And mendacious, too.
Other than thinking Richard Carrier is genius-level mythicism, he thinks the same, in this piece, of Earl Doherty.
I've dealt with Doherty before, starting with his attempt to explain away Galatians 4:4 and claim Paul didn't believe in an earthly Jesus. (Unfortunately, the site I linked to is dead.)
Lataster repeats the same lie on page 18:
Not only is Paul an obviously unreliable historian, he says nothing of a Historical Jesus, at least not anything that could not also apply to the ‘originally celestial’ Jesus proposed by amateur mythicist Earl Doherty.
How does he deal with Galatians 4:4? Doesn't even mention it.
It's called mendaciousness, and mythicists are good at it.
The piece is otherwise strawmanning, with Bart Ehrman — who gets strawmanned by mythicists in general — and Maurice Casey presented as the only two traditional critical scholars.
Lataster himself has even less in the way of relevant education than Doherty.
No comments:
Post a Comment