Looking for an article….

Andrew Vella has been looking for one of Richard Carrier’s articles since 2010.  He wrote:

I wanted to read some peer reviewed journal articles by him. I am after one that for the life of me I can not find, but it is listed on a few places.

Wikipedia lists:

“Whence Christianity? A Meta-Theory for the Origins of Christianity.” Journal of Higher Criticism 11.1 (Spring 2005).

Richards website lists:

“Whence Christianity? A Meta-Theory for the Origins of Christianity,” Journal of Higher Criticism 11.1 (Spring 2005)

Richards CV on page 5 has:

“Whence Christianity? A Meta-Theory for the Origins of Christianity,” Journal of Higher Criticism 11.1 (Spr 2005): 22-34.

Richard also cites himself a year earlier here, here and here:

Richard Carrier, “Whence Christianity? A Meta-Theory for the Origins of Christianity,” Journal of Higher Criticism 11.1 (Spring 2004).

But the problem I see is that the Journal of Higher Criticism website says that “The final issue of the Journal (Volume 10, No. 2) appeared in fall, 2003.” Even Wikipedia repeats this “The final issue of the journal (Volume 10, No. 2) appeared in fall, 2003.”

So where is this article? Or even anything else in Volume 11 of the Journal of Higher Criticism? I have tried a few journal databases and they come up blank…

A bit of help… anyone?

Well, it is odd that Carrier cites one of his articles from 2005 (or is it 2004?) when the journal that is supposed to have published it published its last issue in the Fall of 2003.  So if anyone can find this article, why not share it with Andrew Vella?

[Update below the fold]

But even if the article can be found, I’m not sure it should count as “some peer reviewed journal articles by him.”

Check out the web page for the “Journal of Higher Criticism” here.

Okay, maybe it is just me, but that cheesy web design complete with cheesy motto (This Publication May be Hazardous to Your Cherished Assumptions!) doesn’t exactly indicate we are dealing with a serious, professional journal here.

 

UPDATE:   Journal/article have been found courtesy of Nick Matzke – see first comment.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Mytherism, Richard Carrier and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to Looking for an article….

  1. Sigh. It’s not that hard to do minimum due diligence before casting aspersions everywhere, is it?

    http://grace.gtu.edu/search/?searchscope=0&searchtype=o&searcharg=30121399
    ================
    Title The Journal of higher criticism
    Imprint Montclair, NJ : Institute for Higher Critical Studies, c1994-
    Libr. Has GTU has v.1(1994)-11(2005)

    LOCATION CALL NO. STATUS
    GTU Periodical Periodical v.11 2005 AVAILABLE
    GTU Periodical Periodical v.10 2003 AVAILABLE
    GTU Periodical Periodical v.9 2002 AVAILABLE
    GTU Periodical Periodical v.7-8 2000-2001 AVAILABLE
    GTU Periodical Periodical v.5-6 1998-1999 AVAILABLE
    GTU Periodical Periodical v.3-4 1996-1997 AVAILABLE
    GTU Periodical Periodical v.1-2 1994-1995 AVAILABLE
    Descript v. : ill. ; 23 cm
    Note Title from cover
    Subject Bible — Criticism, interpretation, etc. — Periodicals
    Corp Author Institute for Higher Critical Studies
    ISSN 1075-7139
    ================

    Turns out there is a published 2005 issue after all. Wow, I solved Andrew Vella’s 2-year mystery in like 5 seconds.

  2. Doug says:

    Funny: wikipedia on Robert Price states “he was the editor of the Journal of Higher Criticism from 1994 until it ceased publication in 2003.” Guessing it ceased publication in 2003, and then flushed its backlog in 2005 after skipping a volume-year. Not typically the conditions for careful peer-review…

  3. Michael says:

    Good for you, Nick. I looked for more than 5 seconds and could not find it. For future references, how did you find it?

  4. Michael says:

    Funny: wikipedia on Robert Price states “he was the editor of the Journal of Higher Criticism from 1994 until it ceased publication in 2003.” Guessing it ceased publication in 2003, and then flushed its backlog in 2005 after skipping a volume-year. Not typically the conditions for careful peer-review…

    I think you are right. The journal’s own web page states, “The final issue of the Journal (Volume 10, No. 2) appeared in fall, 2003.” It would be interesting to see how many articles are in volume 11. Apart from this, there is no evidence for think any of these articles when through careful peer-review. The whole journal looks like a creationist science journal. So if there was any “peer review,” it would probably be like one creationist reviewing another creationist for a creationist journal they both publish in.

