having records of Christ 30-40 years after his death is actually really really good for ancient sourcing. I'm fine with you saying he never existed, but I have a list of about 200 historical figures who you also have to say never existed by this logic.
The "Christ was a myth" argument is kind of ill-informed, you will find very very few - secular and religious - biblical history scholars who support it. Those who do are often kind of fringe figures. I mean this as no insult to you, but Christ existing is pretty much solid. It's his divinity that's in question (and that question is a lot more interesting)
Please give me a list of these so called 200 figures, and explain why would they be considered as non exisiting.
I'll get the book down and give you a "greatest hits" cut and put the ISBN - because there's a lot of obscure figures you probably won't know.
As for what I mean by "not existing" is that basically it's because we have much less evidence for them, much further away from their life. What we have of Christ states that not long after his death, he had gained a following of people in the Roman Empire. There's emperors who we have just one passing mention of about 200 years later in a run down of other emperors but nothing else. Yet no one questions these emperors, just Christ - because most people questioning Christ don't understand how ancient sources work.