Slightly edited for clarity (my contributions only)
The lack of someone like Jesus [now] is because we do not live in a first century culture with expectations of the end of the known world around the corner, unless one is a strange sectarian in a closed off community. However, at the time, there were many like Jesus, making predictions, making mistakes, getting things right, being a nuisance to the authorities, getting crucified, leaving visions, teaching, healing, having followers around them, working within that near Eastern culture. The fact that you read about it now, in a separated tradition, is what is different. It's like saying no one was enlightened quite like Buddha, which from that tradition is true, but there were many like Buddha including those who took a middle way rather than extremes. It is just that one of them held a line which became traditions, as in Christianity. Gandhi is a modern times Jesus like person in terms of saying something different in the face of imperial power, and being effective, and having lasting impact regarding constructive non-violent protest, and very relevant.
J B is trying to hold up a morally always superior Jesus. Such a claim is impossible to sustain because there isn't enough information regarding the moral life of Jesus nor of everyone else. The only way this is sustained is via a doctrinal belief that rules out the coming together. Such a Jesus becomes always remote and pointless to anyone else. It is the doctrinal conundrum of Christianity - for example in the myth of the virgin birth - that either Jesus was born one of us and therefore we are or can be as he was, or he was not and therefore we cannot be.
Pluralist - Liberal and Thoughtful