Originally Posted by EarlDoherty

1. The most popular type of argument one encounters in defense of the Historical Jesus is that the vast majority of scholars have always maintained his existence, an argument from authority that is given legitimacy on the grounds that scholarship has again and again demolished the mythicist theory.

2. Earl Doherty several months ago posted on his website a lengthy and comprehensive article demolishing the case for demolition, addressing every major, and many minor, writings over the last century purporting to do the latter. (Alleged Scholarly Refutations of Jesus Mythicism)

3. Considering that so much emphasis is placed upon traditional scholarship’s superior command of the issue and its dismissal of the mythicist theory, one must expect that those truly interested in becoming knowledgeable on this question did in fact investigate Doherty’s article, if only to be sure that the argument from authority had a leg to stand on.

4. Given that expectation, and given the fact that no one to date has offered any critique of the arguments and rebuttals contained in Doherty’s article (have I missed it?), one must presume that no critique was possible, and that scholarship’s stance in defense of an historical Jesus and against the mythicist theory is insupportable.

5. Therefore, Jesus did not exist.

I noticed that another thread was started by someone who asked for a piece of writing that would present the case for an historical Jesus. Why was he not pointed to my article, which not only presents all the essential elements of that case as put forward in a century of defense against mythicism, but also contains a response to all the elements of that case? Two for the price of one. Then he could evaluate the issue based on the debating points of both sides. I note that this person said he had read S. J. Case, who convinced him that there was indeed an historical Jesus. Case wrote in 1912! (More or less the Iron Age of New Testament research.) But then, maybe Case isn’t all that obsolete, because defenders since then, including the most recent, have not come up with much that is more original or up to date than him.

P.S. I usually check in once or twice a week to see what’s going on, and I think this thread is quite an original approach to dealing with the debate. I congratulate Peter on it, but one would almost think that he has become a closet mythicist!

(And while I've got Peter's attention, I would like to urge him to put a link to my said "Refutations" article on his website, as prominently as he has featured articles on the other side, including that lamentable defense of said century of scholars by Christopher Price--which I also address in my article. Not even Price has undertaken a rebuttal to that article.)

All the best,
Earl Doherty

Originally Posted by EarlDoherty

Earl Doherty several months ago posted on his website a lengthy and comprehensive article demolishing the case for demolition, addressing every major, and many minor, writings over the last century purporting to do the latter.

Originally Posted by Toto

could you summarize this demolition?

Originally Posted by Camio

I will try to translate the main part of it for next week (I tried an online translator, the result was horrible...). I truly think it is worth taking a look at.

Originally Posted by No Robots

The attack on the historicity of Christ is one of the gravest threats, because it would rob of us of the very center of our spiritual lives. I am not arguing the fallacy of adverse consequences: I am just saying why I oppose mythicism so strenously.

Originally Posted by Toto

The book has been translated into English.

Originally Posted by aa5874

Your fear of MJers is unfounded, if your Jesus actually existed, you have nothing to worry about, no mythicist can rob you of the center of your spiritual life!

No one can attack the historicity of any person, all that is needed is evidence to support historicity. I f it is claimed that Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Pontius Pilate or Jesus the Christ did not exist, then research into the matter will be able to help one to make a determination of the claims.

Catergorising research into the historicity of Jesus the Christ as an 'attack and one of the gravest threat' is brutal, and displays the arrogance of those who want to suppress any investigation into the so-called Son of God.

Originally Posted by No Robots

If you yell, "Fire!" in a crowded movie theatre when there is no fire, you are committing a grave offense to the public welfare. Mythicists are doing similar mischief by saying Christ never lived.

Originally Posted by everettf WHY???