There isn't any "one day" or "one week" example. Of a myth event, miracle event, normal historical event -- none of the reported events come to us in a source dated from the same time that the reported event happened. There were no newspapers publishing daily reports of the current events, or weeklies or monthlies. Every source we have for the (alleged) events was written decades later than the event(s) reported.
100 years and it's bullshit. But 70 years, that's the ticket.
No, if we had ONLY ONE source, and this was 70 years after the alleged miracle event, that would probably also be bullshit. Obviously as you change the numbers gradually, the conclusion to draw slowly changes also.
Since the latest account, John, covers the same events and agrees with the synoptics and Paul on some major points, it becomes more credible. But if John was all we had, and there was no earlier source about the Jesus events, it would be difficult to accept the miracle stories as credible.
Nobody would ever lie about something that happened 70 years ago.
Why do you have to use extremist language to make your (incoherent) point?
It would be perfectly reasonable to say that we have more evidence for the miracles of Simon Magus than for Apollonius of Tyana, e.g. Most of the miracles of Simon are recorded in a period of 100-150 years after the events allegedly happened. Perhaps in as many as 3 or 4 sources, prior to 200 AD.
Whereas for Apollonius of Tyana, who lived at about the same time, we have ONLY ONE source giving any such claims, and this source is about 150 years later.
So on the scale of most likely to least likely, ranking just these 3 -- Jesus and Simon Magus and Apollonius of Tyana -- the ranking would put Jesus #1, Simon #2, and Apollonius #3 on the list.
It's a wide gap between #1 and #2, and a narrower gap from #2 to #3:
1. Jesus: 4 (5) sources dated 30-70 years after the reported events;
2. Simon Magus: 3 (4) sources, 100-150 years later;
3. Apollonius: 1 source, 150 years later.
And more names could be added to the list. Such as:
Prometheus: 1 (2) sources, several millions years later;
St. Genevieve: 1 source, 20-50 years later;
Mohammed: 1 source, 200 years later;
Emperor Vespasian: 2 sources, 50-60 years later (but only one event reported);
etc.
And of course the simple list by itself isn't enough to give the whole argument for the conclusions. There are some individual differences or distinctions to point out for them. A major factor to include is that Jesus had a uniquely short career, and no widespread reputation during his life, so that it's difficult to explain how the mythologizing got started, in contrast to all the other names on the list.
But you can list other factors to show how this or that figure stands out from the others, if you have examples. Nothing about the listing is rigged to favor Jesus over the others.
So there are no "magic" or "sweet spot" numbers appearing in this list, but just the shades of grey as you go from the more likely to the less likely cases listed, ranking them according to the known facts or evidence about them.
Then he magically heals a paralyzed man and has a conversation with a bunch of demons because ancient people didn't know about insanity and epilepsy. Next he turns morsels into a feast for thousands, a miracle so astounding that his disciples have forgotten all about it two chapters later when he does it again to their astonishment. Dude walks on water, calms storms, heals blindness, leprosy, etc,. Dies to save others, disappears from his grave never to be seen again.
