He existed. That’s all I’m saying. He probably taught something similar to what’s in the Bible, it’s unlikely to all have been bent by the faithful because that’s not how religions work. People don’t worship Ghandi and then put Stalin in their mouths, or the reverse.
Yet all his records appear only like a hundred years after his alleged death. I don’t find that to be convincing credibility.
Give me one single reason why Jesus’ existence should be judged by a standard different to any of these other people:
Sokrates existed, and we’re similarly unsure of what he taught – but it’s bound to have quite some resemblance to what Plato said about him.
Confucius also existed and we’re absolutely sure of what he taught because he wrote it down.
With Buddha again it’s similar to Jesus and Sokrates: The Pali canon definitely gets the gist of things.
Epictetus? We’re damn sure of what he taught, not because he wrote it down but because we have other people’s lecture notes.
Laozi didn’t exist: The Dao de Jing existed in fragments before it was supposedly written in one go, and tales about his life are completely at odds with each other, and frankly speaking reek of extra chapters to the book. Though it’s not entirely unlikely that it was compiled and polished by one guy, then published under pseudonym – “The old master” yep that’s rather obvious for a compilation of old sayings.
If you want to make some sort of point for Christianity, then you’re in the wrong place.
IDGAF about Christianity. Much, much less than you I even dare claim.