It is the number one reason why I hate christianity.
I have to agree with you here. We tell our children that we are 'fallen' and defective. Rather than just teaching them that we are human, and this is what we have to work with, and we can do incredible things with that, we have to teach them that they are incomplete and bad without intercession. We teach them to look for the worst in humans, in order to confirm their biases, and then they pop up on forums and lament the sad downward spiral of humanity---when actually things have greatly improved, but they can't fully celebrate that and focus on where we need to work harder. What's the use? Humans are just bad, and getting worse.
We look at a newborn, and it is a marvelous sight. But somewhere in the Christian mind this teeny, tiny human is fallen and sinful and already in need of some kind of salvation. A sad, dismal and totally unnecessary way to view the world. It's a contaminant.
So we have human suffering, and Christians step up to the plate------------to blame human's sinful nature. LOL
When we see tiger suffering (as BOTR brought out) we don't blame the tiger's sinful nature---some people even blame that suffering on we wretched humans. Is the weather bad? Yeah---it's cuz humans are defective. Is an asteroid hurling toward earth? Yep---human imperfect. You see, our imperfection is so profound, so powerful, that it can even cause events in the cosmos. Humans are, afterall, the center of creation. LOL
But seriously. I'm glad I not caught up in that muck anymore. It really is a hateful way to view fellow humans. I prefer the it is what it is approach, and then do what I can do to improve that to the best of my ability. It's just not something I think we should leave up to God or Christ
And I'll give you the answer to the OP. If Jesus existed, he was a man. He was a man born in Palestine. He had Jewish parents, and human dna. He lived, he ate, he preached, and he DIED. He got tired. He got sniffles. He looked like his parents, as the society would have been homogenous. He did good and he did bad. I suspect he was a political trouble maker, not necessarily a bad thing, but he was a political player. A rebel.
That's if he existed, and I'm of the opinion that he did. But maybe he didn't. And what followed is what follows with many influencial people. Their deaths are used to uphold an ideology and the grow and become more perfect after their deaths than they ever could have been during their life. We like to saint people----ordinary people who maybe did some extraordiary things. He taught nothing new, nothing fresh, but simply consolidated some very old and tested ideas that perhaps the Jews were rejecting because they were foreign. He was kind of like John Lennon, who is also viewed as a saint, just a few short years after his death. It doesn't take long.