I would argue that the "religion" of Christianity was never meant to be discerned and accepted based on objective verifiable evidence. Of course there were allegedly a few eyewitnesses to some of the major stories within the NT,
There were a lot more than a "few" eyewitnesses to most of Jesus' miracles among other things. He fed thousands from a few loaves. He provided enough wine for a whole wedding feast etc etc.
...but the belief seemingly spread like a wildfire through the people afterwards. One could argue that the spread itself was cause for claiming validity...but arguably Islam spread even faster, so truth cannot be used as the reason.
Mohammed had very little success with his new religion at first, but when he decided to impose it on the people at the point of a sword, slaughtering a whole village of Jews who wouldn't accept it, THEN it spread and is now the religion of the whole population.
™ Version 4.2
