Is it incorrect?

Murph - I understand your feelings, but I couldn't disagree more.  Only by questioning the beliefs that we have are we able to grow - intellectually, emotionally and spiritually. 

re:  The "historical Jesus" and historicity vs mythology - there are many Christian scholars who are exploring exactly that field.  Their idea is that more knowledge about the Jesus man can only deepen their understanding and through this - their faith. An altavista search on that exact phrase gives 121,000 results.  I didn't have time to read them all.  One page is by the Jesus Seminar - excellent scholarship and links:  http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html  Not everyone agrees with them:  http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/menus/historical.ht ml

Many of the groups that proclaimed Jesus as a man were declared heretics (eg: many of the the arguments over Arianism stem from this) - one of the issues over which the early church split was the question of whether Jesus the man was in any way separate from Christ - was he man, divine or both?  How did the Jesus the man relate to the Divine and to the Holy Spirit? The filoque argument is exactly what divided the early christian church into Roman and Byzantine or western and eastern (today Catholic and Orthodox) churches in what became known as the Great Schism of 1054.  These are still  delicate areas for some Christians to question.  See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filioque_clause and http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06073a.htm

The various mythologies of the ancient Middle East did and do overlap to a great extent - and many residents of the area would have been familiar with several versions of the myths - so it would be no surprise that there is the influence of preexisting beliefs on those that developed. 

Joseph Campbell explores this relationship quite well in his volume "The Hero with a Thousand Faces".  He relates and compares mythologies from around the world in the context of the life journey of a hero - his chapter headings are - in Part I The Adventure of the Hero: 1. Departure, 2. Initiation, 3. Return and in Part II The Cosmogenic Cycle:  1. Emanations, 2. The Virgin Birth, 3. Transformations of the Hero, 4. Dissolutions, followed by an excellent epilogue:  Myth and Society

re:  Herod - Orod  I don't think that there is a relationship there.  The Herods were a well documented historical dynasty who ruled from 65 BCE through the fall of Jerusalem in the year 70.  They were a sorry bunch of rulers whose support came from friendships with the Roman rulers, especially Julius Caesar and Marc Antony.  http://www.bartleby.com/65/he/Herod.html

re:  The original question of Moses the Roman and his wife - The (also much debated) political sentiment that was raised in the Jewish community around the time of Jesus' life were related to the fact that the Messiah was "of Jesse's seed" - that is - a direct descendant (as Jesus was, through Joseph interestingly enough) from King David (Matthew 1 relates the genealogies).  Politically, this would have given the Messiah the authority to lead a revolt against the Romans.  Apparently Jesus had a different agenda. The (very controversial even today) prophesies that are attached to the long awaited Messiah relate specifically to Jewish history and tradition in the Pentateuch and the stories of the various Jewish prophets.  With that being the case, I don't think that the 1st century Jewish community would have rallied around or made an issue of someone whose family tree was not specifically Jewish, nor would the Romans have percieved a threat from someone who did not meet the Jewish criteria to be the Messiah.  We must also remember that as Janus pointed out, the name Jesus is the modern English translation of a Greek translation of Joshua, which was and is a very common name in Hebrew.

Someone was telling me the other night that there is historical evidence for the presence of Magi in Jerusalem at that time.  Anyone know where I might be able to prove or disprove this?  I have found nothing so far.

Sorry for not being online to address this adequatelly, Azimuth here's what I take, hopefully I can clear up some confusion.

YHWH is not used in english instead of God, God is still addressed as God, or many of the other synonyms given to him, such as Lord.

I (personally) prefer to use YHWH when speaking of God the father, since it gives it more of an ancient and overbearing feel. When I speak of the current God I use God and Jesus simultaneously. Never, do I use the Holy Spirit, although I probably should, since this is the current manifestation of God on earth.

Kind of but not really, as I said this is one of my own personal names for a manifestation of God.

Hope that cleared up any confusion.