The question that shatters faith, forever.

[genkaus]

The effect on teachings is not at issue. The OP suggests that without historical support Christianity falls apart. So by what standard do we conclude that Jesus did not exist? If we say it is reasonable to believe Socrates existed based on the number and quality of the sources, then it would also be reasonable to say that Jesus existed.

The question in both cases is not just that Socrates or Jesus existed - its that they existed as described. Christianity is built on more than someone called Jesus existing at the turn of the century - it requires that he be born of a virgin, performed miracles and died and came back. In contrast, Socrates' philosophy does not rely on him in such a manner.

So, if using the same standard of proof, you conclude that Jesus was an mythical figure and Socrates was Plato's imaginary friend - Christianity falls apart and the Socratic method is still valid.

If you conclude that someone called Jesus probably existed, as did someone called Socrates - but there is no evidence of them existing as described - Christianity still falls apart, but the Socratic method is still valid.