Your assertions simply do not hold up. There are dozens of scholarly opinions about the historicity of Jesus.
Just look at the wiki, of all places, article below:
Most contemporary scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.[7][9][10][30][31][32] We have no indication that writers in antiquity who opposed Christianity questioned the existence of Jesus.[33][34] There is, however, widespread disagreement among scholars on the details of the life of Jesus mentioned in the gospel narratives, and on the meaning of his teachings.[14] Scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts of Jesus,[14] and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.[11][12][13]
Which Jesus are you referring to? Which messiah? Jesus was a common name back than and there were tons of messiahs.
Flavius Josephus was one of the more prominent historians of the Roman Jewish ancestry and he only mentions a Jesus once or twice in his many books. Seems if Jesus was that important he would have recorded more than a paragraph or two. He lived at right around the time of Jesus.
Don't vote knothead, it only encourages them. Anonymous
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." Anonymous
"Self-reliance, free thinking, and wealth is anathema to both the power of the State and the Church." Derby Dude
