Changes

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>  

====Scholarly reception and criticism====

===Scholarly reception and criticism===

Modern scholars of religion hold that tropes like "dying and rising gods" are outdated and based on dubious reconstructions from later sources, not early indigenous sources, since the earliest extant sources of examples mythicists often use (e.g. Adonis, Attis, Marduk, Tammuz/Dumuzi, Osiris, Inanna, etc) never make such claims, and there is no clear instance of a dying and rising deity narrative in the history of religions.<ref>Jonathan Z. Smith. "Dying and Rising Gods". Encyclopedia of Religion (2nd edition). Macmillan Reference. 2005. pp. 2535-2539. ISBN 978-0028659978. "There is no unambiguous instance in the history of religions of a dying and rising deity."</ref>  

Modern scholars of religion hold that tropes like "dying and rising gods" are outdated and based on dubious reconstructions from later sources, not early indigenous sources, since the earliest extant sources of examples mythicists often use (e.g. Adonis, Attis, Marduk, Tammuz/Dumuzi, Osiris, Inanna, etc) never make such claims, and there is no clear instance of a dying and rising deity narrative in the history of religions.<ref>Jonathan Z. Smith. "Dying and Rising Gods". Encyclopedia of Religion (2nd edition). Macmillan Reference. 2005. pp. 2535-2539. ISBN 978-0028659978. "There is no unambiguous instance in the history of religions of a dying and rising deity."</ref>  

:''The nonhistoricity thesis has always been controversial, and it has consistently failed to convince scholars of many disciplines and religious creeds. ... Biblical scholars and classical historians now regard it as effectively refuted.''<ref>Robert E. Van Voorst, ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence'' (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), p. 16.</ref>

:''The nonhistoricity thesis has always been controversial, and it has consistently failed to convince scholars of many disciplines and religious creeds. ... Biblical scholars and classical historians now regard it as effectively refuted.''<ref>Robert E. Van Voorst, ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence'' (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), p. 16.</ref>

=====The Jesus Project - Mythicist attempt at manipulating consensus=====

====The Jesus Project - Mythicist attempt at manipulating consensus====

In 2007 secular scholar Raymond Joseph Hoffmann started the Jesus Project which was supposed to be a non-religious investigation on Jesus and was headed by the Center for Inquiry which is secular humanist organization promoting a secular society.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20120518142836/http://www.centerforinquiry.net/jesusproject The Jesus Project] Center for Inquiry </ref> It members included liberal scholars, nonreligious scholars and even inlcuded mythicists (e.g. Frank Zindler, Richard Carrier, Robert M. Price, Stephen Law, Thomas Thompson etc).<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20150511171320/http://www.centerforinquiry.net/jesusproject/fellows/carrier_richard/ Fellows] Jesus Project Center for Inquiry</ref> Only two years later in 2009, the Jesus Project was shut down in part due to the attempt by mythicist members trying to form their own faction due to the majority of nonreligious experts not supporting their mythicist views: "“mythers,” people out to prove through consensus with each other a conclusion they cannot establish through evidence".<ref>R. Joseph Hoffman [https://web.archive.org/web/20240618082420/https://bibleinterp.arizona.edu/opeds/hoffman1044 Threnody: Rethinking the Thinking behind The Jesus Project] Bible and Interpretation. October 2009. "Alas, The Jesus Project itself became a subject for exploitation: news stories, promotional material and the reactions in the blogosphere focused on the Big Question: “Scholars to Debate whether Jesus Really existed.” Given the affections of media, the only possible newsworthy outcome was assumed to be He didn’t. Such a conclusion had it ever been reached (as it would not have been reached by the majority of participants) would only have been relevant to the people April DeConnick (a participant) has described as “mythers,” people out to prove through consensus with each other a conclusion they cannot establish through evidence. The first sign of possible trouble came when I was asked by one such “myther” whether we might not start a “Jesus Myth” section of the project devoted exclusively to those who were committed to the thesis that Jesus never existed. I am not sure what “committed to a thesis” entails, but it does not imply the sort of skepticism that the myth theory itself invites.</ref>

In 2007 secular scholar Raymond Joseph Hoffmann started the Jesus Project which was supposed to be a non-religious investigation on Jesus and was headed by the Center for Inquiry which is secular humanist organization promoting a secular society.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20120518142836/http://www.centerforinquiry.net/jesusproject The Jesus Project] Center for Inquiry </ref> It members included liberal scholars, nonreligious scholars and even inlcuded mythicists (e.g. Frank Zindler, Richard Carrier, Robert M. Price, Stephen Law, Thomas Thompson etc).<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20150511171320/http://www.centerforinquiry.net/jesusproject/fellows/carrier_richard/ Fellows] Jesus Project Center for Inquiry</ref> Only two years later in 2009, the Jesus Project was shut down in part due to the attempt by mythicist members trying to form their own faction due to the majority of nonreligious experts not supporting their mythicist views: "“mythers,” people out to prove through consensus with each other a conclusion they cannot establish through evidence".<ref>R. Joseph Hoffman [https://web.archive.org/web/20240618082420/https://bibleinterp.arizona.edu/opeds/hoffman1044 Threnody: Rethinking the Thinking behind The Jesus Project] Bible and Interpretation. October 2009. "Alas, The Jesus Project itself became a subject for exploitation: news stories, promotional material and the reactions in the blogosphere focused on the Big Question: “Scholars to Debate whether Jesus Really existed.” Given the affections of media, the only possible newsworthy outcome was assumed to be He didn’t. Such a conclusion had it ever been reached (as it would not have been reached by the majority of participants) would only have been relevant to the people April DeConnick (a participant) has described as “mythers,” people out to prove through consensus with each other a conclusion they cannot establish through evidence. The first sign of possible trouble came when I was asked by one such “myther” whether we might not start a “Jesus Myth” section of the project devoted exclusively to those who were committed to the thesis that Jesus never existed. I am not sure what “committed to a thesis” entails, but it does not imply the sort of skepticism that the myth theory itself invites.</ref>