[LarpBulaBus]

paul was not "there", if you mean it in the context i think you do. his conversion to christianity came after the death and resurrection of jesus. as for not mentioning jesus or stories of him, there are many possibilities to explain this. one simple explanation is that the name "jesus" is essentially a nickname given to him by the writers of the canonized scriptures, but was not his true name. there are many arguments about what his name actually was, but nobody knows for sure.

as for the question of whether or not he really existed...personally, i have no doubt that he did. totally aside from other reasons/sources, i read somewhere recently that there are records in monasteries located in tibet and india which mention him travelling there and doing the same sorts of things described in the bible. apparently, this took place during his youth and after the crucifixion.

like many others, i believe that his teachings were not preserved in their pristine form and were severely distorted for a variety of reasons. however, i am not inclined to dismiss him outright, and certainly not with the venom and aggression that so many others these days are willing to do. i think there is a lot of truth to be found there if one truly has an open mind.
i think that to discard anything outright is a mistake, since everything contains at least some elements of truth (even lies!)...likewise, to believe any one thing as totality is also a mistake, since such singularity of thought inevitably brings various forms of blindness.

in the end, we all must assess the truth for ourselves and we all see what we want to see, regardless of how "enlightened" we may like to think we are or who we may be talking to.