Is Christianity based on older myths?

[SteveII]

Ok, let's work it from another angle. What concrete evidence do you have that suggests the gospels (as an example) were actually written by the apostles entitled? Just anything, what is it?

Here's the thing - the bible is the claim. The things in the bible are the claims made that constitute the entire biblical claim. With me thus far? Why should I, as someone who is skeptical of claims with no substance, take your word about the truth value behind that claim over the null hypothesis that it's all bunk until proven otherwise?

And here's the other thing that you haven't even touched upon since 10 pages back where your own conclusion preceded the subsequent discussions. Whether the Jesus myth is real or not is irrelevant when compared to the claims of divinity which are (again) held within the bible. for that, you'd need to present something to match in incredibleness [sic] of the constituent claim[s], to which thus far I've seen the same amount as you convincing us that the story of Jesus existing is even real in the first place.

If I write that the early church, Paul, John, Peter, and James (epistle writers) believed that Jesus was God, died and rose again, you (and 10 of your friends) will just reply: prove it.

If I write that the multiple attestation of miracles is evidence that a miracle did happen, you (and 10 of your friends) will just reply: prove it, hearsay is not evidence (when it is).

If I write that the alternative is a massive deception and there are not good reasons for a massive deception, you (and 10 of your friends) will just reply: prove it. (Or the more ignorant will say for money and power.)

If I write that most scholars believe that Jesus existed and even that his baptism and crucifixion really happened, you (and 10 of your friends) will just reply: prove it, appeal to authority.

So I won't write those things again.