I'm simply pointing out that your earlier claim that Xianity "took over the Roman Empire within an incredibly short time" is, at best, extremely subjective. 300 years is not "an incredibly short time" in this historical context.
To work out percentages of guessed-at religious persuasions in a guessed-at population is pointless, surely?
I didn't work it out, nor did I guess at it. I'm going by the concensus of most historians of the period - at least, the ones I've read. And again, the percentage is relevant, as it shows that, 300 years post-facto, Xianity was far from having taken over the Empire.
And if I'm not condescending enough, I do hope I can becomes so!
I'm sure you can.
I find American fundamentalists quite peculiarly silly.
Yes, me too. Is this relevant to anything I said?
Incidentally, just for clarity, I have no dog in the fight of the original question in this thread. I sincerely couldn't care less whether there was an original Jesus who gave rise to the myths and legends that grew up around him, or whether they were totally made up, without an historical figure at the root of the tales. Either way, there certainly wasn't any "Son of God" walking the Earth back in the day, so the historicity or not doesn't affect my disbelief one way or the other.