Considering there is much disagreement about 'history', logic says no once source is probably 'the absolute truth'. Better to sort the wheat from the chaff for yourself.
There is no disagreement that Julius Caesar lived and was emperor of Rome during the first century BC.
You can find countless items of history like this, about which there is no dispute.
The historicity of Julius Caesar’s life has been established based on the criteria used by historians. This same criteria—the same standards—has established the fact of Christ’s crucifixion and the fact that his tomb was empty. There is no reasonable explanation for the empty tomb, except the conclusion that Christ was resurrected.
Other established facts—established using criteria as rigorous as any other facts of history—include that the disciple’s behavior changed radically during the days and weeks following this event because of something they experienced, and that they were willing to suffer and die in order to share their experience with others.
Please don’t overlook the good here—that the Resurrection is very good news if true.