Is Christianity based on older myths?

[SteveII]

You are in a minority (perhaps even on this forum) since most scholars have not come to realize Jesus was not a historical figure.

That can't possibly be intended to be taken as an argument against the Christ-mythicists, right? Surely you know that both Appeal to Authority and Appeal to Popularity are fallacies in logical argument. I'm sure we can both find positions that were simultaneously true and yet criticized on the same errant reasoning.

Footnotes from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus. Just the ones that are marked agnostic or atheists because I know how much you guys respect the scholarly works of Christians, Jews, or Muslims.

Bart Ehrman (a secular agnostic) wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees" B. Ehrman, 2011 Forged : writing in the name of God ISBN 978-0-06-207863-6. page 285

Robert M. Price (an atheist) who denies the existence of Jesus agrees that this perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars: Robert M. Price "Jesus at the Vanishing Point" in The Historical Jesus: Five Views edited by James K. Beilby & Paul Rhodes Eddy, 2009 InterVarsity, ISBN 0830838686 page 61

Michael Grant (a classicist) states that "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." in Jesus by Michael Grant 2004 ISBN 1898799881 page 200

Richard A. Burridge states: "There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church’s imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more." in Jesus Now and Then by Richard A. Burridge and Graham Gould (Apr 1, 2004) ISBN 0802809774 page 34

---

Please tell me you're kidding. This is a summation of your argument:

"The Jesus shit is real because you cannot crawl around in Paul's head".

No it is not. I thought since you have strong opinions that you think are well-founded, you would has some theory to put forward. But it is nice to know know that you are only about "prove it" and not about the why of anything.