Internet apologists for mythicism are always ready to point to Sherlock Holmes and Batman and say “look, here we have stories, so these prove the existence of fictional detectives and comic book heroes, don’t they?”
Can they not see that this is absolute silliness, that one could respond with the same trite comeback about anyone or anything? What if someone compares the case of the Hound of the Baskervilles to the Holocaust? Does that somehow prove the latter did not happen?
No historian thinks that the mere existence of stories about someone proves their existence. And so why do mythicists think this is a meaningful retort? My guess is that, when they were previously fundamentalists, they believed the Bible in a gullible fashion, and so they are addressing their own earlier foolish selves, not realizing that professional historians are not gullible in the same way they had been.
Can mythicists not see how ridiculous they look when they offer these comebacks as though they were making a serious point?