Are you aware that the early Christian teachings were totally different than what the church finally put their stamp on?<quoted text> Well it is coincidence that both you and the atheists websites come to the same conclusions.
<quoted text> Accounts which vary in detail do not contradict. They simply vary in detail. <quoted text> The historic Christian message being Jesus resurrected. That is consistent throughout the New Testament which contained different accounts, letters compiled based on criteria. The Bible does speak for itself. It makes fixed historical claims relevent to everybody as it relates to God. It assumes God exists and we are accountable to Him for our every thought and action be they offense or neglect. Intentional or non intentional in which there is no court of appeals. It assumes life does not stop post death. We exist after the fact. In direct contradiction to what you believe. People have assumed many of these things throughout Human history, yet you discard them all. What you know that everybody else does not? Are you smarter than the majority of humans? Do you believe men have no souls? Only physical? Do you believe your rights come from men with no souls and not God? Your right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness? From men with no souls? If rights are derived from God then these rights apply to all persons whether observed or not. If men then it is up to men and they do not apply to all persons everywhere because it is men who determines what rights actually exist.
Reincarnation was a part of early Christian teachings. Then, the church decided more than 300 years later that reincarnation didn't gel with the teaching that you only had one life in which to get everything right. It also didn't gel with 'accept the Christ or die'. Therefore, it was banned.
Had you ever truly studied your religion instead of studying apologetics, you'd know that what you believe today is nowhere near what was taught.
Paul had no contact with Jesus. Paul was an opportunist who saw a good thing and $$ signs. He did really well. Christians today follow his teachings instead of Jesus' teachings. If you read your NT during the time he supposedly taught, you'll find that those teachings start changing with John and Paul. Both John and Paul teach in direct opposition to what Jesus taught.
Yet you will still believe that the teachings of Jesus which the church threw out for political and financial reasons are anathema.
Constantine called a meeting and the result of that meeting (and the ones that followed) is the Bible you have today. There was nothing holy about it. He was trying to bring his country together. The problem with that (among others) is that the church became the power. You still abide by what Constantine and the church decided in order to make his country more uniform and thereby easier to control. You still abide by the rules of a few men who decided what people should be able to hear and what they shouldn't based on their own power struggle.
You toss Jesus in the trash bin and follow Paul and the Catholic church, though you deny it. But if you weren't doing that, you'd be going by the other Christian texts that the church banned. You've been bamboozled and are to afraid to change that.