Interview – Derek Lambert on Jesus Mythicism
My latest guest is Derek Lambert, the presenter of the excellent Mythvision video channel and podcast. Derek has been kind enough to have me on his channel several times over the last two years to discuss atheist bad history in general and Jesus Mythicism in particular.
But today we are going to hear from Derek about his very interesting personal journey regarding his thoughts and conclusions about the historical Jesus. As he’ll detail for us, Derek began as a fundamentalist Christian, lost his belief, became an atheist and also became a Jesus Mythicist, coming to believe that there was no historical Jesus at all. But Derek displays an interesting combination of rigorous examination of the evidence, intellectual honesty and a remarkable open-mindedness. So he is always open to other people’s views, generous in consideration of alternatives and unstinting in following where the evidence seems to lead.
As a result of listening to and engaging with a wide range of scholars, Derek has come to reject Mythicism and now concludes that a historical Jesus most likely existed. And I was surprised and rather flattered to discover during our conversation that my articles on History for Atheists had something to do with this transition. We also discuss why he found Mythicism appealing and why he feels this fringe idea has a hold on many atheists despite being rejected by almost all scholars.
So please enjoy my fascinating conversation with the always enthusiastic, upbeat and very interesting Derek Lambert.
As usual, this episode is also available in audio form on the History for Atheists podcast on Buzzsprout or most podcast platforms. Or you can listen to it via the History for Atheists podcast page.
12 thoughts on “Interview – Derek Lambert on Jesus Mythicism”
I don’t understand.
You constantly repeat that mythicism is stupid and only for retards.
Then we have this Derek Lamber and he finds mythicism interesting and relevant in certain aspects.
Did you lie to us ?
I think it’s wrong. That “only for retards” stuff is your words, not mine.
He thinks it’s wrong. He used to find it interesting and relevant. He doesn’t any more.
No.
I studied for my PhD in modern history, mythicism seems ridiculous, but scholars arguing that it is possible to use history to prove the resurrection is even more ridiculous, for instance Licona, Habermas, Lane Craig. Why is one treated as more respectable than the other? A matter of tradition.
Largely. But many of the arguments of the more conservative scholars on that topic are considered about as bad as those of Mythicists by most other scholars.
Even if you deny the historical reality of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead, you cannot deny the subsequent historical realities. I think that is the point.
Something can be stupid, interesting and relevant at the same time. A good example is Young Earth Creationism. Even many of its fans think the crocoduck argument stupid. Given that 24% of the Dutch population rejects evolution theory (and I suspect that most of them are YECers – there is no ID-movement overhere) it’s relevant. The interesting aspect is how YECers think; that tells us something about human psychology, hence also about you and me.
An interesting aspect of jesusmythology is how atheists at one hand claim to be rational, relying on science. At the same time they reject scientific principles of historical research (like its well-tested methodology), which obviously is irrational.
Given the fact that I’m as human as YECers and JMs the uncomfortable question is to what extent I am as irrational as they.
As for the retards: don’t make the mistake of thinking that YEC is only for them. Several of their prominents are more intelligent and have far more knowledge of biology than the average Jane and Joe, including me. Same for JM.
> Given that 24% of the Dutch population rejects evolution theory
That sounds extremely bizarre and, frankly, much too high to be credible. Source?
Yes, I myself still find it hard to believe too.
https://scientias.nl/creationistische-komedie-wat-creationisten-doen-om-de-evolutietheorie-te-ontkrachten/
“De percentages in België (21 procent) en Nederland (23 procent) zijn opvallend hoog.”
“The percentages in Belgium and The Netherlands are remarkably high.”
The blogpost refers to Richard Dawkins 2009, who refers to a European survey in 2005. On purpose I used “reject evolution” because I’m not sure to what extent that makes them creationists.
The first time I met this was in another source which I can’t refind right now.
Liked the interview.
That was an interesting back story. Tell him thanks for sharing.
I love the discussion and being Jewish you might be surprised that I cringe when I hear Christians attack the Church in any way when they debate the issues.
The forms of the time were parables, myths . The Jews themselves had endless problems figuring out what the parables meant. Myths were not lies , they were to teach the unfilled aspirations of the Jews.
The Torah was not in chronological order , it was in an order of building moral premises.
The church was stuck with the Jewish forms because Jesus was a Jew.
It was stuck with the Jewish Messiah because Zeus did not have a messiah .
Do not attack the church every time you figure
out it is not a history book .
It is the correct Jewish forms .