    After all, the editor, Price himself, is a myther. Here’s how Wiki describes him:

    Robert McNair Price (born July 7, 1954) is an American theologian and writer. He teaches philosophy and religion at the Johnnie Colemon Theological Seminary,[4] is professor of biblical criticism at the Center for Inquiry Institute.

    Google the Johnnie Colemon Theological Seminary and the Center for Inquiry Institute.
    It becomes clear why Ehrman never heard of Price.

  5. The Deuce says:

    What are you talking about Mike? Upon Googling them like you said, I learned that the Center for Inquiry Institute (not to be confused with the Institute for Inquiry Center!) is “the most accomplished body of scholar-educators in the field of humanist studies in the world” according to the Center for Inquiry Institute! So clearly they’re big shots, and totally legit, and not a silly Mickey Mouse operation at all! And you won’t be laughing at the Johnnie Coleman Theological Seminary when they “establish empowerment centers throughout the world”!

    LOL, seriously, thanks. It’s always nice to go to bed in a jovial mood.

  6. Michael says:

    Hi Deuce,

    But you must have missed this one:

    The Center for Inquiry isn’t just a think tank—we’re a world-wide movement of humanists, skeptics, freethinkers, and atheists, all working together at the grassroots level to advance scientific and secular values where we live.

    http://www.centerforinquiry.net/outreach/

    So the Center for Inquiry is a think tank. The skeptic’s very own version of the Discovery Institute! But it’s not “just a think tank.” It’s a MOVEMENT. Y’know, the skeptic’s very own version of the Discovery Institute. So Price is a professor of biblical criticism at an atheist think tank that has a social agenda.

    If you are in the mood for more jovialities, y’gotta check this one out:

    http://divinityschool.net/jcSeminary/johnnie_colemon_theological_seminary.htm

    Read some of the FAQ questions on the left side.

    Can I use my New Thought degree to get a job?

    Usually only within the field of New Thought or businesses owned by New Thought people.

    Can I transfer my credits to a state or private university?

    Not usually…

    Click on those for the expanded answer.

  7. “Good for you, Nick. I looked for more than 5 seconds and could not find it. For future references, how did you find it?”

    Worldcat:

    http://www.worldcat.org/title/journal-of-higher-criticism/oclc/30121399&referer=brief_results

    And actually, for kicks, since the GTU library is on my walk home, I went and copied the article. I only had $1 on me for the copy machine so I had to photograph the last page with my phone. But if any Doubting Thomases want a PDF scan of the oh-so-mysterious article, email me at matzkeATberkeley.edu . My only price is that Andrew Vella and Mike Gene post corrections to their blog pieces.

    Cheers, Nick

  8. Michael says:

    Never used Worldcat before. Thanks.

    My only price is that Andrew Vella and Mike Gene post corrections to their blog pieces.

    Er….just which one of my three sentences am I supposed to correct?

  9. ===========
    Funny: wikipedia on Robert Price states “he was the editor of the Journal of Higher Criticism from 1994 until it ceased publication in 2003.” Guessing it ceased publication in 2003, and then flushed its backlog in 2005 after skipping a volume-year. Not typically the conditions for careful peer-review…

    I think you are right. The journal’s own web page states, “The final issue of the Journal (Volume 10, No. 2) appeared in fall, 2003.” It would be interesting to see how many articles are in volume 11.
    ===========

    Sigh. It’s a full issue as big as the rest on the shelf, I held it.

    Apparently there was even a volume 12 in 2006 which some libraries have:

    http://newlibrary.wts.edu/search/o30121399

    Also:

    “Okay, maybe it is just me, but that cheesy web design complete with cheesy motto (This Publication May be Hazardous to Your Cherished Assumptions!) doesn’t exactly indicate we are dealing with a serious, professional journal here.”

    It looks like the webpage was designed in 1998. And yes, it looks like a website from 1998. Shocker.

    Also:

    “The whole journal looks like a creationist science journal. So if there was any “peer review,” it would probably be like one creationist reviewing another creationist for a creationist journal they both publish in.”

