Thanks for your efforts. I'll take a look at that article, and get back to you.

On your Ramana/Jung point, I was saying something similar at the end of my article on Jung and Buddhism, that Jung might be at the culmination of the involutionary path, while Buddhists are on the evolutionary. I certainly agree with you that we can have both, and that a merger of East and West is coming, or at least is needed.

I have read quite a lot of Ehrman, and am very impressed by him. Maybe atheism is a stage he has to go through, having seen through the falsehoods of his earlier upbringing.

The gospel of John is problematic. You are echoing the conventional scholarly interpretation. It is considered late because Jesus's divinity is more openly proclaimed, and also because it is the most anti-Jewish. Some scholars, however, think that it has some eye-witness details of the crucifixion unknown to the others. That doesn't prove that it is necessarily earlier, but it might be an indication. Also, Kamal Salibi has an unusual take on it; he brings in some material that you don't find elsewhere.