In what way is the Resurrection the best explanation?

[Abaddon_ire]

Trouble with that one is that even though we might like these little morality plays - when a person tries to use them as an example of something that actually happened to them - we balk.  Juries full of christians arent all that warm to the "god made me do it" defense.  

And isn't that just a bit odd.

In the rendition above, Joe is complicit, but we could paint a more tender picture.  A man who would not want a young girl stoned, and chose to go along with the story.  

Not a problem. In such a scenario, one could easily imagine an enamoured Joe going with the invented story. If anything, it makes the scenario more likely.

Or we could imagine Mary as a girl who got what she wanted and strung a bunch of credulous dupes along for the ride.

Sure. She could have been that much of a wee jewish minx of the era. It was a common trope of the time. See Salome or Lot's daughters for examples of those ebil scheming women luring men. Even Eve is one of those.

Each is an exercise in character building, but neither ever happened.

True of all of the bible. And?

 When we begin with a convoluted premise, any explanation that follows from it only multiplies the problems - it doesn't resolve anything.

Parsimony rules this one. Was Mary a divine receptacle? Or actually a bit of a slut?

 There was no virgin birth.  Nada.  It isn't "Based on a true story" even in the loosest sense of a made for tv movie.  It's a way to wash a demi-god of it's human stain.

That is, to me, more of an end point. The starting point might have been abject panic at an unexpected pregnancy.

Now, there is no way, at this remove to actually "know" this for a fact. But which is more likely? Perfect virgin with a god-baby? Or jewish minx who got caught out by failing to count?