My Defense of Christianity.

[CBA222]

One last thing

From the Wiki article you linked:

Quote:
see less value in the letter, given its uncertain date, and the possible ambiguity in the reference.

see it as having little or no historical value.

there is no overall scholarly agreement about their impact on the historicity of Jesus

but its usefulness in determining the historicity of Jesus is uncertain.

they have little historical value, given that the wording of the original writings can not be examined.

not authentic and as a Christian composition designed to rebuff pagan sources.

What do you know, it seems these sources are disputable after all.

Go figure....

And also from the wiki article.

Virtually all modern scholars agree that Jesus existed, and see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.

Although scholars differ on the reconstruction of the specific episodes of the life of Jesus, the two events whose historicity is subject to "almost universal assent" are that he was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.

In antiquity, the existence of Jesus was never denied by those who opposed Christianity.

most scholars consider theories that Jesus' existence was a Christian invention as implausible.

Christopher Tuckett states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by Pontius Pilate seem to be part of the bedrock of historical tradition, based on the availability of non-Christian evidence

Graham Stanton states that "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed".

I don't care how they knew it, all I know is they're professional historians and they know how to do their job and that is what they came up with.
Jesus was a real guy, I am not saying this because of the Bible, I am very sure he was a real historical figure.