Also, embracing an athiestic viewpoint is (for me) NOT a negation of spirituality nor the intuitive and common sense ethos that are universal to all humankind.

To be sincere, if there was a History ar Archaelogy section on this forum, would you have rather raised this topic in those sections? I think not. And the reason no doubt is that you regard these factual inconsistencies to perhaps be fatal to a faith or belief system? I may be wrong in reaching that assumption, but if that is indeed your view, then all i seek to state is that factual inconsistencies of that nature are not necessaily sufficient to diminish a faith or belief system. Hence my example of a question regarding the Buddha.

If there was a biblical history or archaeology section on this forum of course i would have raised my topic there, why would you think otherwise ?

Indeed, and I have not called you an atheist, have I? I have simply asked if you think that these innacuracies serve to discredit a faith, and in some measure you responded in both the negative and the positive.

I believe Globexl in his most recent posting has dealt rather more eloquently with the answer to this question.

but what I seek to convey to you is for example as follows. . . Hinduism has hundreds of gods and goddesses. . . prove to a hindi man that many of them do not exist, and that may still take nothing away from the overall - superstructure of his faith

Precisely, the Hindi can afford to lose a few gods along the way, he has hundreds more to replace them. Christianity cannot.