Similarities to earlier stories aren't the only reasons that someone would doubt Jesus was a real person.  I'd recommend taking a listen to this show that Richard Carrier did on "how not to argue the mythicist position."  

 http://infidelguy.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=178318

"Richard Carrier appears on the show to discuss theories on the origins of Christianity that imply a mythic Christ. The primary focus of this show will be to take a critical look at the errors of those who promote mythic Christ theories. In other words, this show is about how NOT to argue for mythicism."

Simmo, here's a question I want you to ask yourself, and try very hard to take yourself out of the mindset of not questioning Christianity. Try not to assume anything is true, and just ask the question.

Like stuntgibbon said, earlier stories aren't nearly the only reasons to doubt that Jesus existed, but let's look at this for a second.

Have you ever thought about how myths form? Even if you believe that Christianity is true, you believe that other myths exist, and that they have formed gradually, right?

Let's look at Santa Claus for a minute, ok? Everybody knows who Santa Claus is, right? He's the jolly guy in the red suit who comes down chimneys and brings presents to little kids on Christmas, right? But where did this myth come from? That's a lot harder to answer.

Our Santa is most often traced to a mispronunciation of Sinterklaas, which is a variant of Sint Nicolaas. So just the name has gone through no less than two changes if we draw a direct line. But, the line is not direct.

Saint Nicholas was a 4th Century bishop in Lycia, which was in present day Turkey. The legend of St. Nicholas included his generous gifts to the poor, particularly one notable gift to three poor girls so they wouldn't have to become prostitutes. He has been historically portrayed as a bearded man in church robes.

Before Christianity reached the Germanic people, there were stories of the god Odin (who was known as Wodan, too! Isn't it amazing how myth changes!) who would have a great hunting party at Yule. Children would put their boots, filled with carrots, near the chimney for Odin's flying horse, Sleipnir. Odin would reward them by replacing the carrots with candy. After the Christians took over German culture, they adapted this festival and replaced Odin with St. Nicholas.

An earlier folk tale tells of a holy man and a demon. There was a monster who would slither down chimneys and slaughter innocent children, stuffing them in a sack and scampering back up the chimney with his prize. The holy man sought out the monster and tricked it into wearing blessed shackles. From then on, the monster had to slither down chimneys, but instead of killing the children, he had to do household chores and bring gifts. In an early version of this story, the demon had to recruit elves and imps from the forest to help him.

(See how the myth is forming from different elements?)

In Dutch folklore, De Goede Sint, or The Friendly Saint, had a beard, a hat and a spear (which changed into a staff over the years.) He would ride a magical white horse through the air, and he had servants with him carrying a cloth bag in which to capture naughty children. (Naughty or nice? Notice the previous versions didn't say anything about deserving the gifts!)

In very early versions, the helpers or servants were actually ravens, and were derived from earlier Odin myths.

In later version -- in fact, until World War II -- St. Nicholas was helped by one servant, an Ethiopian boy name Piter. St. Nicholas and his little black servant went around doing Santa type stuff. Later, Piter became a chimney sweep because it was thought that the white/black images from before the war were racist. Since he was a chimney sweep, he became white with a sooted face to avoid the racist image!

Santa Claus in the American form originated in roughly 1809, when Washington Irving adapted Sinterklaas, did away with the clerical frock, put him in a green Dutch sailor suit, gave him a green pipe, and made him rather jolly looking.

In 1823, "A Visit From St. Nicholas" was published. It has become known as "The Night Before Christmas." This is the first mention of the reindeer.

Simmo, this is only a brief summary of the more common Santa Clause myths. There are many more. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if someone disagrees with my story! There are probably other versions of all of these stories that I just told you about -- regional variations, etc...

Here's the kicker. This has all been meticulously written down, and we still don't really agree on it.

You see how myth works? It changes as the times change. Most importantly, I want you to see how at least four or five different stories, each substantially different, but similar in some ways, were amalgamated. Is Santa Clause like the saint who shackled the demon? Not even close. Both stories have a bag, candy, and a chimney, but demons and saints, versus a jolly old man who lives in the north pole with midgets who make toys and flying reindeer and a jolly Mrs. Clause who patiently waits as her husband flies all over the world?

