I'm not up to date on the of historicity of the buddha, but virtually no reputable scholars or historians endorse the "christ myth theory." It is widely accepte

I'm not up to date on the of historicity of the buddha, but virtually no reputable scholars or historians endorse the "christ myth theory." It is widely accepted across all disciplines that at the very least he existed and was baptized & crucified and there is extensive scholarship around this consensus. The rest of your comment feels plausible, but confidently being so wrong about such an easy to check fact of scholarship makes it all untrustworthy.