"Do not be discouraged that in historical terms Jesus' resurrection cannot be established with absolute certainty. For one, all worldviews share the same challenge." Says Gary Habermas. I'm sorry these are the ppl that Cs have to rely on, to prove that resurrection is historical.

And guess what his "all" comparable worldviews are? Atheism and "all." 1st off, the statement reeks of a shallow understanding of "all" worldviews. Question is, how many did he care to study and at what level, to make a comparative and authoritative statement like that, on "all"?

Shows, at best he got his hands on a bunch of atheist arguments. That's all. That's his "all." 2nd, if at all, his "all" includes Hinduism, Q is, how many Hindu texts did he read? Under whom and in what language? If he did, he would know that Hinduism is not history-centric.

Cs must be thinking, 'what abt your Puranic stories?' No informed Sanatani claims historicity of Puranic stories. Cs don't have the same advantage. Their religion comes crumbling down even if one biblical event's historicity cannot be established.

If the very ppl (apologists) that are charged with establishing its historicity cite a weak defense like I said in the beginning, and give up, saying that resurrection cannot be 100% established, then isn't the C-faith futile? Like their Paul says?