|He walks on water and can levitate into the clouds|
How do you know that your position on Pilate is correct?
We have no idea what really happened, friend! All we have are four anonymous books written decades after the event, two/maybe three of which borrow heavily from the first. We are both guessing what really happened. My point is that the Gospels seem, to me at least, to portray Pilate as “moral” as he prefers not to execute an “innocent” man. Based on the description of Pilate in Roman documents, I don’t think he would have had any pangs of conscious in executing any Jew for any reason. My point is that the character of Pilate painted in the gospels does not square with the character of Pilate in non-Christian texts. To me this adds more doubt to the reliability of the Gospels as historically reliable texts.
Regarding the sign on the cross above Jesus, I believe that this little detail is an embellishment. I doubt its historicity, but historical or non-historical, it is inconsequential to the question at issue here, which is: Is there sufficient evidence for the claim of a first century reanimation of dead human tissue, for any reasonable person today to believe it as historical fact. I say, no. I have presented the evidence that Saul most probably also found the evidence for this claim poor. The persons in the first century who did believe there was good evidence for this supernatural story were overwhelmingly poor, uneducated Jews and Bible-ignorant Gentiles. That is NOT a ringing endorsement for the historicity of this claim.
Imagine if someone in this country made the claim of seeing a Bigfoot that levitates into the clouds, and when he presents the evidence for his claim, the only people who believe it are a group of poor, uneducated people from Appalachia and some Japanese tourists.