Switch89

I would not think that being a sibling of Jesus would get you anything. I mean, just cause you're the brother of Christ does not mean you're of high character. Then again, when did a cult ever make sense?

In any case, I think Galatians 1:19 is a severe wound for mythicism.

aa5874

You must be joking.

The church writers could not even identify the letters the writer called Paul wrote and there are no external sources that have identified the true Paul or when he wrote.

The writer presented Jesus as a mythical creature who was witnessed by over 500 people to have resurrected, ascended and will come back a second time.

spamandham

Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I don't put much stock in a single verse. There is evidence of later tampering throughout Paul's letters, and several letters once attributed to Paul have been determined to be pseudepigraphical altogether. Some qualified scholars argue that all the letters are completely disingenuine.

The strength or weakness of mythicism does not rest on a single passage, or even a few, but rather, on whether or not it's a simpler overall explanation.

gurugeorge

I should have added to my previous post that I think the idea of "rank" is putting us off the scent a bit.

Not rank, specifically, but more like a generic self-appellation for Christians in those early days, is what it looks like to me.

i.e., the idea would be that, in those days, Christians generically thought of themselves as "brothers of the Lord".

The idea of "fraternality" is a common enough idea for all sorts of groupings of people - think of the Freemasons calling each other "brother".

spamandham

....or for that matter, modern Christians as well as ancient ones.