Actually, there is. If you read up on the history of the time, you'll learn that I'm not spinning claims out of thin air. E.g. the Romans executed quite a few Jewish prophets and leaders, before and after Jesus. "Miracle workers" were common in the ancient world. The Jews were livid about the Romans, and this is present in their religious writings of the time. For example: The Essenes were a group of devout Jews who lived in their own community near the Dead Sea, and rejected the Temple as corrupt for collaborating with the Roman overlords.
Similarly, we can look at a contemporary account such as Josephus, who goes into great detail about the Jewish uprisings but says practically nothing about Jesus and the early Jesus Movement.
And yet, so many people derive so many conflicting ideas about Jesus. Ah well.
This last part is due to our desire to understand him on our terms, not on his terms.
Anyway, I'd say that his disruption of the money changers is a typical example. Without historical context, this may seem like a generic assault on materialism. However, in context, it's very different. Jesus was a Jew, and he was objecting to the presence of the money changers in the Temple, which was supposed to be the most important sacred space for all of Judaism. He was basically saying "the Temple and its leaders are corrupted," and part of that was their collaboration with the Romans -- along the exact same lines as the Essenes.
...except that it's based on the best information we can put together from an understanding of history, and the actual events as recorded during his time.
And again, part of the point is to illustrate how there are plenty of options aside from saying "Jesus was either divine or insane, and can't be anything else." That's a false choice.
There are other possible choices, but I think there are probably not other viable choice. It just is what it is. You can't claim to be God without either being Him, or being nuts.
You haven't made a case at all for Jesus' actions being anti-Roman. You'd think with all the books of the new testament the case would be easy for you to make. But it's just not there. You having to use the moeny-changers as an example illustrates how sparse the evidence, and how reaching you have to get to come to your conclusion. The Jews did hope that the Christ would deliver them from the Romans, but Jesus didn't make that claim, and didn't work to that end. This is likely one of the primary reasons most Jews rejected him in the first place. There is probably a stronger case to be made here by far than your premise.
Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword. “Or do you think that I cannot appeal to My Father, and He will at once put at My disposal more than twelve legions of angels? “How then will the Scriptures be fulfilled, which say that it must happen this way?”
It is all but impossible to even infer your position from the historical record. Yet you choose this option over believing what he said directly about himself, and what those who followed him believed about him.
This isn't overly surprising in that most who can't believe his message make some kind of attempt to mischaracterize him (explain him away).
It is quite clear the Jews in general weren't happy with Roman occupation, but that has little to do with Christ.
How you impute his anger over the money changers to any unhappiness with Jews cooperating with Rome is just your personal interpretation.
Had this been the seat of or even one of the primary reasons for his unhappiness with the Jewish leadership why would he dine with the tax collectors?
They were probably one of the most despised groups in the culture for that reason.
Your position remains unsupported, and part of the general attempt to treat Christ as something other than that which he claimed to be.
There may have been a lot of christ wanna-be's running around in that day, but that was because the Jews knew the Christ was coming.
Christ wasn't a want to be, he was the Christ.
I would think from a scientific viewpoint even atheists could agree with the words of this wise Jewish leader, and this I think speaks to your idea that there were many "Christs" running around at that time and that he was one of many (this is regarding his disciples arrest):
And now I say unto you, refrain from these men and let them alone, for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought;
but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it, lest it may happen ye be found even to fight against God.”
The work came to full fruition, and he was right, they could not stop it. It has spread around the globe, literally.
