Does Jesus Mythicism give atheism a bad name?

[robvalue]

I think there's some misunderstanding about what the mythicist position actually is. It is almost always presented as a strawman.

It's not saying the entire story is fictional. It is saying that there isn't enough evidence to reasonably pinpoint a single historical figure; so that its most likely to be a mixture of several historical figures, or else so vague that it could have been based on hundreds of different real people without making any difference.

It's a position I lean towards myself, and I think it's perfectly reasonable. So no, I don't think it gives atheism a bad name. The strawmen presented about it may cause problems however. The arguments and evidence for pinpointing a single, distinct historical figure are (in my opinion) terrible. It's the default position as far as I'm concerned, after the HJ has failed to meet its burden of proof.