No, there are no others who performed "magic tricks" like those of Jesus in the Gospel accounts.
Regarding magic tricks, here is a pic of Sai Baba of Shirdi, India (1834-1918). Magic tricks, healings, . . .
There are no serious accounts of any healings by Sai Baba of Shirdi.
It is popular to make such claims, as comparison arguments to debunk the Jesus miracles. But there is no written record from the time of this guru, from anyone claiming miracle healings, other than the normal praying claims of all religious people, who pray for healing and other favors, and when something good happens they say it was an answer to their prayers.
Not only are all the claims from devotees only, who had been under the influence of the guru's charisma for many years, but these are the only ones ever healed, who already believed in their guru and prayed constantly to him, and when they sometimes got a favorable result, they then attributed it to their guru as a miracle answer to their prayer.
Likewise all the ones healed at the Asclepius temples were disciples who had worshiped this ancient healing god all their lives and prayed to him constantly and performed his prescribed rituals or had them performed on them by the local Asclepius priests.
But by contrast, most/all those reportedly healed by Jesus were non-disciples seeing him for the first time, not disciples who already worshiped him regularly.
And,
no claims of healing miracles are legitimate if you cannot present the published account of them, where the events are described, by the earliest known sources for the claims. We do not have written accounts of miracles by these various gurus, such as we have written accounts of the Jesus miracles. If no one ever quotes from the original sources for these miracle claims, then it's not credible. It's easy to just repeat Jesus-debunkers making these claims without the original sources for them. The sources have to be something other than just another Jesus-debunker crusader throwing out names of alleged miracle-workers they claim did the same thing Jesus did, without any original source for the claimed event.
So to give a serious argument, present your Sai Baba Shirdi miracle example from some source other than a contemporary Jesus-debunker whose only source for it is his insistence that there have to be other miracle-workers than Jesus who also did the same thing because it's just not fair that only Jesus could have done such things. Because this kind of crybaby argument is all we ever get as examples of Jesus parallel miracle-workers.
. . . preaching, small band of followers (to whom he appeared after his death) etc etc.
Of course among the millions of devotees having gathered around him over his long career and expecting him to re-appear we can expect some to claim having visions of him, over many years, so they can equate him to Jesus, after whom his resurrection is modeled. But there are no accounts of Sai Baba Shirdi and others appearing physically to a group of witnesses together, or of his dead body returning to life. People individually have visions of earlier hero figures, as mystical experiences or spiritual encounters, in one believer's dream or trance or altered state. That's not what we see in the Gospel accounts, or in Paul's description of witnesses seeing him alive, even a group of 500 witnesses who saw him together.
Again, we need the original quoted source saying it happened, not just a claim that there are such miracles reported somewhere which are the same as in the Gospel accounts. Why can't the original source for it be presented, so we can read the account of what happened or what was seen? Why do we never get the reported event from the time? Why is it we always have only today's Jesus-debunker crusader assuring us that the other miracle claims exist? Why do they never quote from the original source for it?
Again, only an illustration of plausibility.
There's nothing plausible about it if we can't have quotes from the original source reporting it. A tirade from a 21st-century Jesus-debunker crusader is not a sufficient source for a Jesus-parallel miracle-worker claim. We need the written account about it, like we have reports of the Jesus miracle acts in written accounts from the time.
There were, apparently (according to Josephus) a number of 'messianic claimants' going about Judea around the supposed time of (or before and after) Jesus, some of them with much larger numbers of followers than Jesus was said to have had (thirty thousand men in the case of the unnamed Egyptian Prophet, 52 CE).
These were anti-Roman political dissidents fomenting a revolution to seize power. Of course this anti-Roman militancy was widespread throughout Judea-Galilee-Samaria and nearby areas, and it drew large numbers in some cases. But it was about a war against the Romans, not about someone performing miracle acts.
I believe one of them (Theudas) tried to part the waters of the river Jordan in 45 CE and persuaded 'a great many people' to attend the event.
No miracle acts are reported in any source. There were probably many charlatans making promises to do miracles, but no reports of any miracles having happened, such as are reported in the Gospel accounts. The mere promise to perform a miracle act is not what drew any large crowd. It was the call to arms to fight against the Romans, from a charismatic demagogue, which drew the crowds.
The Romans sent armed horsemen who killed many of the people there, took Theudas alive, and then executed him, according to Josephus. Then there was Judas, son of Hezekiah (4 BCE), Simon of Peraea (also 4 BCE), Athronges the shepherd (also 4 BCE), and The Samaritan Prophet (36 CE). And others in Judea during the later years of the 1st Century CE.
If Jesus did exist, it's possible he was not even as well-known as any of these, either to Josephus or the Romans.
Because he was not a political dissident insurrectionist militant leading an armed rebellion to overthrow the established government.
The Romans apparently executed a large number of mostly unnamed Jews in those times, but that he was said to have been crucified suggests that if he existed he would have been a bit more of a naughty boy, from the Roman pov, than he is portrayed in the Christian texts.
As for Philo, I am not an expert on his writings, but I understood it that he did not mention any of these sorts of people, so I don't tend to see the omission of one of them as telling us much, other than that perhaps none of them, or their exploits, were actually famous (or relevant) enough for him to mention. But then I am not even sure how many if any religious figures he mentions at all (he wasn't, as I understand it, writing history, and was more into ideas and philosophy).
He wrote mainly of the ancient events and ideas and philosophy, i.e., Moses, Torah, the Patriarchs, the Flood, Creation, etc. A few pages of controversy with the recent emperors Tiberius and Caligula. Nothing about contemporary philosophers or revolutionaries or rabbis or prophets or "messiahs" etc. If he heard anything of Jesus and his miracles, he would have dismissed it as fiction, as all such claims were dismissed, by him and others who were educated, who never took such claims seriously, as 90% of even the uneducated did not.
It was a period when miracle claims were rejected by virtually everyone. There is nothing in any literature of the time showing any acceptance of miracle claims about Messiahs or other heroes here or there, including in any Greek-Roman literature.
The appearance of Paul's epistles and then the Gospel accounts is a sudden disruption of the pattern of the 1st century and earlier, where reported miracles by resurrected messiahs and saviors etc. are totally absent from any literature. It would be astonishing if we saw anything of this nature in the writings of Philo or any earlier writer, later than the book of II Kings (600-500 BC) where there is a slight hint of such things, and yet even this was about ANCIENT miracle-worker legends from centuries earlier (Elijah and Elisha).
I.e., all the interest in any "miracles" was only about ANCIENT prophets or heroes or gods, never about a recent "messiah" showing up, like Jesus shows up suddenly around 30 AD unlike anything similar to be found in that culture. Then, after 100 AD, we see some Jesus copycat stories popping up here and there, and new miracle legends and revival of some pagan miracle cults experiencing new life.