Hardly.

Now, I want you to think objectively about the Jesus myth. There are individual similarities in Horus, in Mythras, in Marduk, in a half a dozen Pharoahs, in Moses... Yes! Have you ever thought about the similarities between Moses and Jesus? Moses had to be secreted away so that he wouldn't be killed as a baby. Jesus had to be secreted away so that he wouldn't be killed as a baby. Moses came to set his people free from the law and rule of the Egyptians. Jesus came to set his people free from the law and rule of the Romans and the Jewish Priesthood.

In fact, there are death and resurrection stories from dozens of different cultures, many of which, through capture or conquer, had some contact with the area where the Jesus story came from!

Now, objectively looking at both stories, Santa Clause, and all that Jesus stuff I printed earlier, can you see how similar they are? Do you see how each one is a conglomerate of many different myths? Of course they aren't identical. That's because word of mouth, immigration, being conquered, illness, disease, and a hundred other factors change the way a myth is passed down.

Now, once you've thought about this for a while, I want you to ask yourself if you've actually thought about the way that Christianity has changed since it was invented.

Yes. Christianity has changed. When was the Catholic church formed? Do you know? How about the Protestant Reformation? Wildly different ideas about what Christianity "really is." Calvinism. Methodism. Baptism. Mormonism..... yes, that's about Jesus, too.

It behaves just like any other myth, simmo.

If you take away the blind belief, you'll see how it works.

Cpt, sometimes I wonder if you take a nitpick pill every morning. Seriously. Take your panties out of a bunch, ok? Did I tell him he has to believe that Jesus is a myth? No. I told him that if he examines the Jesus story, he'll see that it has, in fact, evolved since its beginnings, and that there are enough stories preceding it that it could well be a conglomerate of stories, just like Santa Clause.

There are predecessor myths with elements of the Jesus story. This is fact. Myths evolve. This is fact. Santa Clause has similar predecessor myths, and we know for a fact that this is how Santa evolved. We don't know for certain about Jesus because we don't have the records. I asked simmo to take the blinders of belief off and look at this evidence objectively. I did not tell him that he has to believe that Jesus is a myth.

I personally don't know if Jesus is a myth or not. I simply presented a strong case for it, since simmo has come here and asked us questions about it.

Chill out, dude.

You're the one who posted the thread about how nobody ever deconverts anyway.

So why are you nitpicking me?

If you don't object to the parallels between Santa and Jesus that I've drawn, and you don't object to the fact that belief can blind people, and you don't object to the fact that there are similar cases, what are you objecting to?

Would you be mad at me if I told you that if you just opened your eyes you would see the elephant standing in front of you if your eyes were closed and there really was an elephant standing in front of you?

Everything I've presented here is verifiable fact. I have only asked simmo to take the blinders of belief off so that he can see the parallels between Santa and Jesus which objectively exist.

I ask for no conclusions, only acknowledgement of facts.

Chill.

You posted a thread asking if anybody ever deconverts, noting that people argue all the time, but no theist ever admits they're wrong.

Forgive me if I inferred that you think nobody (or very few) deconvert, and you actually meant that it rains on Tuesday in Guam.

Santa is good - Jesus is good - the parallels are staggering.  Maybe you should make a youtube video.   

Hey Hamby, 

I was just wondering if you could direct me to the book written hundreds of years before Santa shows up written by Santa about Santa.  If you could give me the ISBN number I would appreciate it.

1.  The pear grows on a tree.  It is good to eat.  It has a stem.  It contains seeds.  It is covered by a peel.  It is a fruit.  It falls off the tree if no one picks it.

 I think I have shown that we can compare apples to pears.

2.  Are the points of similarity relevant to the comparison?

Both grow on a tree, both are good to eat, both have stems, both contain seeds.  Both are covered by a peel.  Both are fruits.  Both fall off the tree if no one picks it.

