I'm not questioning the historicity of anybody. I'm saying that all of your reasons to doubt the reality behind the Jesus of the gospels could equally be said about many other characters from history.
You said in your OP that your thoughts are 'Based on the limited research I've conducted over the past few days'. I agree it is an interesting topic but I think you should dig a lot deeper.
The best case for a historical Jesus is probably made by Bart Ehrman. The best and most recent case for a mythical Jesus is made by Richard Carrier.
No I know you weren't seriously questioning the historicity of anyone. You were suggesting that if we accept that Jesus never existed then perhaps we ought to accept that many others with similarly flimsy supporting evidence never existed. And I would agree actually, perhaps Alexander the Great never existed, I'm open to the possibility. But I don't care so much, because the question of his existence isn't quite the hot topic of Jesus's existence. Do you get me? I wasn't raised by Alexander's witnesses.
On the other hand however, I'm not sure that 'well if Jesus never existed then maybe no one did' (intentional exaggeration btw!) is such a good argument. It doesn't speak to the historicity of Jesus to concede that the historicity of many other historical figures is equally shaky, quite the opposite. It speaks to the limitations of historical scholarship in general.
I will dig deeper, there's no reason not to. I was simply checking in with where I'm currently at.
And lastly I have to say it doesn't give me much confidence in the idea of a mythical Jesus to hear that its best proponent is Richard Carrier. Mind you, I don't ultimately have a real horse in the race, as an atheist. Whether Jesus existed or not, he certainly wasn't the messiah.