And we wouldn't know about anything else from history if we did not have historical records about them...and yes, that is how absurd what you said sounds. (I am not trying to be mean by the way, just addressing your response)

We have a historical record of this creed. This creed points out 500 eyewitnesses at once, so what do we do now?

A single reliable witness is enough to establish a fact in court so twelve would not be bad would it?

But it's more than twelve, we have Jesus' brother, about 120 in the upper room in Acts 1...and note their criteria for picking an apostle to replace Judas,

Acts 1:21-22
[21]“Therefore, of these men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
[22]beginning from the baptism of John to that day when He was taken up from us, one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection.”

And they usually would not count women and children in those days, so at least 100 witnesses because it said THESE men who have accompanied us. So multiple people witnessed these things.

Matthew and John were disciples who wrote their gospel themselves, does it get more first hand than that?

Still waiting on that coherent explanation that accounts for all the cumulative historical facts presented?