I think a better question than what is the historical evidence for Jesus is why do we have to look so hard for it in the first place. Imagine that a man that performed miracles and then rose from the dead. Even in that day with lacking communication word of this would have spread like wildfire. Historians from all corners of the globe would have been lining up to write about the stories they had heard of this amazing man. Instead we have to actively search for any historical record confirming this supposedly amazing man's existence. I think the actual historical record is irrelevant when you consider the fact that somebody who would have been so well has so little historical documentation. In theory, the evidence should be overflowing and impossible to ignore.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
