A question that occurred to me while reading the Ehrman book.
One of the central points of the Jesus Myth advocates is discounting the Gospel accounts as history. This is a complex subject- the texts are a blend of myth and more reasonable narrative. But it is a fact that the people who believe in them as absolutely true history now tend to be on the margins intellectually- either ignorant or blindingly dogmatic fundamentalists.
In our view of these Gospel narratives, are we reading back the character of these literalists on the original authors? I.e. are we thinking that whoever wrote John was the First Century equivalent of Pat Roberston or worse?
