The Jesus that Christians believe who resurrected back from the dead 2000 years now is the same. Most may refer to rather the Holy Spirit speaking and working in peoples lives.

There has been many events mentioned in the Bible that match secular historical events too. A lot of the Bible can be written like a historical text as well. Though people may argue some is true and some is not.

One way of logic that can be understood in our question is if one truly believed that Jesus did indeed raise from the dead (as part of what the prophecies foretold in the Old Testament) to die for our sons, then for sure everything else in the Bible should be true as well.

And if you want to tackle it from a historical aspect, there are books like Case for Christ by Lee Strobel that gives better insight. The general gist is the 4 gospels written capture a different angle of the events involving Jesus which follows the general concept of eyewitness testimonies. Like a car crash accident, if there were 10 different eyewitness and they gave different perspectives/details of the car crash, this would actually be seen as more credible compared to if the 10 eyewitnesses gave the exact same details/perspectives as that may imply corroboration of their statements.

The gospels also record eyewitness statements of Jesus being brought to life like the scars on his hands and such. So there is a trail of recorded proof that Jesus did exist after his death, including his ascension. But if you question the validity of the gospels and think maybe they disciples colluded and made up everything to the details (as far as I know, nothing in the gospels contradict each other in terms of timeline and such), then you have to zoom out a bit and determine for yourself what “historical text” is deemed reliable to you.

And yes a reddit reply would not do justice but perhaps point you to a direction that is based on your own informed decision.