We know he taught "the way" and not "christianity", but had it also occurred to you that he didn't teach or promote the symbolism associated with him either?
Imagine if there was a revolutionary leader that was softened by being put into an archetype and then shaped from that archetype. In other words, the new testament was part of that effort to minimize the historical leader, if one existed.
Rome was always pro-philosophy rather than a more literal interpretation, which sounds good until you realize the philosophy they were pushing wasn't deep insight. It was hiding the real philosophy that was being shared ("the way").
