"Yeshua" was a fairly common name in the Levant about 2,000 years ago. So yeah, Yeshuas existed. Was there a Yeshua that claimed to be a prophet? Could have been. Was he the Messiah? Definately not.

None...... He was recycled from previous virgin births

No. There are some really neat theories out there though, everything from literally true, metaphorically true, may have been a real person with lots of myths attached , may have been a real person with lots of fiction attached, complete fiction, some myth some fiction and some truth, may have been several people merged together with or without fiction as well, may be a much older story retold with new names and times, political propaganda invented by the Romans, etc.

All of them had some believers who made really good sounding cases, until you start to look for real evidence, of which there is none, and all the theories equally therefore stand on thin air. But people have a lot of fun with speculation, and as long as you realize it is only speculation for fun, there seems little harm in it. But sadly some people will take it seriously, and then it can be really dangerous.

I have enjoyed the three Jesus theory recently. Many scholars have pointed out that there seem to be two contradictory persons in the text. One, who was a hard line fundamentalist rabbi who preached against foreign ideas and wanted hard line law, and the liberal pacifist who preached brotherhood etc.. The theory goes that the first was a real historic person, who became part of folklore, and the second is a fictional invention, tacked on to the name and reputation of the first later, by authors with a different agenda. It then goes on that there was then a third famous person, whose only claim to fame was that he survived being crucified, probably simply because he was taken down too early while still alive, and who may or may not have shared a name with the other two, ( It was a very common name. ) who then got into the mix by mistake or intention to deceive. The whole concoction is complete crap of course, but it is fun and just as likely to be true as any of the other theories.

Jesus was not mentioned by the Romans in any way at all. Scriptures claim he had an audience with Pilot but why would that have happened if he had no significance? There is also a great likelihood that Jesus and Pilot did not speak the same language.

No primary sources. No historically authenticated historical sites, only religious tourist sites. No contemporaneous witness accounts, no validated artefacts. Nothing.

Mary was a ho. She made up a story to cover up for her being a slut.

Not for the mythical Jesus of the Bible. I believe an individual was most likely the basis for Jesus of the Bible, and that the events described in the Bible represent very little if anything this individual did or taught. We have relatively recent day examples of the phenomenon. The sanitation and deificaton of Mormon founder Joseph Smith's poor character and deplorable behaviors could easily serve to explain how some Hebrew teacher/prophet could have the transformation for better or worse into the mythical Jesus we find in the Bible.

Nope. Not really. If there was a man who came to be known as Jesus, pretty much all the miracles attributed to him came from earlier stories and other religions.

For me the most interesting argument against the existence of the Biblical Jesus, carpenter of Nazareth is not that there is no evidence independently of him whatsoever, and there is not. It is that there is ample evidence for the existence of John the Baptist as the head of a sect called The Christians and in all of that evidence there is no mention of Jesus at all.

The idea of him didn't even begin to emerge until at least 100 years hence.

And especially if ALL the dead rose and walked the streets zombie like those Romans might have made a note about that.

Nope. All of it is myth/stories made up to control the masses.

Before you can talk about jesus, you have to prove mary existed.

So were unicorns

Is the pope Argentinian?

I'm not aware of any.

While I certainly do not believe Jesus was the son of a god, I believe there was a person who thought he was, and had followers that went along with the delusion.

The Hero with a Thousand Faces - Joseph Campbell

Who else was around to do this.

Reports have it that a 1,500 year old book found written in dialect of around the time JC was born, discribes a very different story about him and the crew. It's a fascinating find and story. So I've been going with yeah this dude did. Miracles nah.

The Stork didn't bring him!

Evidence is evidence, not proof.

There are many Jesuses existing today, over 260,000 of them in the US per se.

Jesus had nothing to do with memes except in our world today. Was he the son of man? If he existed at all I expect the gospels giving genealogy for him means that he had normal parents like everyone else. There is your son of man. As for the son of god, this came along when they had to explain his death. Jesus took on a whole new identity and meaning.

You have 2 different questions going on. Let me address the first one explaining how to observe Jesus being a product or offspring of man.

The expression "the Son of man" occurs 81 times in the Greek text of the four canonical gospels, and is used only in the sayings of Jesus.

A way to view understanding for what is ment by "son of man" is a simple understanding that a "son" is a product or offspring.

How do we get Jesus character from "mankind"? It is by way of meme organism.

Meme organism really exist.

A meme (/miːm/ MEEM)[1][2][3] is an idea, behavior, or style that spreads by means of imitation from person to person within a culture and often carries symbolic meaning representing a particular phenomenon or theme.[4] A meme acts as a unit for carrying cultural ideas, symbols, or practices, that can be transmitted from one mind to another through writing, speech, gestures, rituals, or other imitable phenomena with a mimicked theme. Supporters of the concept regard memes as cultural analogues to genes in that they self-replicate, mutate, and respond to selective pressures. [en.m.wikipedia.org]
Revelations 19: 10. "...For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.”
First, just because something is prophesied (written or spoken), does NOT mean the prophesy will come to furition. Nonetheless, meme organism corrilations with prophesy.
However, biblical text writers understood what we now call meme organism.
The word meme itself is a neologism coined by Richard Dawkins, originating from his 1976 book The Selfish Gene.[12] Dawkins's own position is somewhat ambiguous. He welcomed N. K. Humphrey's suggestion that "memes should be considered as living structures, not just metaphorically"[12] and proposed to regard memes as "physically residing in the brain."[13] Although Dawkins said his original intentions had been simpler, he approved Humphrey's opinion and he endorsed Susan Blackmore's 1999 project to give a scientific theory of memes, complete with predictions and empirical support.[14] wikipedia - meme
"...But we have the mind of Christ." 1 Corinthians 2:16
John 1:1...the logos was with God and was God. John 1:14 ... the logos became flesh.
Logos from Greek is: though, word, speech.
Meme organism is transmitted from thoughts by written words and spoken speach.
Old testiment meme organism is purported to have developed or evolved into a person.
Meme organism can be observed to exist. Will, or can another meme organism develop or evolve into another Jesus style God?
A person having received and accepted the biblical meme organism from "testimony about Jesus the Christ " as memes are passed from person to person(in speach or writing), that person then has the biological nature, in their logos, of the biblical god. Atheism illogical, a style of god exist.
Does atheist, christianity or anyone want another meme organism to be developed or evolved by meme transitional action to become another Jesus style god for evidence that it happens?