@ ScifiBoy - I think facts seem to point that Jesus wasn't an individual but an anthropomorphic personification of a group of Jewish breakaways, in fact I once read that references to Jesus being one person only became widely used in the 2nd century.

The thing is no-one will ever know.

Jesus is portrayed as white because that was what people wanted to see him as. As Christianity spread to Europe, nobody in Europe wanted to believe that Jesus looked like their arch enemies (the Arabians). As such, they changed his image to something more fitting to European culture. He stills looks eccentric (long hair and beard) to keep him distinctive, but he was still made to be white and brown-haired. Most people in the west still view him like that because it's been his portrayal for a long time, and most shows (The Simpsons, Family Guy) find the depiction to have far more comedic effect. It's not going away anytime soon.

The facts don't point to that though... it's why such a theory is completly uncredible... it's seen as up their with the "moon landing was faked", 9-11 was an inside job and conspiracy theories like Zeitgeist.

There is more evidence for Jesus then a great number of historical figures taken for granted as real.

It's just my interpretation of what I have heard, I mean many people believe or don't believe in Jesus because they have interpreted the facts differently.

I think a large religious movement is likely. The first written gospel of Jesus was the gospel of Mark which was written c70 A.D. I mean until this point Jesus' stories were largely only told orally so the likelihood that the stories were twisted during this period is fairly high. And the gospel of Mark has several variants and many ommisions that have been implemented over time from what I understand. And the bible wasn't even widely read in a way which the reader could interpret themselves for centuries after due to illiteracy, only to be interpreted in the way preachers wanted. I just think that over time 'they' could have become 'he' quite easily.

I don't know though, it's not like it's something I've extensively researched or anything it's just a general evolution of my ideas over time.

It's just my interpretation of what I have heard, I mean many people believe or don't believe in Jesus because they have interpreted the facts differently.

I think a large religious movement is likely. The first written gospel of Jesus was the gospel of Mark which was written c70 A.D. I mean until this point Jesus' stories were largely only told orally so the likelihood that the stories were twisted during this period is fairly high. And the gospel of Mark has several variants and many ommisions that have been implemented over time from what I understand. And the bible wasn't even widely read in a way which the reader could interpret themselves for centuries after due to illiteracy, only to be interpreted in the way preachers wanted. I just think that over time 'they' could have become 'he' quite easily.

I don't know though, it's not like it's something I've extensively researched or anything it's just a general evolution of my ideas over time.

so...no-one knows who he was or anything about him then?

and i mean facts...not fiction...till then...the answer to the OP is "I don't know and I don't see why i should care" 

Hold up. Regardless of your religious views (or lack of them), you can't deny that Jesus existed in the time period. If you doubt that, then you must doubt every single historical figure of that time and before then as well.

That's far different from saying Jesus didn't exist.

For example there is no historical evidence for Socrates until after his death.

The evidence comes mostly from his two students... who in reality could of been the same person... and then a parody on philosphers where "Socrates" is portrayed as the lead villian.

The Socrates proof is only slighlty stronger then Jesus because it happend closer to his death.

The truth is though... not much was written about anyone until they were dead... hell not much was written about anyone at all.

None of Socrates work really lives on however.

Jesus was... up until decades after his death... fairly unremarkable compaired to many other people... it wasn't until later that his story became worth writing because his movement started catching on to the mainstream.

Josephus is the biggest Jewish scholar... and he wrote in rome... exactly what the roman emperor wanted him to write... as did everybody in that period.  History was a state controlled tool back then.

To say Jesus didn't exist is basically to say nobody existed for sure until we developed video cameras... and do we please have the video tape.

Sure some of Jesus miracles were "top of the line" compared to miracle makers... but why should someone in Rome believe he did it?  which is pretty much where all the historians lived.  Even the ones who wrote about stuff in Judea.