    Hmm. To me it looked like a pretty standard boring journal. Let’s look at the WorldCat list to see the idiots who thought the rag was worthing carrying:

    1. Graduate Theological Union
    2. Fuller Theological Seminary
    3. Claremont School of Theological Library
    4. Reed College Library
    5. Iliff School of Theology
    6. Baylor University Libraries
    7. Criswell College Library
    8. Dallas Theological Seminary
    9. Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary Library
    10. Nazarene Theological Seminary
    11. Southern Methodist University
    12. Texas Christian University
    13. Luther Seminary Library
    14. Covenant Theological Seminary
    15. Saint Louis University – Main Campus
    16. Harding School of Theology
    17. JKM Library
    18. United Library
    19. Wheaton College – Buswell Library
    20. Andrews University
    21. Calvin College
    22. University of Notre Dame
    23. United Theological Seminary
    24. duPont Library
    25. Emory University
    26. College of William & Mary
    27. Library of Congress
    28. Union Presbyterian Seminary
    29. University of Central Florida
    30. Villanova University
    31. Virginia Theological Seminary
    32. Woodstock Theological Center
    33. Columbia University In the City of New York
    34. Drew University Library
    35. New York Public Library
    36. Princeton Theological Seminary
    37. Westminster Theological Seminary
    38. Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary
    39. Yale University
    40. University of Edinburgh, Main Library
    41. University of Cambridge Cambridge University Library
    42. Danish Union Catalogue and Danish National Bibliography
    43. Universitaetsbibliothek Erlangen-Nuernberg
    44. Universitätsbibliothek der Eberhard Karls Universität
    45. University of Pretoria Libraries

    Obviously a bunch of rubes.

    An actual creation-science journal, on the other hand, say AiG’s Answers Research Journal:

    1. University of Colorado Denver, Downtown Campus
    2. Grace University Library
    3. Auburn University
    4. Liberty University
    5. Patrick Henry College Library
    6. AUT University Library, Auckland, 1020 New Zealand
    7. Griffith University Library, Nathan, AU-QL QLD 4111 Australia

  10. The Deuce says:

    *snicker* And if 45 libraries don’t convince you that it was a Very Serious Journal, F.C. Baur’s Very Serious Face certainly will!

  11. Andrew Vella says:

    Nick,

    Thanks man! I will gladly update my blog.

    I would love a copy, my work email is andrew.vellaATanu.edu.au and my spam account is andrewvellaAThotmail.com

    It seems that both the ANU and CSU journal databases that I have access to aren’t extensive as the ones you used and even more extensive than the journals own website.

    Perhaps someone should update the wiki page for the The Journal of Higher Criticism and maybe even the admins of the journal’s own website….

    And guys, I wouldn’t diss the whole journal, after all Barbara Thiering has contributed to it…

    Andrew Vella

  12. “Er….just which one of my three sentences am I supposed to correct?”

    How about the bit that says the journal published its last issue in 2003, the bit that suggests that it was therefore odd (and hints at dishonest) for Carrier to cite his 2005 article, and the bit that suggests that Andrew Vella’s 2-year search for Carrier’s article was worth the electrons expended describing it. All the suspicion and angst was based on what could be nothing more than a typo in the closing date on the journal’s website, and wikipedia’s copying it.

    C’mon, be a big man and issue the correction. Call it an update if you like.

  13. Andrew Vella says:

    Michael, I’d really like if you do put at update on this because I honestly would like to read this article and Nick has used his electrons in solving this. He has gone above and beyond what I was after- offering to email out a copy.

    Nick, I do question the typo theory. The front page says: “The final issue of the Journal (Volume 10, No. 2) appeared in fall, 2003.” This means there are three typos in that one line regarding the volume, number and year. Normally academics are pretty sharp on things like that.

    My theory would be that someone else must of taken over this journal in 2004 or after nothing in that year in 2005 and when they got ownership of the journal for some reason or another they didn’t get access to their main site… but we may never know.

    Again, thanks for your effort Nick, and Michael thanks for having a way more popular blog than mine.

  14. Michael says:

    Andrew,

    It seems that both the ANU and CSU journal databases that I have access to aren’t extensive as the ones you used and even more extensive than the journals own website.

    I hear ya. Even Google Scholar did not pick it up. My mistake was probably in searching with the title of Carrier’s article. Did you search with that too? Nick went old school and searched libraries for the journal itself and then found the article by walking to a physical building.

  15. Michael says:

    This means there are three typos in that one line regarding the volume, number and year. Normally academics are pretty sharp on things like that.

    Yep. Also, the typo speculation does not account for the missing 2004 issue.

    My theory would be that someone else must of taken over this journal in 2004 or after nothing in that year in 2005 and when they got ownership of the journal for some reason or another they didn’t get access to their main site… but we may never know.

