.

Here's a factoid you won't pick up in Sunday School or in the works of real scholars, because it doesn't matter:
There is no contemporary record of that Jesus existing. And no serious scholar makes an issue of it. Why? There are a lot of factors; we look at those here, but it all boils down to that no historian claims that records of a person must be contemporary with them in order to be of value. Really, that's just plain stupid: As if Tacitus could be a better witness to the existence of a Roman senator that died 2 hours after he was born, than if that senator had died 4 hours earlier. I mean, come on, that's not how professional historians work. It's also that no one contemporary with Jesus had a reason to say anything (see here; and maybe Pikachu can explain why Columella should have mentioned Jesus in his book on agriculture). A second issue is Pikachu's claim that there is no Christian record mentioning Jesus by a contemporary, but that's false -- "mainstream modern scholarship" does hold Paul as a contemporary, even those who think the Gospels are late (that's yet another issue we'll note shortly). So where does Pikachu get off with all of this?

Non-Relevant
What non-Christian alive when Jesus lived should have mentioned seeing Jesus or hearing Jesus? Pikachu makes a list of stuff that happened in Jesus' life, but never gets around to answering the question: Which of these guys would or should have mentioned Jesus who were alive when he was? Who does he have in mind?

Philo? No, he had other interests.
Seneca? No, he had enough problems saving his head from Nero, and none of his writings would provide an occassion to mention anything about Jesus.
Petronius? Maybe Pikachu can explain where in his Satyricon or in Trimalchio's Dinner (two works of fiction) he could have said something about Jesus preaching.
Paterculus? Got any room for the trial of Jesus in Palestine in a history of Rome?
Quintillian? Maybe he'd have found room for the crucifixion of Jesus in his book on rhetoric.
Silius Italicus? His poem on the Second Punic War would have been a great place to mention Jesus' resurrection.
They never mention anything Jesus said, or anywhere He went, or anything He thought, or anything He said, or anything He did -- because they didn't have to, and had to place to mention any of this. In fact, try to find such detail on any Jewish peasant (as he would be in there eyes) and you'll amaze today's historians like nobody's business.

So that no non-Christian alive when Jesus lived ever mentions Him at all doesn't mean dip. You got to wonder why Pikachu doesn't name any names.

Relevant
Digging deeper into his own Pika-pile, Pikachu avers that there is also no contemporary Christian record of Jesus. And in fact he goes on to raise the bar beyond what any responsible historian would assert, noting that even parts of the NT written by people who were contempoaries of Jesus, were written after Jesus died, by people who didn't know Him. Without granting that even at face value, I'd like to know what credentialed historian claims that a historian has to have not only been a contemporary, but also have personally known whoever they write about, in order to be trusted. This is a tangled web Pikachu weaves.

Despite Pikachu's claim, there is no reason to date any of the Gospels later than 70, and needless to say, he doesn't provide any worthwhile analysis or comparison to secular works as we have done; and while it is true that the consensus does date them all after 70, it was noted by J. A. T. Robinson some time ago that all such arguments are interdependent -- few if any actually look at the issue afresh as he did. It's also not taken for granted that none of the Gospel authors knew Jesus in person. That consensus, by the way, does say that the dates were between 70 and 90 -- despite his appeal to "consensus" and the "modern mainstream," Pikachu opts to give scholarship the shaft and call this a "low ball guess"! The basis is that the gospels are not mentioned by in any other Christian writings -- Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius, for example -- until about 150 AD. Once again, the reasons WHY they should have been mentioned is not explained; by that same reckoning the works of Tacitus can't be dated any earlier than Tertullian's time. Just as well to say, "Many scholars guess the Annals existed before 200 AD -- but a scholarly guess is still just a guess." Talk about arrogance in ignorance.

There may be no contemporary record that Jesus existed, , but here's a fact Pikachu covers up. There are records of Jesus by perfectly reliable historians just after his time, who also report events from before and during the time of Jesus that the real historians don't just wave off because they were not alive at the same time or didn't know the people they write about. Looks like we caught Pikachu covering up the truth yet again.

And Pikachu is not done with the half-truths for this round yet. Addressing whether early Christian writings prove Christianity is unique, Pikachu filches a single quote out of context from Justin Martyr to support that early Christians did not think Jesus was unique. He alludes as well to Tertullian and Origen, but with this type of quote, he's obviously playing games with the evidence:

"we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter"? [St. Justin Martyr, First Apology] Impressive for Pikachu? Read on in Justin: For you know how many sons your esteemed writers ascribe to Jupiters: Mercury, the interpreting word and teacher of all; Aesculapius, who, though he was a great physician, was struck by a thunderbolt, and so ascended to heaven; and Bacchus too, after he had been torn limb from limb; and Hercules, when he had committed himself to the flames to escape his toils; and the sons of Leda, the Dioscuri; and Perseus, son of Danae; and Bellerophon, who, though sprung from mortals, rose to heaven on the horse Pegasus. And so on. What it boils down to is that Justin himself is straining for a comparison; because he needs to appeal against the Roman argument that because Christianity was new, it was bad. That's the only "bind" that they were in at this time -- not a need to explain similarities.