nineteen hundred years, and upon a statement of facts so important
and so marvellous?

The same objection applies to the evidence of Peter and of Paul.
Many critics and scholars deny the existence of Peter and Paul.
There is no trustworthy evidence to oppose to that conclusion.

That by the way. Let us now examine the evidence given in these
men's names. The earliest witness is Paul. Paul does not corroborate
the Gospel writers' statements as to the life or the teachings
of Christ; but he does vehemently assert that Christ rose from
the dead.

What is Paul's evidence worth? He did not see Christ crucified.
He did not see His dead body. He did not see Him quit the tomb.
He did not see Him in the flesh after He had quitted the tomb.
He was not present when He ascended into Heaven. Therefore Paul
is not an eye-witness of the acts of Christ, nor of the death of
Christ, nor of the Resurrection of Christ, nor of the Ascension
of Christ.

If Paul ever lived, which none can prove and many deny, his evidence
for the Resurrection was only hearsay evidence.

Paul, in the Epistle to the Corinthians, says that after His
Resurrection Christ was "seen of about five hundred persons; of
whom the great part remain unto this present, but some are fallen
asleep."

But none of the Gospels mentions this five hundred, nor does Paul