Challenge to atheists: I find your lack of faith disturbing!

[xpastor]

About his life and death, we can say only that he probably created a disturbance in the temple and he was probably crucified as a troublemaker.

That's not accurate at all, you know that. The facts not in dispute are that Jesus lived, that he called disciples, was baptized by John and that he died by crucifixion. Furthermore, it's also not in dispute that his body went missing three days after his crucifixion, and many atheists have come up with interesting theories as to explain why or how. Some other facts generally accepted are that Paul knew the family of Jesus and that he wrote at least 7 of his Epistles, and furthermore consensus is that Luke-Acts was written by a single Author.

Yes, I should have included the baptism by John, but no dove descending and no voice from heaven. I took the disciples following Jesus as a given, though I see no reason to be confident that there were 12 of them or that their names were as recorded or that the stories of their calling are accurate. I guess we could also note that Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples shortly before his crucifixion, as stated by the three synoptic gospels and Paul.

Your other points above don't really have much bearing on our knowledge of Jesus' life, which is what I was writing about, but I will respond. It's generally accepted that Paul met James, the brother of Jesus, on a few occasions, and we might note disagreed with him on religious issues. I don't recall any evidence to the effect that he "knew" Jesus' family beyond that. Nobody has ever doubted that Luke and Acts are by the same author, who was probably not Luke and who probably did not accompany Paul on his travels in spite of trying to create that impression with the first-person narratives in Acts. Luke-Acts was written decades after the life of Jesus and even 20-30 years after Paul's epistles. I don't know what you think Paul's authorship of his epistles has to do with the question of Jesus' historicity. However, yes, I agree that he wrote 7 of the 13 epistles attributed to him. Ehrman considers the other six to be forgeries, though he acknowledges that Colossians and Ephesians have some support among critical scholars, unlike 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, and 2 Thessalonians which are almost universally rejected.

What we can say is that he was a brilliant speaker, the parables and the wrong-headed moral teaching really catch your attention. He made a huge impact on his immediate followers, so much so that they could not accept his death, and they began to spread stories of his resurrection, probably after one deluded person had a hallucination.

This theory, as I've pointed out before, means you have to do a lot more explaining like how did Paul get converted to Christianity, and why does he record in 1 Corinthians that there are more than 500 witnesses to the resurrected Christ, most of them still alive?

I don't feel it is incumbent upon me to explain how Paul got converted. There are any number of explanations of his psychology. Bishop Spong claims that Paul was suppressing homosexual urges. I don't say that's true, but it would explain the appeal of a religion with a Get-Out-of-Hell-Free card for a 1st century Jew. All we really know is that Paul says he saw a vision, what most of us today would call a hallucination.

As for referring to the 500 witnesses, it doesn't mean anything except that Paul heard someone say that. Most people even today are not great as fact checkers. I really appreciate Confused Ape giving us that thorough summary of the story of the Angels of Mons. I was going to reference it in much less detail. It shows how even in the modern era people will firmly believe any sort of superstitious nonsense. And it's far from the only example of modern credulity. Elvis stories, for sure. Much of the stuff that goes from my Inbox to my Trash folder. And 2000 years ago there were even fewer people who were fact checkers. To be fair, it was also much harder for them to check facts with no modern means of communication. If Priscilla told Paul that Andronicus told her that 500 people had seen the risen Christ, that would likely have been enough for Paul, without traveling hundreds of miles to interview one of these supposed witnesses.

More to the point, why is this completely consistent?

• Matt 28:10: Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid; go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee, and there they will see me.”
  
• Matt 28:16-20: Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted. And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”
  
• Mark 16:7: But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going before you to Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.”
  
• Luke 24:18-24: Then one of them, named Cleopas, answered (Jesus), “Are you the only visitor to Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in these days?” And he said to them, “What things?” And they said to him, “Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, a man who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people, and how our chief priests and rulers delivered him up to be condemned to death, and crucified him. But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel. Yes, and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things happened. Moreover, some women of our company amazed us. They were at the tomb early in the morning, and when they did not find his body, they came back saying that they had even seen a vision of angels, who said that he was alive. Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but him they did not see.”

Still more to the point, why did you leave off the rest of the passage from Luke which is completely inconsistent with the passages from Matthew and Mark?

According to Matthew and Mark an angel tells the women to tell the disciples to travel to Galilee where Jesus will meet them.

According to Luke the angel(s) just tell the women to let the disciples know that Jesus is risen. Jesus subsequently appears to two of the disciples in the vicinity of Jerusalem. Then he appears to a gathering of all of them in Jerusalem itself. There is nothing about going to Galilee. On the contrary Jesus tells them "stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high." Then right after that Jesus leads them out of Jerusalem and floats up to heaven.

When he had led them out to the vicinity of Bethany, he lifted up his hands and blessed them. While he was blessing them, he left them and was taken up into heaven. Then they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy. And they stayed continually at the temple, praising God.