Could the rise of Christianity be explained by a supposed evil twin who had impersonated Jesus following His crucifixion? Is this a viable theory or a disastrous rationale?
Can the rise of Christianity be explained by the occurrence of hallucinations? Were the disciples only seeing things that weren’t really there?
Can the rise of Christianity be explained by the spread of a lie? Is the Christian faith nothing more than an elaborate conspiracy?
Is it better to be joyful or filled with sorrow? How do we reconcile these two verses?
How do we explain the rise of Christianity? Was it a hoax perpetrated by the disciples or the persuasive charms of a charismatic leader?
Were there really guards set to watch the tomb of Jesus or was their existence invented as a cover-up?
Was the empty tomb the result of a malicious or crafty theft? Can this popular argument explain the rise of the Resurrection belief?
Could the empty tomb of the Gospels be the result of an unfortunate mistake? Perhaps Jesus’s burial in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea was merely temporary?
With the historicity of the empty tomb established, what are the arguments against its significant in the Resurrection narrative? Would the decomposition of the corpse make the Resurrection claims inevitable?
Why do female witnesses serve as powerful evidence for the existence of the empty tomb?
Is the empty tomb a believable piece of evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ? Is there any reason to believe that the empty tomb is historical?
The final piece of the minium facts approach details the conversion of Jesus’ unbelieving brother, James. Why is this such an important piece of evidence and why should we believe it’s true?
Is wealth a sign of sin and wickedness or a sign of righteousness? Does the Bible claim that it is both?
The conversion of Paul is one of the most demanding pieces of evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus. But is the Resurrection hypothesis the only valid explanation?
The conversion of Saul of Tarsus, better known by the name of Paul, is one of the most convincing (or perplexing) pieces of data surrounding the Resurrection. But why should we believe Paul’s conversion was genuine?