Proof of Christianity

[Esquilax]

I'm at all sure I've understood your argument. However, my reply to what I think it is would be that the disciples made clear claims that they witnessed the events, and observation, rather than any invention, is much the best explanation for the emergent beliefs in the form that they are. Or to put it another way, if they were going to create stuff about Jesus, it would be very unlikely to look like material that is coherent with C1 Judaism, yet is shockingly different.

Why is this? Would they not have access to the earlier texts? And which is it: is the fact that it's similar proof that it's real, or is that the fact that it's different? You can't claim that two contradictory propositions are proof for the same claim.

For example, if you believed in resurrection at all in C1 Israel, you thought it would happen to everyone at the instigation of the Kingdom of God. The idea that one person should be resurrected in advance of that universal resurrection would be thought...bizarre in the extreme. It's all much more likely to have come from something they saw.

Bizarre, huh? Is that so? This claim of singular resurrection isn't as original as you'd like to think: religions and myths both before and after christianity have employed it so often it's its own category.

Or are you claiming that all of these distinct individual resurrections occurred, just because the idea of it is weird?