Christian apologists love to play a bait and switch game. They will argue that lots of secular historians accept at least the possibility of a real Jesus in the historical record, therefore, the Jesus in the Bible must be real!
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Now sure, there are plenty of secular historians who think there could have been a real person walking around Palestine who was the kernel of truth at the center of the Jesus myth. I have no problem thinking there might have been an itinerant Jewish preacher in the first century CE upon whom the mantle of deity was posthumously draped by the anonymous writers of the Gospels. That doesn’t make him the Biblical Jesus though.
The Jesus as recorded in the Bible performed miracles, he was born of a virgin and rose from the dead. None of these details can either be validated independently, nor suggested by a real, human preacher. It’s really not possible to get from one place to the other with any kind of credibility. It’s like saying that because you can prove that once pleisosaurs existed, that proves the modern Loch Ness Monster is real. One simply does not follow from the other.
Apologists don’t stop there, of course. They apply the same ideas to the creation story and the flood story, among others. For the flood story, for example, they will claim that the flooding of the Black Sea somehow proves that the story, as described in the Bible, actually took place. They’re willing to gloss over all of the details that don’t fit to have any hope of a historical, scientific backing, even if it ends up destroying their Biblical basis for belief.
See, doing this ultimately shoots them in the foot. It just proves that the Bible is wrong. If they’re willing to accept a non-supernatural, non-miracle-performing Jesus, then why bother with the Bible? If they’re willing to accept a completely natural local flood, what part does Noah have to play? If you only worry about justifying creation by scientific standards, all of the miracles vanish. You really can’t have it both ways. Either the Biblical stories are myths with a kernel of factual truth at the core or they are wholly and completely true, at least at the extremes. If the former, they are worthless except as historical curiosities. If the latter, they cannot be justified using rational, objective, evidence-based science. Take your pick. Just don’t try to play in the middle ground where you think that one somehow proves the other. It just ain’t so.