1 edit
I'll try one more time.
If I tell you there is a pink elephant outside, that is evidence. Is it credible evidence? That is for you to decide. More than likely you will dismiss it, however.
If two people tell you there is a pink evidence outside, then that is evidence, more evidence than before. Still, you will probably dismiss it.
Now if everyone tells you there is a pink elephant outside, you have two choices. Embrace the notion or begin with conspiracy theories as to why everyone is lying to you. Obviously, this evidence is better than the last two.
Anyone who claims anything is a witness to that truth. It is then for you to decide if it is the truth.
1 edit
-Removed-Evidence is not proof. I'm not claiming that they are proof.
Try watching a movie called, "The Case for Christ". It is about an investigative reporter with the Chicago Tribune whose wife became a new convert to the faith. Being an atheist, he went bonkers and demanded she recant her faith, feeling that he was being replaced. To make a long story short, he investigated the claims in the gospel and ended up coming to the conclusion, based on the evidence that he found, that the gospels were true.
It is a true story.
2 edits
-Removed-Do their names matter?
I've seen enough historical evidence to suggest that the 12 disciples not only existed, they gave their lives for their faith.
They obviously believed what they saw and heard.
I'm also well acquainted with the numerous prophecies that tell us what the Messiah will do and say. Needless to say, Jesus matches what they predicted he would do and say.
You can either say that this is a million to one chance, or the gospels were written to match the life of Jesus.
Which do you prefer?