Well, Josephus' calling Jesus the Messiah is no more than 20-30 years after the fact, yet it is an unreliable forgery because a Pharisee would not call Jesus the Anointed One. The reason the Bible is so scrutinized is because it makes fantastic claims! When we read the Odyssey, we don't have to believe that Hydra really existed! But when you claim that people who have been dead for days get up and walk away as if nothing happened...that is a slightly different ball of wax.
Well then, Acts of Pilate/Gospel of Nicodemus. should be right up your alley.
Why should I believe them? Mid second century, Medieval forgery? LOL. Does that meet "corroborated" evidence?
Face it, there were no video cameras back then, no cameras, no recording devices, no printing presses, no paper like we have today and no ballpoint pens. If anything is to be believed that happened 2000 years you're going to have to accept the written eyewitness testimony. Too bad it's not in the format you will accept, but nonetheless it's all we got. The archaeological record has proven it, the historical record has proven it and the written testimonies have been preserved for all this time. Not only that, we have the witness of the very lives of the Apostles and disciples from the first century both in the Bible and in extraneous writings of early church fathers. Just as Abraham told the guy in Hades, if they won't believe Moses and the prophets - and we also have the NT - then neither will they believe if someone comes back from the dead. To disregard it all as prejudiced or biased is to ignore that not all of those writers started out as believers.
An honest, sincere study of the accuracy of the Bible and the beginnings of the Christian faith will reward the honest seeker with the undeniable truth he is searching for. I know it is true and I am not alone. That leap that you fear is not such a huge chasm as you imagine.
Well, I guess you rolled right through that </deadpan> tag after the Acts of Pilate/Gospel of Nicodemus sentence without seeing it. I probably should have used a </tongue-in-cheek> tag on that one.
Cordially,