Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach

[Jenny A]

Only two of the items on your list are accepted by the majority of biblical historians:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical...he_Gospels

Gary Habermas has done a longitudinal study of hundreds of publications in multiple languages. Yes, the majority of scholars accept the first four of the minimal facts presented in my OP.

Habermas says surveyed NT scholars most of whom are theologians and who's opinion of whether the book they faithfully believe is true is about as critical as a mother's love.  ("Most of the critical scholars are theologians or New Testament scholars, while a number of philosophers and historians, among other fields, are also included." http://www.garyhabermas.com/articles/J_S...2_2005.htm)   And even his paper is doesn't find a majority of scholars found that the original twelves saw anything.  What he found was much more limited:

As we have mentioned throughout, there are certainly disagreements about the nature of the experiences. But it is still crucial that the nearly unanimous consent[92] of critical scholars is that, in some sense, the early followers of Jesus thought that they had seen the risen Jesus.

http://www.garyhabermas.com/articles/J_S...05.htm#ch4  And even for that limited consensus Habermas relies primarily on theologions including Reginald Fuller a British angelican priest and theologian;  John Meier, a Catholic Priest, who authenticates the claims of Paul and James but not the disciples of Jesus referred to in the gospels as people who reported having seen Jesus; and James D.G. Dunn, yet another British theologian and again one who relies visions of early Christians, not necessarily your disciples.  

So if the claim is some early Christians had visions they thought were of Jesus, I agree they did.  But that doesn't show the disciples did.

But I will not grant you that Jesus was buried in a tomb.  There is much scholarly disagreement on that point:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burial_of_Jesus

It is highly improbable that the Roman's would have allowed the burial of anyone crucified by them.

Crossan's theory is what is truly laughable, Jenny. The Jews had very specific laws concerning the ritual uncleanness that resulted from coming into contact with a corpse. The idea that the Jews would allow dogs to roam the streets of the Holy City of Jerusalem potentially defiling everything they came into contact with is absurd. Pilate agreed to allow a senior member of the Sanhedrin to bury Jesus in his personal tomb because Pilate wanted to settle the crowd and avoid any more confrontations with the Jews. He had had enough for one day!

If Pilate did that it was while not exactly a first for Romans it was highly unusual and most uncharacteristic. Therefore highly unbelievable.  And it wouldn't have been the Jews throwing the corpse to the dogs, letting it rot on the cross, or burying it in a mass grave, it would have been the Romans.   It was considered part of the punishment.

The point is not that anyone can show what happened other than resurrection but rather that there is insufficient evidence that resurrection happened.

You mean other than the testimony of the eyewitnesses (you know, the early Church)?

Other than the four written accounts which are included in the Bible?

Other than the testimony of the converted enemy of the Church, Paul?

With the exception of Paul, we have no eyewitness.  The gospels are nothing like eyewitness testimony, and saying O YES THEY ARE over and over won't make them eyewitness testimony.  Paul claim a vision.  

All of the things I suggested including the highly unlikely event of a hundred men entering into an elaborate conspiracy are less unlikely than resurrection.  It isn't necessary to prove any of them to demonstrate that the resurrection is more unlikely in this case because all of those things have demonstrably happened somewhere to some one and all are physically possible.   Mass hallucination have happened.  The British managed an enormous conspiracy called Fortitude South during WWII.  I'm sure I can come up with others.   People have stolen bodies both to properly bury them and to dishonor them, and to create the impression that the person is still alive.  

Resurrections have never been demonstrated.  Not once.

And the resurrection of Jesus may actually be the one example of a supernatural event that you're looking for.

It's an extra ordinary claim and the gospels are much less than ordinary evidence.  They cannot prove the resurrection.