(February 26, 2015 at 11:17 am)robvalue Wrote: 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.
What is its "burden of proof" here? How would it meet this, exactly? What evidence, of the kind that we could expect for an early first century Jewish preacher, would be sufficient to meet this burden of proof, in your opinion?
Quote: 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.
See my questions above about what could be "demonstrable" here.
