Answer #3 for centuri0n

I was wondering when you would raise the standard of evidence to incredible heights.

I have made the claim that the Jesus story contains similarities to many sources, including the Old Testament, previous non-Jewish myths, and the competing religions that were present at the time that Christianity was conceived and developed.

In response you have demanded that I produce a nearly identical religious character to Jesus. This technique is similar to that in your Question #2, when you extracted a single element of the mythicist case and demanded that I demonstrate how it could make the entire argument on its own.

Perhaps there is some value in your inventing claims that I have not made, then demanding that I support these claims. I don't see what that value is, but, hey, it's your blog.

You want me to produce the following work:

--Cultic literature
--Written between 300 BC and 100 AD
--Imitated historical narrative
--To express religious truths
--Protagonist interacts with contemporary political figures

No, I cannot point you to a piece of fiction that contains every item on your menu. This piece of fiction may indeed exist. Former Baptist seminarian and Jesus Seminar fellow Robert M. Price spoke to me about many popular stories of the time that had similarities to the Jesus tale (see his interview on The God Who Wasn't There DVD or view this partial clip). But I am not aware of a work that fits your precise specifications.

Of course, when researching The God Who Wasn't There, I did not say to myself, "Now, if only I can find a piece of cultic literature written between 300 BC and 100 AD that imitates historical narrative to express religious truths and that has a protagonist who interacts with political figures, only then will I have evidence that the Jesus character may be derivative of other sources."

That would, of course, have been 1) Placing an impossibly high standard on the mythicist case, and 2) Operating on the absurd assumption that if the Gospel tales are unique in any way, that means they can't be fiction.

It should be obvious that the Jesus story is a synthesis of previous myths. To take just one example, the slaughter of the innocents more likely is "derived right out of the book of Exodus" than it is an accurate account of an amazingly coincidental historical event.

However, to claim that the Jesus story is a synthesis is not to claim that there was no originality in how the story was assembled and developed over time. Also, to claim that Jesus is a god in the "dying and rising savior" genre is not to claim that Jesus is identical to every single god in that genre. Clearly, Christianity was innovative in some ways, and the innovations aided its spectacular success.

I hope this clears up any misunderstandings you may have had about the mythicist argument as it is actually presented by its proponents.