If you want to be consistent, you must deny the historical existence of all ancient figures, because more authentic historic evidence exists for the reality of Jesus than any of the above.
And your ignorance of the data proves to me that your 'investigation' is a bluff. You don't know what you're talking about.
You may say you don't believe Jesus is the Messiah, that he isn't God made flesh, but to say he isn't an historical figure only reveals your own lack of information and ignorance.
Do some study, and get back to me. Then we can have a discussion based on intellectual honesty, and not emotional bluster.
And don't ever teach science if you have such a blatant disregard for facts.
> Was Julius Caesar also a fantasy then? Plato? Aristotle?
No. There are distinct reasons why they can be reasonably declared to ahve been real, while Christ may be reasonably doubted.
1) They wrote their own stuff.
2) There were numerous independant eywitnesses, including opposing viewpoints. These witnesses existed *at* *the* *same* *time* as the figure in question.
3) Had they not existed, there would have been no particular need to invent them.
4) Their recorded activities were entirely mundane.
> more authentic historic evidence exists for the reality of Jesus than any of the above.
Simply untrue.