I don't find the Jesus story incredible, just horribly politically convenient
Hmm, can you unpack that a bit?
I consider myself a Christian, and 'politically convenient' is about the LAST way I'd personally think to describe Jesus Christ.
His teachings, as I understand them, do not map cleanly onto any current large political or religious grouping; neither liberal nor conservative, neither anarchist nor imperialist, neither materialist nor idealist; opposed to almost all structures of power, requiring radical forgiveness and self-discipline from his followers; a pacifist, a healer, possessing no personal property; advocating a form of voluntary communism and international globalism but opposed to violent uprising.
Even in a world where multiple major religions have been established in his name, just trying to understand what his teachings actually WERE is difficult, as they seem to constantly be obscured by organisational infighting and the quest for power.
It is certainly politically convenient, currently, in the American South to CLAIM to be 'an Evangelical Christian' of a very narrow definition - yet Catholics, Quakers, anyone sympathetic to immigrants, and other people who attempt to ACTUALLY live out Jesus' teachings tend to be attacked.
The missionary and writer Hannah Hurnard is a case in point. She was in Palestine at the time of the formation of Israel, for which she has become sort of a minor saint among Evangelicals for a couple of books she wrote in the early 1950s - yet her many other writings have also been placed on a kind of 'index of forbidden books' by exactly the same Evangelical publishing houses - because she came to reject the concept of eternal Hell, claiming the voice of Jesus himself told her this was a wrong interpretation.This was seen as a bridge too far.
Then there's 'A Course in Miracles', which I've read and which I feel is quite likely to be an actual communication from Jesus (it focuses a lot on 'forgiveness', which to me is near the core of his teaching in the Gospels). But many Evangelicals believe that this book is quite literally 'demonic'. I mean, this isn't surprising given that Jesus himself was executed by the leaders of his own religion for being 'demon-possessed', but ... ... .. it's kinda funny, isn't it? A little too close to history repeating beat for beat.
And how many other times has this cycle repeated, over the last two thousand years? There's a reason why multiple lay and monastic orders spun out of the Church, from the Benedictines on. There seems to have to be a constant process of struggle and renewal as every century or so a new generation has to rediscover the actual heart of the teachings and try to re-embody them. And often even those 'renewal' movements (like Protestantism) are really only reactions to political circumstances (eg, the decline of Rome and the rise of nationalism and capitalism). I suspect something similar happens in all other philosophies and systems too. (Take Einstein, for instance; a secular saint, yet the bulk of his work in his own lifetime was considered out-of-date and not taken seriously). The spirit and soul of a belief is always deeply buried under temporary organisational forces, and harder to get to without serious inner work.
To me it seems that anyone trying to follow the ACTUAL teachings of Jesus will generally get at best a mixed reception in the worlds of religion and politics - even/especially among large organisations calling themselves 'Christian'.
Regards, Nate