Changes

A few weeks [later] these very same men and women who had huddled in secret (John 20:19) were fearlessly and openly proclaiming the resurrection of Christ—even before the Sanhedrin that was responsible for Christ’s death (Acts 4-5). The only thing that can account for this immediate and miraculous change is that they were absolutely convinced they had encountered the bodily resurrected Christ.<ref>[https://jashow.org/articles/evidence-for-the-resurrection-of-jesus-christ-from-the-dead/ EVIDENCE FOR THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST FROM THE DEAD], John Ankerberg website</ref>}}

A few weeks [later] these very same men and women who had huddled in secret (John 20:19) were fearlessly and openly proclaiming the resurrection of Christ—even before the Sanhedrin that was responsible for Christ’s death (Acts 4-5). The only thing that can account for this immediate and miraculous change is that they were absolutely convinced they had encountered the bodily resurrected Christ.<ref>[https://jashow.org/articles/evidence-for-the-resurrection-of-jesus-christ-from-the-dead/ EVIDENCE FOR THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST FROM THE DEAD], John Ankerberg website</ref>}}

== Proponents of the Myth argument ==

== Christ myth arguments and proponents ==

Christ myth theory has been around for over 250 years and has never had much traction among actual experts of both secular or religious backgrounds.<ref>Larry Hurtado (Scholar). December 2017. "[https://web.archive.org/web/20250904143324/https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2017/12/02/why-the-mythical-jesus-claim-has-no-traction-with-scholars/ Why the "Mythical Jesus" Claim Has No Traction with Scholars]" Response to Richard Carrier. "The "mythical Jesus" view doesn't have any traction among the overwhelming number of scholars working in these fields, whether they be declared Christians, Jewish, atheists, or undeclared as to their personal stance. Advocates of the "mythical Jesus" may dismiss this statement, but it ought to count for something if, after some 250 years of critical investigation of the historical figure of Jesus and of Christian Origins, and the due consideration of "mythical Jesus" claims over the last century or more, this spectrum of scholars have judged them unpersuasive (to put it mildly)."</ref>

 

A few academics, notably not including historians or biblical scholars, have asserted that Jesus never existed and that he is simply a mythological imagination.  These include G. A. Wells (a professor of German, who has subsequently abandoned this position after reading the works of the renowned J.D.G. Dunn), Earl Doherty (who only holds a bachelor's degree and once wrote a self-published booklet on the subject), Robert M. Price (a systematic theologian), Michael Martin (a philosopher), Richard Carrier (who, although he has a doctoral degree, failed to find an academic position in an institution of higher learning and is therefore currently a blogger), Timothy Freke (who holds no postgraduate degree), and Peter Gandy (who holds no doctoral degree). By such parenthetical comments this article does not intend to be uncharitable to the academics or others who hold to this position, but it is no disparagement to observe what it true: that these scholars are not historians or biblical scholars.  Neither is it unfair to observe how this has, at times, impeded the quality of work produced.  For example, in their work ''The Jesus Mysteries'', Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy used as cover art an image of an amulet of “[[Orphic mysteries|Orpheus]] crucified” (their position being that Jesus was a mythological figure patterned after Osiris-Dionysus) which has been proven to be a forgery.<ref>"In his review of this book in ''Gnomon'', 1935, 476, Kern recants and expressed himself convinced by the expert opinion of Josef Keil and R. Zahn (''AGGELOS, Arch. f. neutest. Zeitgesch. und Kulturkunde'', 1926, 62 ff.) that the Orpheoc Bakkikos gem is a forgery." W. C. K. Guthrie, ''Orpheus and Greek Religion: A Study of the Orphic Movement'', 2nd ed. (London: Methuen, 1952), p. 278, n. to p. 265. This problem was identified by James Hannam; see his comments on his [http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2004/07/some-news-and-thoughts-on-crucified.html Blog]</ref>  

A few academics, notably not including historians or biblical scholars, have asserted that Jesus never existed and that he is simply a mythological imagination.  These include G. A. Wells (a professor of German, who has subsequently abandoned this position after reading the works of the renowned J.D.G. Dunn), Earl Doherty (who only holds a bachelor's degree and once wrote a self-published booklet on the subject), Robert M. Price (a systematic theologian), Michael Martin (a philosopher), Richard Carrier (who, although he has a doctoral degree, failed to find an academic position in an institution of higher learning and is therefore currently a blogger), Timothy Freke (who holds no postgraduate degree), and Peter Gandy (who holds no doctoral degree). By such parenthetical comments this article does not intend to be uncharitable to the academics or others who hold to this position, but it is no disparagement to observe what it true: that these scholars are not historians or biblical scholars.  Neither is it unfair to observe how this has, at times, impeded the quality of work produced.  For example, in their work ''The Jesus Mysteries'', Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy used as cover art an image of an amulet of “[[Orphic mysteries|Orpheus]] crucified” (their position being that Jesus was a mythological figure patterned after Osiris-Dionysus) which has been proven to be a forgery.<ref>"In his review of this book in ''Gnomon'', 1935, 476, Kern recants and expressed himself convinced by the expert opinion of Josef Keil and R. Zahn (''AGGELOS, Arch. f. neutest. Zeitgesch. und Kulturkunde'', 1926, 62 ff.) that the Orpheoc Bakkikos gem is a forgery." W. C. K. Guthrie, ''Orpheus and Greek Religion: A Study of the Orphic Movement'', 2nd ed. (London: Methuen, 1952), p. 278, n. to p. 265. This problem was identified by James Hannam; see his comments on his [http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2004/07/some-news-and-thoughts-on-crucified.html Blog]</ref>