Jesus existed, and was the son of God.

"The gospels was not written by Jesus himself, so it's most likely to be credible."Just because there are many gospels saying the same thing doesn't mean it must be true as much as many fanfictions about Twilight doesn't mean vampires exist. It could be of many reasons, actually.1) The stories could be passed on. Like as Pro has said Peter, who travelled with Paul, could have received the stories from him, and Matthew's gospel could have been based off Mark's. And they could have passed the stories on too. And there you have it, many storybooks with the same stories.2) Because of this particular motive of providing evidence, gospels could have been written. The dawn of Christ could have required more evidence, and the followers of Christ may have come up with their books that reflect one another just so you can now say that the numerous gospels are all about the same thing.3) It could also be due to fame. How much fame and admiration could you have invoked if you said something like, "Uh, yeah, I saw the same thing too! I saw Jesus!" Now, I don't mean these to be proven, but it has just as much probability for a reason that all those gospels are the same as "because Jesus was real." On Pro's 3 accounts stating the honesty of the gospels:1) Some possible reasons for forgery have been stated above.2) Not that hard, considering religious texts of other religions are easily spread as well.3) Were they? Please present parts of gospels that were from eye-witness accounts.No.4, "Star Wars have different episodes but they tell the same story of different times, but the gospels were recorded in the same time," in response to Star Wars having many episodes but it's still fiction.I was just raising an example actually, in which case I have plenty of. Any fictious concept could have had numerous independent stories, other than the Twilight fanfiction mentioned above, there could be retellings of Terminator, The Matrix, and other concepts that mix and match that essentially still retain the core idea, just like the gospels could have been the fanfiction, Jesus the concept.No. 5, "Peter and John, the disciples, 'would have been absolutely sure about these details, and they are recorded as the same, even by different people. So they must have been convinced themselves.'"This point has been rebutted above. "They must have convinced themselves" demonstrates they didn't even know the creditibility of those claims but they decided to roll with it anyway. Just like how they "filled 5000 men with just 5 loaves and 2 fish."And again, yes, I do believe a Jesus probably existed. What I don't believe, however, is the assumption that He is the son of God capable of ressurection and walking on water. Pro, do you believe he has magical powers?"The Gospels can be used in this debate because it is historical evidence. There are lots of the gospels in archeological numbers."I cannot make of any sense for the second sentence. As for the first, I see the only evidence given to fulfill the burden of proof that Jesus was the son of God was the gospels, perhaps. Now, what is the evidence that the gospels are true and credible? This link is for why John's gospel, a "disciple's" gospel was not so trustworthy, but mostly it works for the others too.http://www.manyprophetsonemessage.com...Best of luck to Pro and have a nice day!I love Avicii and Coldplay btw...