Take this counter-example in Robert Price's newest book The Case Against The Case for Christ:
[…] Since the autographa have not survived and nobody has laid eyes on them for 2,000 years, how could anybody possibly know what was in them – much less, which copies approximate most closely to them? Since there is nothing to which existing manuscripts can be compared, the very ideas of the original manuscripts and which manuscripts approximate most closely to them are useless ideas and should be abandoned. I can judge that a photo is a good likeness of you if and only if I have seen you and know what you look like. If I have not, then I am the last person on earth to ask. The situation is not improved by assuring me that there are thousands of photos of you. The fact is that I have never seen you, so tell million photos would not help. (98-99)
Unfortunately for him, this tactic involves a tradeoff: if Price going to allege that our MSS of Scripture are unreliable, then he can't impute error to Scripture. For, according to him, our extant MSS don't correspond to the autographa.
In addition, he can't indulge in his parallelomania about dying-and-rising savior gods, for even if that method was otherwise sound, he'd only be drawing parallels from untrustworthy MSS.