Can we discuss the historicity of Jesus?

[KDbeads]

They made him up, they gave him a cool story, and then he was propagated throughout the Roman Empire for political purposes. Everything after that is history.

For me, that is hitting the nail on the head and what I have thought for a very long while!  Thank you for taking the time to spell that all out.  

[deekayfry]

Excellent work!

I have for years, have felt that Christianity should be called Paulianity.  Almost all Christian dogma and doctrine derive from the Pauline epistles.  Another Christian/Pauline dogma that has passed through the two millennium was Paul's hateful, angry, and nasty attitude.  THAT unfortunately has survived and thrived to today.

I feel, however I do not believe, that Jesus was a collection of some tales that either occurred or marginally occurred.  So in a sense someone or a group of people embodied the tales.

You said that during that time religion was going through a change as in rise of paganism, an appeal to a more generalized deity, or a deity that caters to the masses.  This is true for that point in time, but it is also true throughout pre-history and history of humankind.  Religion has always evolved, died off, returned, revised, and evolved.  It has been borrowed, stolen, remade, etc.

Oh and serious kudos for pointing out that the name "Jesus" was simply a Greek translation of the Hebrew name "Joshua," a very common name at the time.  I wonder how many people realize this when they say, "In the name of Jesus" they are really saying "in the name of Joshua."