Congrats on your service even though it is pretty irrelevant to getting bent out of shape on an internet forum. You are considered a well-spoken and informed poster on this board but your belligerence on this thread when challenged on your position versus well thought out arguments suggest either a lack of conviction or frustration with your reasoning. Honestly if you are going to take a minority position that Jesus is a completely fictional character the onus is kind of on you to support the argument not simply attempt to poke holes in the widely believed premise that Jesus was at least an actual man that walked the Earth.
Who's getting "belligerent", or bent out of shape on an Internet forum? Challenge my views all you want, just don't start name calling, and/or debating like a condescending douche, or the discussion ends.
In re: Jesus: It's possible that a holy-man/rabbi existed 2000 + years ago, that the 'Jesus' character depicted in the 'gospels' was very loosely based on. So i'm not really arguing that this rabbi, et al, never existed, or "walked the earth". My guess is, the new testament, written and revised 50-300 years after the Jesus character's death, regards a composite/construct of holy-men/rabbis living before and/or after the 1st century. So from a historical perspective, and in a factual sense, the "gospels" have to be taken as a work of fiction, especially since absolutely nothing was written by the alleged Jesus or about him by others during his lifetime.
Bookmarks