks here are just like water drops rolling off a duck’s back. I did a series responding to the major theistic arguments for God’s existence. I’ve had numerous written dialogues with Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, and mystics. I don’t just dismiss theism. I argue against many theistic arguments, especially Christian ones. Those are plain facts which anyone can check by looking through my Medium articles, not to mention the many previous ones on my blog.
I’m not interested in whether theists are intelligent, because my arguments aren’t ad hominem. Who says intelligent people can’t have preposterous beliefs and practices? The modern secularist’s presumption that her culture is progressive is preposterous considering the ecological damage that consumerism is doing, a fact which I’ve harped on. I’m talking about the beliefs and practices, not the people, because my writings are philosophical.
As for whether most theists are indoctrinated, I’ve yet to see you challenge my point that that hypothesis explains why religions are mostly confined to different geographical regions. Why are most Muslims in the Middle East and most Hindus in India? Obviously, it’s because those religions are passed down mainly through families that tend to stay and have more families in their home countries. Why should I assume that’s not the main reason theistic religions flourish despite modernity?