    Sounds good. Here’s my speculation. If you look at the url, it seems likely that the journal page was maintained by a professor at Drew – Darrell J. Doughty. He lived from June 24, 1936 – May 22, 2009. In 2003, he would have been 67. So he probably retired and decided to close up shop. That is, it’s probably the case that the Journal of Higher Criticism was Doughty + Price (and the Institute for Higher Critical Studies was Doughty himself). Maybe a core of the regular contributors wanted to keep an easy publication going, so in 2005 perhaps Price (or someone else) tried to bring it back. But by 2006, he lost interest or just didn’t have the discipline that Doughty had when it came to the humdrum mechanics. So an obscure, insignificant little journal, edited by a myther outside of academia, died. And no one noticed. The journal page probably can’t be updated because no one has access to it ever since Doughty died. Someone would probably have to contact some IT people at Drew, but I can’t see it being any type of priority for them.

  16. Michael says:

    All the suspicion and angst was based on what could be nothing more than a typo in the closing date on the journal’s website, and wikipedia’s copying it.

    Oh dear me. Now that the suspicion and angst have disappeared, I can get some sleep. That is, as long as I can get F.C. Baur’s Very Serious Face and Eye out of my head!

  17. Doug says:

    After reading several of the Articles You Can Read Now! I get the distinct feeling that the difference between “Higher Criticism” and “Wild Speculation” is primarily one of form rather than substance. This, for example (by the journal’s editor, no less) is a remarkably long-winded attempt to deflect attention away from a good deal of evidence that brings us to the opposite conclusion.

  18. Michael says:

    It looks like there was an attempt to move the “journal.” According to this blog post from back in 2005,

    http://michaelturton2.blogspot.com/2005/08/new-site-for-journal-of-higher.html

    The Journal of Higher Criticism by Robert Price has a new URL and a new editor:
    http://www.atheistalliance.org/jhc

    Unfortunately, that link is dead. But given its url, it looks like some atheists tried to keep it alive and failed given that Doughty, its only connection to academia, was lost.

  19. Michael says:

    Nick,

    Hmm. To me it looked like a pretty standard boring journal. Let’s look at the WorldCat list to see the idiots who thought the rag was worthing carrying:

    Nick, there is no need to attack these libraries. That a few dozen libraries carry this obscure journal does not mean much. Instead, let’s focus on the journal itself. Its editor was Robert Price. In fact, Price also claims he is the founder of the journal.

    Are you saying that Price, the founder and editor of the journal, is a pretty standard mainstream scholar who is part of academia?

  20. I agree with the criticism of the typo theory, it looks like there was a short-lived revival of the journal for 2005 & 2006 which was not recorded on the original version of the website for the reasons that Mike suggests.

    Michael (11:29:54) :

    Nick,

    Hmm. To me it looked like a pretty standard boring journal. Let’s look at the WorldCat list to see the idiots who thought the rag was worthing carrying:

    Nick, there is no need to attack these libraries. That a few dozen libraries carry this obscure journal does not mean much. Instead, let’s focus on the journal itself. Its editor was Robert Price. In fact, Price also claims he is the founder of the journal.

    Obviously I was being sarcastic when I “attacked” these libraries. If you look at the list of those libraries, they are largely seminaries, schools with famous religious studies/biblical criticism programs, etc. The list has most of the places someone would go if they wanted an expert graduate education in the study of the Bible and its history. Obviously not all of the institutions agree with the perspective of the journal, e.g. Dallas Theological Seminary and the like probably keep it locked up the restricted books section (kidding). But, although it’s not determinative, it counts for something to note that many of the places that are leaders in Biblical scholarship carried the journal.

    If you’re going to start saying people shouldn’t list articles in such journals on their CV because they are published and edited by atheists and atheist institutions, what are we going to do with the CV entries in journals published by, say, the Evangelical Theological Society and conservative evangelical seminaries?

    I haven’t looked into it in depth, I have no strong opinion about the quality of the journal, I’m just pointing out that you guys are making strong allegations, but you haven’t made your case.

  21. Andrew, I’m emailing the article in a sec…

  22. Michael says:

    But, although it’s not determinative, it counts for something to note that many of the places that are leaders in Biblical scholarship carried the journal.

    As far as we know, Doughty himself sent out free subscriptions to these schools, since it was his baby (he and Price would love the greater exposure). I doubt there was any serious vetting process, given the qualifications of the journal’s editor. You would have rule these out for your library list to become relevant.

