Moving my comments here just to be clear. You see, I think Mark Kirklen is making a huge mistake.

Once you have given up on evaluating historical and forensic evidences you have a hard time claiming any rational belief at all.

There is a religion called naturalusm. It purports that only natural objects as known by humans are real and reality is limited to only what humans can see, taste, touch, experience, etc. That is actually an a priori metaphysical belief. A religion. Using a religion to assume other ideas are wrong leads to philosophical mistakes. Ignoring historical evidences is one of those mistakes.

Mark assumes Jesus and most claimed about Jesus is a form of hallucination. That is because he (obviously) has not looked at the forensic evidence surrounding the life of Jesus. Mark is engaging in the very same sort of delusion that he is criticizing, i.e., DECIDING AHEAD OF TIME WHAT THE RESULTS YIELD. Then betting your life on it. Why? One might guess because it gives him emotional satisfaction? That is typical. Mark is one of the most anti-Marxist people I know. He is agnostic/athiest when it comes to Christianity. But he is a right-wing agnostic/atheist.