A most ingenious paradox indeed: that for Jesus Christ to be one he must be many; or, that we do not contradict ourselves if we say there is one Jesus Christ and then say there are many Jesus Christs. This seeming contradiction is a paradox, a seeming contradiction. Most people, I believe, think that only the proposition 'Jesus Christ is one' can be true, while the second, 'Jesus Christs are many', must be false. They think that when the Epistle to the Hebrews (13:8) declares Jesus Christ to be 'the same, yesterday, today and forever' it gives not only the theologically correct view of the matter but the commonsense view as well. 'Everyone knows' that there is only one Jesus of Nazareth, as there is only one John the Baptist. And Christian dogma seems convinced that its god, the Lord Jesus Christ, is one, unique and unchanging. Quite often I will find myself using the plural forms of the relevant terms or names, i.e., I will speak of 'Jesuses' and 'Christs' and 'Jesus Christs', very much aware that virtually no one uses them. The plurals will sound awkward to us if we live in the presumption that there is only one Jesus. So a range of 'alternative plurals' (especially in book titles) are in use, e.g., The Faces of Jesus, Portraits of Jesus Christ, Images of Jesus, Asiatic Aspects of Christ, Depictions of Jesus, and so on. Such usage, however, suggests that there is someone out there to whom these images or portraits or aspects refer. And yet, all the questing for an original historical Jesus, within or beyond the Gospels, has not produced one. There can be no Life of Jesus Christ. So the images, depictions, faces, are it! Religious images and symbols are not empirically referential; that is, they are not images of anything existing outside a confessional religious context or story or faith-world. It is a profoundly important commonplace in religious studies that religions, and the earth's myriad deities, are made and remade by people who, in turn, can be made and re-made by those same religions and gods. Before proceeding, one could point out that Christianity is built on great paradoxes -on the Incarnation, for example, where God, though defined as not a man, is held to have become one and to have dwelt among us. The Trinity displays another apparent contradiction for God is said to be at once one yet three. Theology This Immense Panorama: Studies in Honour of Eric J. Sharpe calls such paradoxes 'mysteries'. I simply note that what is a contradiction from the point of view of 'n' dimensions is seen as only a seeming contradiction (a paradox) when 'n plus one' dimensions dawn upon us (or when we look with the eyes of faith). This paper, however, does not explore Christian paradoxes from within the Christian theological circle. It is not a contribution to conventional theological or christological debate. It looks further afield to a phenomenon of culture and history too little noted, the multiplicity of Christian gods -and the paradox of Jesus Christ as both one and many. I believe that what identifies both Oneness and Multiplicity is the same thing: the Christian Story -the story of Jesus as the Christ -in all its simplicity and fantastic elaboration. The problem of definition is never settled, says Sykes, it simply reappears in different form throughout Christian history.1 I believe (a) that it is 'the Christian Story' that 'defines' or identifies the Christian religion (its 'oneness') and (b) that it is 'the Christian Story' that sustains the multiplicity of alternative Jesus Christs in history and culture and in many non-Christian religious traditions. So this paper is an exercise in Religious Studies -historical, descriptive and reflective. It belongs to the empirical study of the worlds of the religions. In this general sense I call it basic Phenomenology of Religion and turn first to identifying and describing some of the world's many Jesus Christs.