Richard Carrier and His Sperm Problems

Richard Carrier is the most prominent proponent of Jesus-mythicism today. Out of all the mythicists, I will say he is the most capable. His ego certainly seems to reflect the fact that he's aware of it. However, his ego is over-inflated. I intend, over the next few weeks, to deconstruct several key arguments made in On the Historicity of Jesus. Deconstructing the whole thing would take an entire response. Here, I want to focus on his usage of the "sperma". He says in his book On the Historicity of Jesus that Paul uses a different word in Romans 1 to describe what is actually going on. Here's how the ESV translates the verse in question: "Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh
(Romans 1:1-3 ESV)" Carrier believes that the word for "descended" should actually be "manufactured", and the word for "descended from David" should actually be "sperm of David. So, Carrier thinks that Paul was saying that the body of Jesus was "Davidic flesh"...i.e created from the sperm of Jesus. Seriously. To understand Carrier's theory, we have to understand his view of how the ancients viewed cosmology. Carrier states that there are three heavens. There is the our air-Earth. There is then the region right below the moon. There is then the firmament-which is kind of a fixed glass dome that surrounds us. So when Jesus was incarnate, he was an incarnate being in the second heaven-right below the moon. His followers received private hallucinations from this divine being.

So, in order to fulfill the prophecy about the Messiah being from David, Paul started to believe that the body of Jesus in the second heaven was created from Davidic flesh...from David's sperm. Hence, Paul's really saying that Jesus was manufactured (ginomai) from (ek-out of, denoting origin) the sperm (sperma) of David. So what can we say in response? Carrier is a looney.

Ginomai

First of all, let's examine the word "ginomai". Carrier makes a big deal of this because, in Galatians 4, Paul uses gennao to denote birth (the son of the slave as born according to the flesh), but ginomai to denote Jesus's birth. Hence, Carrier thinks that since Paul normally uses gennao to describe when someone was humanly born, and ginomai to describe manufacturing, Paul's not saying Jesus was born from the seed of David. There's just one tiny teeny problem with his argument. Paul NEVER uses "ginomai" to mean "manufactured". The closest Paul comes to that is "become" (i.e 2 Cor 5:21-He made Him who knew no sin to be sin, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God). Carrier claims this kind of usage is normative. 

So let's survey how Paul uses the term otherwise, shall we? (the underlined portions will show where the term ginomai is being used)

Romans 11:25-"hardening [over Israel] has happened
1 Corinthians 10:6 "Now these things happened as examples for us"

1 Corinthians 10:32: Give no offense

1 Corinthians 14:26 "Let all things be done for edifaction
2 Corinthians 1:8 "...our affliction which came to us in Asia"

2 Cor 3:7 "...ministry of death...came..."

2 Corinthians 5:17 "If anyone is in Christ He is a new creation. The old has passed away, the new has come"

2 Cor 7:14 "has proved

Galatians 3:13-3:14

 Christ became a curse for us so that blessings might come

Galatians 3:17 "....which came 430 years later"

Alrighty. So I think it's clear that Carrier is off his rocker with this term. In John 1, when the author declares that all things were made through the Logos, it uses this term. Hence, the term carries the meanings of arrival, or coming into being. It does not mean "manufactured"-I could not find one instance where Paul uses it like that. Rather, it means "to come into being", or connotes arrival. Literally, the term means "emerge into existence" in these kind of contexts (i.e Rom 11:25, 1 Cor 10:6, 1 Cor 14:26, 2 Cor 3:7, and others), but that's not always the case (as in 2 cor 7:14). However, most of the time it is-especially when it fits the context. Now let's take a look at sperm. 

Sperma

The word sperma (literally, "seed"), when used in connection with a person, ALWAYS references physical lineage...i.e progeny. It ALWAYS talks about descent if it's connected to a person. Throughout the New Testament, it's used 100% of the time to talk about human descent if it's connected to a human. Paul uses it like that in Romans 9:29, Rom 11:1, 2 Cor 11:22, Galatians 3:16, and Galatians 3:29. The author of Hebrews uses it like that in 2:16, 2:11, and 11:18. The Gospels use it like that whenever it portrays the Jews calling themselves "offspring (sperma) of Abraham. So Carrier is just flat out wrong here. What does the verse in context actually mean?

Jesus came into existence (ginomai) from (ek-denoting origin, as in "out of") the offspring of David (i.e the human descendants) according to the flesh. 

According to the Flesh

One more thing before I treat his reading of Galatians 4. That CANNOT mean what Doherty and co. think it does-namely, in the realm of flesh. It means according to Jesus's humanity. Hence, in Romans 9:3, when Paul says that the Israelites are his kinsmen "according to the flesh", that means "according to Paul's humanity". It doesn't mean "in the same sphere of reality"-otherwise, when Paul said that the Israelites are his kinsmen "according to the flesh", that "according to the flesh" bit becomes superfluous. Of COURSE the Israelites were his kinsmen the same sphere of reality. Rather, Paul's emphasizing the point that there are other kinsmen he has-namely, those not according to the flesh but in Christ.

Conclusion

Paul believed Jesus was of human descent from David (Romans 1:3), and was an Israelite (Rom 9:5). And that's because Jesus existed.