Jesus may not even be the most important person in Christian history. Constantine probably did more for Christianity than Jesus.
Now you are talking about Christian history. That is not what Ehrman is referencing. He is referencing human history.
<crickets>Was there a point to that? In what way does that change anything in this discussion?
Incidentally, like most people, I tend to assume when you ignore a point that it is because you had no acceptable answer.
If Jesus isn't the most important person in Christian history, he isn't the most important person inhuman history, either.
I already told you that both Paul and Constantine were more instrumental in establishing the Christian religion and its churchThen who is and why?
than Christ. Of the two, I think Constantine was the more important. Wasn't he the one that made Paul relevant and kept him off of the cutting room floor when the bible was being cobbled at the Council of Nicea? Jesus, too, for that matter. This is where it was decided which words would be imputed to Jesus and which would be ignored. Please correct me if I'm wrong.