The Histories of Jesus (and a Word of Comfort for the Holiday)

Peace and blessings
 
In honor of the upcoming holiday, I wanted to contribute my meager share in calming the troubled minds of Christian children and tell them plainly: Not every long-nosed Jew is a baker (or an apprentice baker) and there is no room for general and sweeping panic about Jews wherever they are. Most Jewish bakers have access to religiously and age-neutral supplies (there are also Muslim children in the world).
However, I will reserve my words and add that it is of course recommended to maintain the normal level of panic (the rule of thumb is this: the more pure and innocent a Christian child you are, the more careful you must be).
 
And now for the next minor matter:
I have argued here several times in the past that the basic Christian model (and I emphasize: I do not mean its historical incarnations – Catholic, Protestant, etc.) provides the most successful practical and theoretical response. Both to the heart and to the mind.
So far, this is a fundamental philosophical claim.
But recently I have been exposed to a development of this argument that also relates to the historical side, and more specifically to claims about the resurrection of Jesus from the dead.
The argument goes something like this:
There are a number of historical facts that are accepted by most professional historians in the world (including non-Christian, secular, and atheist historians):

1. It is known where the historical Jesus was buried after his crucifixion.
2. There is a number of testimonies (especially from women!!!) that this tomb was discovered empty after three days.
3. Jesus appeared in his body to many people in different places and under different circumstances after his supposed resurrection.
4. A large group of his Jewish followers began to believe at once – contrary to all the Jewish tradition in which they believed – that he was indeed the resurrected Son of God/Messiah.

 
Assuming that all of the above is a historical fact (I invite readers to raise objections to this as well), the claim is made that all naturalistic explanatory models fail to account for it and that in any case the traditional Christian explanation is the most successful.
An example of naturalistic explanations: Jesus did not really die, the reports of his return to life originate from mass psychosis, there is a conspiracy here, Jesus was not really buried in the place that tradition identifies.
 
I would love to hear the readers' substantive opinions, and of course it is possible and even desirable to spice them up with slander and insults on a personal basis. Shtsel, you are a miracle.
In the next response, a recipe for traditional matzah will be included for those in the know (Jewish).
 
I also attach a link to two short videos (missionary, of course…) that explain the argument in a matter-of-fact manner.

Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? – Part One: The Facts – YouTube
 

Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? – Part Two: The Explanation – YouTube
 
 
Win and dine