My blog

[robvalue]

What I mean is... To say jesus is mythical isn't making a claim as such, it's just saying HJ has not met its burden of proof. And I don't mean declaring that it definitely is mythical; just that if something isn't demonstrably real, we have no reason to assume it's anything but fiction.

---

Right, well yeah. You can just pick any random jesus back then and it's "based on" them as much as any other jesus. But if you can't attribute a single word or action to them, in what way is it based on them? That's my problem

---

I mean, Harry potter may be "based on" a real Harry, but what does that mean? Does it make Harry potter any more real if so?

---

Sorry for the confusion dystopia, I really appreciate the feedback and upon re reading my blog I can see definite bits I could improve. Sorry I was confused, I can see your concerns now. I hope to improve it soon.

Cheers!

---

Maybe mythicist is the wrong term for my position. I may be getting confused. I'll think it over! Maybe thats making a separate claim... OK that may be a bad idea then! I'll think about it!