Hi! I'm an atheist who's trying to get answers about Christianity. In my opinion most arguments for the existence of God don't really make sense, but besides the philosophical defense I also have to consider the evidence for the resurrection. The Apologist at my church, who has researched this stuff for most of his life, says that there is a mountain of evidence to support the resurrection compared to the relatively miniscule evidence for most historical events. Evidence includes the eyewitness reports of the apostles and over 200 witnesses (who had little incentive to lie and were unlikely hallucinating or crazy in some way), the medical impossibility of Jesus simply surviving the crucifixion, and the abundance of surviving accounts of Jesus and the disciples who claim to have seen Jesus resurrected, which would become the letters and the gospels. I am worried that I might be getting biased information, so I'm just looking and hoping for a second opinion.
On a somewhat personal note, I'm also kind of an idiot who isn't very good at seeing logic, or a lack of logic, when it's in front of me. I'm trying to be open minded, but I'm scared of being tricked or of falling for a fallacious argument. In other words, any help would be appreciated here.
Hi there -- while it doesn't directly answer your question about resurrection, this section of our FAQ has some information about the question of whether a historical Jesus did exist (most likely) and also has a good thread from u/kookingpot about how historians approach religious texts as sources in general.