It is worth noting precisely what it is that mythicists do with Paul\u2019s references to Jesus in his letters, and just how easily the same could be done with James, the brother of Jesus, whom most mythicists accept was an actual person, while denying that he was actually Jesus\u2019 brother. They emphasize that he is not called \u201cthe brother of Jesus\u201d but \u201cthe brother of the Lord\u201d as though the Lord, for Paul, were not clearly Jesus. Some have even tried to claim that he was the brother of Yahweh, showing that mythicists are clutching at straws and have no real understanding of what ancient Jews and early Christians believed.<\/p>\n
And so why don\u2019t they go further still? Paul went up<\/em> to Jerusalem. Surely this could refer to a heavenly journey to the heavenly Jerusalem, during which he met Jacob, Yahweh\u2019s brother. Simple! After all, Paul himself says that he was taken up to the third heaven.<\/p>\n My objection to this (in case you are starting to think maybe I\u2019m onto something) is that it is the same approach religious fundamentalists take to the text, deciding what it is allowed to mean in advance, and then accepting any interpretation that provides that desired meaning, without discussion or consideration of whether the text\u00a0more likely<\/em> means what they think it should. Mythicists prooftext rather than exegete.<\/p>\n Of related interest:<\/p>\n History for Atheists on the Nazareth myth<\/a><\/p>\n Jesus mythicism and the invisibility of the poor<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/brucegerencser.net\/2019\/10\/questions-do-you-believe-jesus-was-a-real-person\/<\/p>\n Bruce also interacts with Harry McCall<\/a>, who claims that I \u201cremoved from both his blog and Butler University religion faculty description any claim that he debunks claims that the New Testament Jesus never existed.\u201d I have no idea what he is talking about, but I am happy to reiterate here that I do indeed debunk Jesus-mythicist nonsense, when time allows. Bruce writes nicely on this topic, in a way that meshes with points I made above:<\/p>\n Harry McCall\u2026is a mythicist zealot. He\u2019s the kind of \u201cbeliever\u201d who puts people into two categories: \u201cagainst\u201d him or \u201cfor\u201d him. McCall is convinced that he has overwhelming proved that the historical Jesus is a myth, and anyone who reads his writings will come to the same conclusion. Those who don\u2019t are immediately condemned and summarily executed.<\/p>\n McCall thinks that just because he writes something, that those who disagree with it or mythicism, in general, are obligated to refute him. I see similar behavior from Christian Fundamentalists. Over the years, I have had countless Evangelicals demand that I answer their \u201cirrefutable\u201d arguments for their peculiar brand of Christianity. There was a time when I would do so, but I later came to the conclusion that it was a waste of time. Zealots, be they Christian, atheist, or \u201cspiritual,\u201d are closed-minded. Their goal is not discussion, it\u2019s conversion.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n https:\/\/brucegerencser.net\/2019\/11\/harry-mccall-objects-to-my-rejection-of-mythicism-says-i-hate-him\/<\/p>\n See too:<\/p>\n https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/godlessindixie\/2019\/10\/17\/episode-18-was-jesus-a-real-person\/<\/p>\n Memory and the Jesus\u00a0Tradition<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n