@Esquilax
A trial for a murder is certainly serious enough to warrant "beyond a reasonable doubt" level of evidence. A liability trial for slipping on the ice warrants a "preponderance of the evidence" level. Judging whether it is likely that a historical event is "preponderance of the evidence".
To say that the evidence of the early adopters belief can be applied to any religion is true. You would have to then go through each religion and see the differences--asking questions about the actual event believed to have happened, context, numbers, results, does it contradict reality, and can it be weaved into a coherent worldview.
A trial for a murder is certainly serious enough to warrant "beyond a reasonable doubt" level of evidence. A liability trial for slipping on the ice warrants a "preponderance of the evidence" level. Judging whether it is likely that a historical event is "preponderance of the evidence".
To say that the evidence of the early adopters belief can be applied to any religion is true. You would have to then go through each religion and see the differences--asking questions about the actual event believed to have happened, context, numbers, results, does it contradict reality, and can it be weaved into a coherent worldview.