To claim that Jesus is historical is stretching things massively. Yes, there are some vague references outside the Bible for the existence of a preacher, or possibly several preachers, called Yeshua (which was a fairly common name), but little or nothing that ties this person (or persons) to the Jesus of the Bible. The closest we have in the Bible would be Paul's writings, and he was pretty clearly setting out a religion of Paulism, dressing it up as belief in a Christ. So much of what he writes is "Jesus would want this", not "Jesus said this". The four canonical gospels were clearly written much later than the events they describe and also clearly include interpolations by later authors in different styles, so their credibility is at best suspect.

But the article really misses the point. The whole concept of Jesus' sacrifice was supposed to be to clear us of Original Sin. That sin was the sin of Adam and Eve. So to be a Christian you must accept that piece of mythological hogwash. And even if you do, nobody has come up with a satisfactory explanation for why anybody has to die to wash away that sin. It just does not make sense. And is it really death if you get resurrected three days later? Some of us have had hangovers worse than that.

I note that the OP is a Marvel Fan. That universe is more consistent with reality than the bible.