    If you’re going to start saying people shouldn’t list articles in such journals on their CV because they are published and edited by atheists and atheist institutions, what are we going to do with the CV entries in journals published by, say, the Evangelical Theological Society and conservative evangelical seminaries?

    Huh? Here’s what I am going to “start saying”: Richard Carrier being published in The Journal of Higher Criticism is about as significant as Jonathan Wells getting published in Rivista di Biologia.

  23. Bilbo says:

    I would guess that most seminaries would want to keep current on the latest views of mythicists and would find it valuable to have the JHC in their libraries.

    Now I have to look up Rivista di Biologia.

  24. Bilbo says:

    OK, Rivista specializes in “theoretical biology,” so it’s willing to consider ideas that aren’t mainstream. But it doesn’t seem to have an axe to grind, as JHC does. So I would put it a step or two above JHC. Still, I see your point, Mike. And yes, if Nick thinks Carrier should gain points by publishing in JHC, then he’ll have to give some love to Wells. C’mon, Nick. Pucker up.

  25. “But it doesn’t seem to have an axe to grind, as JHC does.”

    Rivista di Biologia certainly did. IIRC its editor was Sermonti, an ancient Lamarkian holdout from Italy.

    And you don’t think that, say, the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, or any number of other books and journals by conservative evangelical inerrantists, has an axe to grind? I just want you guys to be consistent in what books/journal articles you judge based on the cover.

  26. Bilbo says:

    And I just want to see you plant a big wet one of Wells’ butt. …Sorry, Nick. Just having fun with you. 🙂

    I don’t know if you read my comments on the Stark Coldcocks Carrier thread, but it looks to me as if Ehrman conceded the Mythicists point.

  27. Bilbo says:

    Really, Nick. I’m sorry. Really, really sorry. Don’t be mad at me. You’re my favorite ID critic. I like you more than I even like Art Hunt. And that’s saying a LOT.

  28. Bilbo says:

    Don’t tell Art I said I like you more than him.

  29. Michael says:

    And you don’t think that, say, the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, or any number of other books and journals by conservative evangelical inerrantists, has an axe to grind? I just want you guys to be consistent in what books/journal articles you judge based on the cover.

    You would have a point if I had a history of promoting conservative evangelical inerrantists and pointing to their publications in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society as evidence of their scholarship. You’re the one with the inconsistency problem, Nick.

  30. “You would have a point if I had a history of promoting conservative evangelical inerrantists and pointing to their publications in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society as evidence of their scholarship.”

    Probably every single inerrantist scholar at a theological seminary and elsewhere, though, proudly lists such publications on their CV. Is that (a) nefarious, misleading self-promotion, or (b) normal, appropriate behavior?

    It’s very simple. You seem to be saying (a) for Carrier but (b) for everybody else with similar biases. Thus *you’ve* got the inconsistency.

  31. Michael says:

    Probably every single inerrantist scholar at a theological seminary and elsewhere, though, proudly lists such publications on their CV. Is that (a) nefarious, misleading self-promotion, or (b) normal, appropriate behavior?

    As usual, as I was going to answer your question straight up, but given your history of ignoring my questions, I decided to first ask you a question. If you answer, I’ll answer yours. Here’s the question:

    Are you acknowledging that when an inerrantist scholar at a theological seminary publishes in an inerrantist journal or when an IDist publishes in Bio-Complexity or PCID, this is normal, appropriate behavior?

    It’s very simple. You seem to be saying (a) for Carrier but (b) for everybody else with similar biases. Thus *you’ve* got the inconsistency.

    Yes, it is simple. You are simply relying on your misguided subjective impressions:

    You seem to be saying

    Instead of relying on what you believe I seem to be saying, why not try to deal with what I have actually said:

    Richard Carrier being published in The Journal of Higher Criticism is about as significant as Jonathan Wells getting published in Rivista di Biologia.

    And

    if there was any “peer review,” it would probably be like one creationist reviewing another creationist for a creationist journal they both publish in.

    I’m consistent. You are the one who is being inconsistent. Bilbo was able to see it:

    Still, I see your point, Mike. And yes, if Nick thinks Carrier should gain points by publishing in JHC, then he’ll have to give some love to Wells. C’mon, Nick. Pucker up.

    Not surprisingly, you chose to ignore his point rather than come clean. Just as you continue to ignore my questions about Price, the founder and editor of JHC.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s