I agree.MrMacSon wrote: ↑Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:07 am For the gospel Jesus to be the result of euhemerization - ie. the result of anthropomorphization of a celestial figure - does not require
- that pre-euhemerized figure to have been called Jesus, or
- that figure to have been pre-Christian, either fully or partially (though that is possible)
- eta: ie. there may have been a period of early Christianity that espoused a celestial figure, whatever his/it's name
However, Dr. Carrier's hypothesis (at least, the one being addressed in my article) is explicitly that the gospels Euhemerize a pre-Christian celestial figure named Jesus. If one wants to propose and support a less specific hypothesis, one is certainly free to do so. However, that's a completely different case to the one at which my comments were directed, and therefore irrelevant.