(skip ahead to 34:00 for Ehrman)
Ehrman's thesis is that the divinization of Jesus developed in stages. First, it was believed Jesus was exalted to be the Son of God at his resurrection (the tradition recorded in Acts 13:33), then that he was adopted as the Son of God at his baptism (Mark 1), then that he was born the Son of God (Matthew 1-2 and Luke 1-2) and finally that he was god and with God from from the beginning and before creation (John 1.1-2).
If Ehrman is correct this would seem to favor the theory that there was an historical earthly Jesus, however much later mythologized, against the mythicist theory proposed by Earl Doherty and Richard Carrier that Jesus was originally (e.g. in the letters of Paul) held to have "lived" and been crucified in the celestial realm.
It is, of course, possible to think that Ehrman is simply wrong and the New Testament does not contain exaltation or adoptionist christologies . Michael Bird, for instance, argues that all the evangelists held an incarnational christology. It is also possible that the exaltation or adoptionist christologies are later developments (Mark is, after all, later than Paul) and Ehrman is wrong about the chronology of the development. One could even propose that Jesus was a "man" who was crucified in the celestial realm and was then exalted to the status of "Son of God" there. Or one could suggest that Jesus was originally held to be an earthly man, but that man was a myth. I'm sure there are other possibilities.
So what I'm wondering is: what do people think of Ehrman's case and how does it interact with the mythicist theory as proposed by Doherty and Carrier?
Best,
Ken