Criticism of the Jesus Myth–the Case Against the Historical Jesus
The Jesus Myth: The Case Against the Historical Jesus–A Critique/Criticism/Answer
I haven’t had sufficient time to look at the full document, but its primary arguments amount to the following:
4) other documents
5) controversy/disagreement (there is an argument–must mean there isn’t an argument)
The allegory argument is pretty weak. It assumes that documents must pick one or the other rather than combine the two. In other words, when Lincoln and other historical figures told allegorical stories–this author would condemn them. That seems a little inconsistent or hypocritical.
He ultimately makes arguments based on their similaries and differences. And the argument that the New Testament confirms the Old Testament–is evidence for credibility and consistency. The difference (the author even talks about) seem to negate the sourcing issue in Mark.
Controversy is par of the course–happens in academia all the time. If that falsified something–we would get rid of the academy entirely & every book on record. I don’t see what the problem is.
Other religious documents that point in other directions are pretty irrelevant. There isn’t the substance of an argument articulated.
And the consistency between the Old and New Testament predictions is actually a good thing. His spin is radically insufficient on this issue.
The Gospel of Mark was the first story of Jesus that was written, and all others are dependent on it
If there is any uniqueness in the other gospels, and there is a great deal, I would suggest this argument is pretty useless and meaningless.
The Gospel of Mark shows clear signs of being written as an allegorical fiction
It contains allegories does not mean its all allegories. Thats the fallacy of composition.
Virtually every detail of the life of Jesus comes from “Old Testament” scriptures
Thats a good thing. That shows consistency. That shows prophecy in action. That demonstrates the credibility of the Bible as an entity
If you want a better informed study, I suggest looking here at Gary Haberman’s work on the Historical Jesus. Also the Case for Christ is quite good as well, you can grab it here on Amazon for pretty cheap. NT Wright has written a good deal about the subject of the historical jesus, although not as much from a strictly historical view–but its quite intelligent and informed.