Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach

[Pizza]

I already pointed out that a resurrection goes against biology, but the Gary Habermas clone replied, "I'm not talking about a natural cause, I'm talking about a supernatural cause." What a joke. Special pleading is funny stuff.

Yes. Yes, you have. Big whoop. The God who created all life forms out of nothing by speaking them into existence is not constrained by your puny laws of nature.

But hey, why not actually make an argument as to why God would NOT be able to suspend His own laws if He chose to do so? Why not attempt any argument at all? See, if you're going to assert that the resurrection violates what we know of biology (which NO ONE disputes, btw), then your real mountain is to explain in no uncertain terms why God is somehow bound to obey the laws and priniciples which He himself created. You have not begun such a climb.

Don't shift the burden of proof. Give an argument that there is in fact a god that does " suspend laws." You can't just assume Christianity is true.

See my CONCLUSION above. Feel free to offer your own alternative theory which explains ALL of the five facts.

I did give one people died for a lie. There's an irregularity supported by occam's razor.