So, why not concentrate on the central parts of the message, rather than the "mythology"? That's what is important in the message.

What difference does it make whether someone turned water into wine (most probably a symbol) or various other such things?

What is important is the spiritual philosophy imparted by Christianity.

I think it very probable that Jesus existed, merely because the events of his life had such an enormous and lasting impact on first, a small group of followers...and then, a much larger group...eventually converting the Roman Empire itself from the top down against absolutely collosal odds. Such things are not started or inspired by mythical people, no more than the Buddhist religion or the Hindu religion was...BUT...the followers of such people are very inclined to concoct exciting myths or exaggerated stories or symbolic stories about their prophet AFTER HE IS GONE.

And I think that is a very large part of what happened. It was natural that the followers of Jesus who survived him would come up with stories that fitted the traditional culture they were living in. Thus they borrowed all kinds of religious ideas that they could relate to, and wrote a bunch of books which we know as the New Testament.

To suggest that Jesus himself did not exist is far less plausible than questioning the accuracy of the people who wrote stories about him after the fact.

When a stone is thrown in the water it makes a splash, and the ripples keep spreading for a long time. To suggest there was no such stone as Jesus doesn't strike me as plausible when the ripples are still all around us. Do you know of any completely fictional person now who has that kind of impact on people? Not bloody likely. It takes a real prophet to launch a religion.

There were many, many other would-be prophets and messiahs around at that time, but they are barely remembered, if at all. Jesus is remembered. That in itself is the clearest indication that he did exist, just as did Buddha, Ghandi, Sri Ramakrishna or a host of other such people.

Consider another example: Robin Hood. I doubt that the story of the real man who started it all was much like the one we hear (which had a lot of Celtic mythology woven into it), but a real man certainly must have existed as a catalyst to start the whole thing off in the first place, and he must have been fairly unusual to have that sort of impact on people.

Once people form a belief (religious or not) based on faith or partial information (and what information is not partial?) they also form an emotional attachment to the belief, and defend it tenaciously.

I think, Tunesmith, that you have formed such an emotional attachment to the idea that Jesus never existed. It has become important to you. Other people have equally strong emotional attachments to the idea he did exist. How about you respect their right to their attachments if they respect your right to yours? Why do other people have to be wrong? Why can they not just be different?

If Jesus had never existed, we wouldn't be arguing about this... :-) We'd be arguing about someone else, most likely.

- LH