This will shock the believer without satisfying the scientific
 naturalist. I submit that the propostition I have italicized is 
absolutely untenable. On this point may be staked the whole dispute 
about the actuality of the gospel Jesus. It simply does not follow 
that because a statement is credible it is therefore trustworth or 
proved. If it were so, half the characters in fiction could be 
"proved" to be real people. Perfectly credible statements are made 
about them." _Pagan_Christs_ pgs 64-65.

  And I would add that perfectly credible statements are made by 
fictional
 characters also. It is credible to pronounce that Joe Catholic 
said a hundred Hail Marys this morning. Such is a credible 
statement concerning Catholics. But is it trustworthy?

  Such thinking requires a leap. The leap involves a thought 
process that
 says what is possible must indeed be true. T.X. Huxley makes this 
same mistake. Huxley says that Sauls visit with the Witch of Endor 
is entirely probable, so there is no reason not to believe it. It 
is probable that I, as a child, fell into a dark hole for 3 days 
and nights. History is full of discredited "probablilites".

  To finish this section up I'd like to say that what applies to 
characters
 of fiction must also apply to demigods and characters about whom 
there is a fable. Unless it can be shown on independent grounds how 
the credible story came to be associated with the fable, we have no 
reason to accept one and reject the other. There are instances of 
myths being built up on a basis of facutal events, but although 
this can be established in modern times, such cases do not enable 
us to distinguish between the merely possible and the actual in 
ancient tradition. Admittedly there are borderline cases, but even 
when these are free from supernaturalism they may often be doubted.

---
1:128/23)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------