Just to balance the question: Is there any proof that there was an actual Jesus like we presume? Prophet from Israel with the adventures as a child and adult described in the bible? I'm asking seriously.

Semi off topic but some native american cultures also had a jesus like figure who died and was resurrected. There are a few cultural stories very similar yet unrelated. This is from 4 years in anthropology so there are sources.

I find it very odd that on this subreddit revisionism is considered such a bad thing. The term does not mean simply making something up and hoping people go with it. What this term means, in brief and without writing a thesis on it, is that historians should not respect a source as being legitimate because it has a "tradition" and because the majority of historians defer to it. We need to be far more critical than this. The wikipedia page on Jesus of Nazareth has started some type of urban legend on the internet that there is an irrefutable knowledge that Jesus of Nazareth is a real, historical person. This is far from the case. From a revisionist standpoint, the testimony of Josephus can be regarded as a probable forgery, for reasons that can be easily deciphered in any critical paper on his work. This leaves us with the Gospels. This obviously didactic work is dripping with supernatural tales that fall completely outside the pale of Western history. So, the wikipedia page would have you believe there is some "kernel" of truth that can be divined via a type of Quellenkritik. Yet why is even this to be believed? Again, wikipedia would say that multiple ancient sources attesting to the same individual is enough to indicate a presence in reality. But this is a false assumption. Really, the previously mentioned "Q" criticism has already divined that all the gospels are an extrapolation of a lost "Q" original, probably most similar to Mark, where Jesus is described as a simple faith healer who turns the authorities on their heads. The progression of the gospels takes Jesus from a faith healer to something approaching a God, though this is notably never made explicit. It is equally possible that Jesus is a mere retelling of a Galilean folk hero who was gradually embellished and would have remained in obscurity, had it not been for political events in Palestine that pushed the cult into in hands of gentiles and transformed it into something entirely different from the Jewish tradition it emerged from. The Romanization of the cult is abundantly clear and non-controversial.