there is no real debate among historians that Jesus was a real life person.
Right, no debate. There is no historical evidence Jesus existed.
If this were not true, these folks could have clearly refuted it.
Who would have? Paul wrote that nearly 25 years after the event happened. If someone was 20 at the time they saw it, there were probably dead when Paul wrote the above. Lifespans were MUCH shorter then. In fact, I'd call the incredible delay between the events being 'reported' on and the first 'gospels' as good evidence that the whole thing was fiction.
as recorded in Acts.
Citing scriptures is circular reasoning. Is it not telling that in the copious amounts of historical documents from the period (not least the Dead Sea Scrolls), there is not only NO MENTION OF JESUS but NO MENTION OF ANY OF HIS APOSTLES. That's 13 people purpoted to change the world no contemporary accounts can verify the existence of.
over ten thousand Jews are following him and overthrowing century old social structures that they believe had been given to them by God.
Wow, that's pretty impressive. Wonder why there is no historical record of it happening? Oh, that's right - because IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.
Those numbers continued to grow.
I think you'd find a better case for a group of men starting their own religion, and then writing the gospels as a 'back story' for it, and a reason to leave Judaism. The movement, later called 'Christianity' grew slowly at first until it made good with a major government and became a state religion.
A fanatic is one who, upon losing sight of his goals, redoubles his efforts.