Just to jump in here, a good book to read that not many have read is "Time Frames" by Niles Eldridge, discussing the theoruy of punctuated Equlbria in evolution. He and Gould both developed this theory, but had their own take on it. A good readable book.
Maybe you've never been in a court. Hearsay evidence cannot be used to convict a person, because by definition it is not reliable. It is illogical to think it BECOMES MORE reliable when you go back in time 2000 years, and records become even more shrouded in their source, and who might have had...
Some man-god dying for our sins (Jesus or otherwise) is illogical, because it doesnn't take into account all persons preexistant to that time, and all persons who would never hear of such an event, or are culturally bound to other religions.
It seems to be important enough for people to insist that historisty doesnt need to be concurrent, but can depend upon hearsay, i.e. you can change the rules of the game if you have an axe to grind.
Nuff said.:D
Yeah, this "brother of Jesus" stuff is just plain hokey, there is no gospel equivalent of it, and certainly no real historical evidence of it. Just the usual third-hand, could be faked, evidence of it.
Wait a minute, these early Christian saints were as honest as the day is long, just because Paul says to "lie for the lord" doesn't mean they took it literally.:D
You're quite correct, insisting that a supposed Jesus was an "original" personality is ridiculous given the plethora of existing religions and philosophies that were preexistent to the first cetury. The gospels, which themselves conflict with each other greatly, are simply continuations of this...
Smiling missionaries have destroyed more cultures than all armies combined. "Help" given with an agenda is the most insidious type of invasion - an invasion of one's culture.
Yes there is, it is certain that the gospels were works of fiction, written by unknown authors. That fits the "evidence" far batter than any other theory.