1. Although I've had a number of interesting experiences over the years that I've been told should be attributed to the influence of "God", I take the view that it is more honest (both intellectually and emotionally) to doubt, rather than to blindly believe.

Why? Simply this - many of those experiences I had were the consequence of altered states of consciousness caused by either (a)drugs, (b) sensory deprivation, or (c) meditation (itself a state in which objective evaluation is almost impossible, except to an independent external evaluator. And even then, it's only physical changes that can be measured - the experience of the meditator is as subjective as any drug-induced high).

2. Consequently, having never had the existence of God proved beyond all possible doubt, I prefer to stay honest to myself and say: I don't believe in the existence of God (as defined by the three attributes most commonly attributed to such a Being, namely: omniscience, omnipotence, and ... er, what was the other one? Oh yes, - love of all creation).

3. For similar reasons, neither do I believe in the existence of a powder-blue unicorn who wears a teapot on Sundays while orbiting the outer reaches of the moons of Saturn when there's an "r" in the month (though both you and I can conceive of such a creature, having pictured it in our imagination).

I do, however, believe that it's possible that such a creature might exist (only just), but until its existence is proven, I don't consider it worthy of contemplation. Fair enough so far?

4. Down to the nitty-gritty (if that phrase doesn't offend, and it's not intended to) - the historical existence of the one god-man called Jesus/Issa. In my own world-view, the existence of such a person is far from proven. As is the existence of, for instance, the sons and daughters of Zeus/Jupiter similarly unproven. A myth has grown up around the character of this "Jesus".

I admit, one person of this name who personifies all the myths surrounding his name might have existed, but the evidence is extremely uncertain - cf the Histories of Josephus, who mentions several men of that name, contemporary to the scene, and whose individual life events each contain a few similarities to those of the life story of "Jesus of Nazareth". But I consider it more likely that episodes from the lives of those individuals were "conflated" (good word, look it up, if need be) into one mythical whole.

5. To get to the gist of where I'm at (and I'll expound/expand further, if you wish): God isn't, and any so-called "Messiah" is the product of human wish-fulfillment and/or deception.

A personal view, you understand.