The reality of the Christ problem is that the actual evidence points to literary invention, not historical existence, as the basis of the Jesus stories. The cosmology of the ancient oral mystery cultures that gave birth to Christianity is so distant from modern worldviews that people today are largely unable to imagine how the authors of the New Testament may have thought. So instead Christians get away with believing the ancient writers accepted the absurd literal supernatural magical claims about God, fanciful miracle stories that only became believable by the application of massive political intimidation over many centuries.
Compared to literalism, the far more compelling reading is that the Gospels are allegory, but their real meaning was suppressed by fanatics. Literalism is about emotional comfort, not historical analysis.
Dogmatists such as Casey must find coherent analysis emotionally upsetting. Otherwise they would not resort to such desperately thin and personal arguments. Jim West compounds the problem, providing evangelism on steroids with his empty derogatory comments about mythicism. Casey and West are an embarrassment to Christian theology, using bullying instead of dialogue, and blank dogmatic assertion in place of analysis of evidence.
Adam wrote:Though Casey's book isn't even "out" yet, Jim West presumes already to declare it the "last word" (my bolding) on debunking MJ. (The formatting was very hard to copy over, sorry for not getting it exactly the same as West's formatting.)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/189205535/Casey
The new volume is comprised of these segments: Preface Abbreviations 1. Introduction 2. Historical Method 3. The Date and Reliability of the Canonical Gospels
4. What is Not in the Gospels, or Not in ‘Q’
5. What is Not in the Epistles, Especially Those of Paul 6. What is Written in the Epistles, Especially Those of Paul 7. It All Happened Before, in Egypt, India, or Wherever you Fancy, but there was Nowhere for it to Happen in Israel 8. Conclusions Appendix: Latinisms
The volume is dedicated to the very lovely Stephanie Fisher who contributed to its appearance in numerous ways.
But is it any good? Does it serve a useful purpose? Or does it simply give 'airtime’ to a fringe element of pseudo-‘scholars' who scarcely deserve the recognition they herein receive? In my estimation the answer to the first question is a resounding yes. Casey has an engaging writing style as all who have familiarized themselves with his earlier works will know. He also can turn a phrase. For instance: Blogger Godfrey uses the work of Kelber in an incompetent piece of creative fiction (p. 78). Again … Doherty has taken over Kloppenborg's version of these entirely hypothetical documents [i.e., ‘Q’], so he has drawn dramatic conclusions from the absence of things from documents which did not exist until modern scholars invented them (p. 109). This book is a rip-roaring and irrefutable denunciation of post-modernity’s silliest assertion: that Jesus did not exist and was a myth invented by the church. This brings me to the second question: does this book serve a useful purpose? Again, the answer is yes. It is exceptionally important that scholars not be silent when falsehoods are foisted upon an unsuspecting and uninformed public. Put simply, silence is acceptance. Hence, when Casey speaks out so forthrightly about the folly and foolishness of the mythicists assertions he is doing what scholars must do: teaching.
Finally, does Casey's book simply give airtime to a fringe element of pseudo-scholars who scarcely deserve the recognition they herein receive? This time the answer is an even more resounding No! This book once and for all settles the question of Jesus existence. The pseudo-scholarship of the mythicists is so roundly and soundly defeated precisely because Casey addresses their ideas point by point and line by line and measure by measure. Casey concludes The most important result of this book is that the whole idea that Jesus of Nazareth did not exist as a historical figure is verifiably false. Moreover, it has not been produced by anyone or anything with any reasonable relationship to critical scholarship. It belongs in the fantasy lives of people who used to be Fundamentalist Christians. They did not believe in critical scholarship then, and they do not do so now. I cannot find any evidence that any of them have adequate professional qualifications (p. 243). This volume needs to be read by every person interested in the Historical Jesus.
It is one of those unusual volumes of which it can be honestly said, this is the last word necessary on the subject. Case closed.
Casey has closed the case as no one else could, or has. Jim West Quartz Hill School of Theology
