Pagan influences on the biblical stories of Jesus' life

[Jenny A]

If Christianity was a recycling of old myths, then it all had to be developed and synthesized between Jesus' death and the writing of Paul's letters or at the latest the gospels a few years later.

A few years later? Paul wrote his first letter a good two decades after the traditional dates for Jesus ' death. He notable almost never quotes Jesus or describes Jesus' life. With the exception of Romans, his surviving letters were written to gentile communities not groups of Jewish Christians. Sudden great consistency with jewish myth was hardly reqired.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_epistles

The the first gospel was written was Mark in 60 CE but probably closer to 70 CE. John was written last sometime between 80-95 CE. That's a generation or two after Jesus' death. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historic...p_and_date

That would be an impressive undertaking resulting in a systematic theology that had to:

1. Be compatible with OT monotheistic doctrine of God

But it isn't consistent. The trinity is not consistent with previous monotheist doctrine. The christian concepts of afterlife are very different from earlier jewish notions of death. Christians largely threw out the bedrock of Jewish practice of the laws of Moses.

2. Be compatible with OT prophecies

Which prophesies? Seriously. Jesus was no David. There was no prophesy of a virgin birth. Just what intricate prophecy would be hard to meet?

3. Be internally consistent.

The gospels are far from internally consistent and the description of Paul in Acts is in conflict with Paul's letters. If internal consistency were required there wouldn't be a christianity.

4. and since most of you believe that Jesus actually/probably existed, had to be compatible with what the people knew to be true about Jesus--whom Paul never net.

The fact that a man lived preached and died has little to do with how he might be mythologized decades later elsewhere in in world.

It also assumes that, presumably Paul, was familiar with the details of each of the examples of ancient myths you give. I don't see reasons why that would be true. He would have been studied in Jewish law and the OT. Access to the details of extinct and eastern religions would have to be explained for this to be plausible.

Not really. I doubt many founders of other religions borrowing ideas had extensive knowledge of the myths they borrowed. Right now new age idiots mythicise quantum mechanics without actually knowing much more than a little vocabulary. The jewish notions of death changed as they met other cultures. Extensive knowledge of those cultures was not required. Religious ideas move freely through many cultures without scholarly study by myth makers. Why would it be more difficult for early christians?

Then you are back to the question of: Why would Paul go through all that trouble to make up such a complicated story? If you are tempted to say for power and/or money, please provide evidence for that assertion.

Paul joined first one side than the other in an ongoing jewish debate about what Jesus' teachings and death meant. He didn't make up a religion, rather, he had strong ideas about a developing religion. Many, many people were involved in the making of Christianity. That is why it is so internally inconsistent.