Is Christianity based on older myths?

[SteveII]

I don't care if you believe the events of Jesus' life actually happened or not. But the consequences of rejecting the gospels is that a significant number of people intentionally lied. Then the question is to what end? This all goes toward the probability assessment of whether the first Christians believed in the actual key events in Jesus' life.

"Lied' is the wrong word. "Wove tales" would be more apt.

---

So you are saying Galilean fisherman probably had access to libraries (in their language) in order to tell Paul some lies. Or are you saying Paul was the mastermind and got the disciples to change their stories 20 years later to match something he concocted from these scrolls he may or may not have had access to?

Or how about:
that there weren't any Galilean fisherman;
or that Paul never spoke with them;
or the Galilean fisherman exaggerated;
or Paul misunderstood the Galilean fisherman;
or Paul exaggerated?

You are a tad too credulous.

You mean someone lied, lied, lied and lied. No one seems to want to tell me why the assumption is all these writers lied. Or is it more proper to assume a writer of an ancient document is not being intentionally deceitful until it can be proven or at least a plausible explanation why the contents are false. There are at least 8 authors of these 27 docs.