N.b. that this is theocrasy (not a typo!), not an historical statement at all; I will nonetheless address it historically:


Jesus and Moses are fictional characters.  Such can be said because they are alleged to have been historically extant human beings; and the Biblical alleged histories are bunk, just fiction (although they may be in part based very roughly on composites of bits and pieces of historical events).

In particular, I am amazed that anybody after the late 19c./early 20c. treats Jesus as having any more reality than the Wizard of Oz.  The Gospels are historically prepostrous.  Josephus was a liar generally, as can be readily demonstrated on many points (not only relevant to this issue).  Roman historical sources contemporaneous to, or soon after the alleged life of Jesus contain absolutely nothing about corroborates the story; biased “scholars” are left hanging onto some old chestnut about Tacitus and “Chrestus”, a misinterpretation that is completely absurd to anyone with even the slightest knowledge of the matter.  Etc...  Moreover, there is no reliable evidence that Christians (i.e. followers of Jesus) existed before the Second Century.

The others whom you listed are wholly mystical beings, not susceptible to scientific examination or other rational scholarship.  It is, strictly speaking, not irrational to believe in the existence of such beings somewhere that mere mortals (and their scientific instruments) cannot see.

The alleged historicity of Jesus was actually what I was thinking of specifically, when I wrote this:

---

Not intact in the least.

Many if not most of the modern sects of the Hindus are almost unrecognizable compared even to the diverse syncretisms of the Hindu Golden Age, let alone the religion of Vedic times.

The oldest religion would probably be something from prehistorical times—therefore perforce unknown.  I need not reach the question of which religion has the oldest historically or archaeologically attested tradition.

Gautama expressed an atheistic philosophy, eerily similar to Schopenhauer’s World as Will.  His Nirvana had the same objective as Schopenhauer’s Renunciation.  All of the Buddhist mysticism was piled on later, after the historical Gautama.  Such a thing could conceivably also happen over the course of future centuries to Schopenhauer and his quasi-mystical palingenesis of the Will, which can only be escaped by renouncing all desires and attaining the state of Nirvana, i.e. nonexistence.  (Sanskrit nirvāṇa = ‘extinguished’, literally ‘blown out’ in the sense of a candle.)

Obligatory at this juncture:

Parenthetically, I must remark that Gautama and Schopenhauer are correct:  Life inevitably has more suffering than joy.  People with an inner vitality must fight every day for a few precious joys amidst many sorrows.  Decadent people tire of this, and thus seek escape.  The desired escape can be rational and realistic as Gautama and Schopenhauer, or an irrational escapist fantasy, such as the Christian heaven or the transhumanist Singularity.

---

I have no desire to discuss this now at length; and I have avoided this general line of discussion for want of time even to parse it.  Dashing this off in haste, I simply call out a few points well known to me, which happened to have caught my eye as I skim down to try to catch up with what must be the fastest-moving forum thread in the world.

---

I’d be pleased for some pointers on the Lokāyaka. ;-)

(I appreciated that your post, and did not intend to ignore it.  If were to I answer the question that you thereby asked, I should do so properly; but I have (as yet?) lacked both the time and the inclination for such a discussion here—sorry.  It also invokes the problem that I keep my reading list private; indeed, I use Tor to help assure that nobody can track what I am reading.)