3.  Are the points of difference non-critical to the analogy?

Many people think they taste nothing alike

They are two different colors.

They cannot grow on each other's tree

4.  Is the analogical reasoning cumulative?

As I have demonstrated - there are many, many similarities between the pear and the apple.

5) Are only literal analogies used as logical proof?

Yes. I have gone to great lengths to demonstrate that the pear and the apple are the same.  They are the exact same fruit.  No doubt about it. 

Whereas both the pear and the apple are fruits - they are two completely different fruits.

Whereas both Santa Clause and Jesus are both narratives - they are two completely different genres.  The story of Santa - myth.  The story of Jesus - Nonfiction.

You are getting desparate.

Did you read anything I wrote, or did you just pick out the word Santa and run with it. I'd appreciate it if you demonstrate an ability to comprehend my arguments before you make any more stupid objections.

Congratulations. You've learned that categories can overlap.

Would you like to make an actual rebuttal to something that I've stated?

This is not an answer to the question. Christ on a fucking pogo stick! You can't even justify your own objection by answering the question that's asked.

Seriously, you haven't answered this question either! This is a yes or no question. Once you answer yes or no, you provide evidence for your answer. You have simply provided more similarities. This is too fucking funny. You're fucking up your own analogy, which doesn't have anything to do with mine!

ROFLMAO!!

You're right. You have demonstrated that apples and pears are similar. Congratulations! Next week, we'll see if you can tell the difference between a squash and a meat cleaver.

You don't even know what cumulative reasoning is, even though I just explained it a couple of posts up!

Honestly, it's hard for me to type right now. My side hurts from laughing at how stupid this is.

I'm not kidding. This is the single worst argument I've ever heard in my life. For anything.

If Chewbacca doesn't make sense, you must acquit!

Is it possible for you to take your head out of your bible long enough to recognize that the question of whether or not Jesus is fiction or non-fiction is precisely what my analogy is meant to address?

Once again, I thank you for illustrating so clearly why critical thinking skills ought to be taught in schools. I'm sorry the system failed you.

Do you mean disparate? I am different in kind from something else?

Or do you mean desperate? reckless or dangerous because of urgency?

By using logic skills, I will decide between the two words, each equally wrong, and assume you mean that I am desperate.

Thank you for your assessment of my current emotional state. I don't feel so, but your logic has been so impecable so far, it must be true.

Thanks for your continued comments everyone. Whenever I am away from here for a few hours there ends up being a whole lot of reading and thinking to do. Which is good. In reply to some of the comments - Hambydammit - Yes I can see how stories mix together and change over time. With regards to the Jesus story I have really just thought that it was sufficiently accurate to show the character of the man (love, forgiveness etc.) and what he did on earth, with there being other historical evidence outside the gospels to verify his existence on earth and then those gospels providing the detail.BGH - What to do when something about Christianity doesn't make sense? There have always been doubts and questions about various things, and in many ways I have put them aside on the basis that I don't understand everything and at that with further investigation the doubts can be explained. The reality then was generally that life is busy, you get on with things and never get around to really looking into things. Until now.JCE - "Do you think this need for acceptance also came from your upbringing?" - To an extent, but I think we all need to feel loved and accepted, and Christianity provideds that."If you let go of this need, do you think you would live your life differently?" - I don't think much would change about how I outwardly live, it would more be an internal change of thought process on many issues."Without your faith, do you think your life would be meaningless?" - No "Is it possible for you to create your own meaning of life?"  - Absolutely, and in so many ways I already do. Christianity influences much of what I do and how I live, and as I have stated earlier I see this influence as a positive thing. But my meaning in life is far from just 'living for Jesus' and nothing else matters. I have my wife, my children, my extended family, my friends, my work, my sport, etc. which all bring all different types of meaning to my life. However many of these things are intertwined with my Christianity. So my existence is already not consumed by my Christianity, which some would say calls into question my faith anyway, regardless of fully 'turning away' or not.