Thanks for the response Graham. I’m afraid, however, that you misunderstood my reference to Josephus. I did not refer to him as proof of the resurrection, but rather as proof that Jesus existed. While the Wikipedia article does point out that some of the references to Jesus were likely or possibly added, it also says that is at least one that is considered authentic.

Your study on this subject is impressive, Graham. You didn’t respond to my suggestion that we both are exhibiting signs of confirmation bias in our reading material on this subject. I can point you to a great many sources of scholarship on the historicity of Jesus, the biblical accounts and the resurrection. I suspect you are not interested in those. I’m happy to continue this “debate” on the resurrection if you like as I do consider it extremely important but it is not likely we are going to persuade each other so it might be more productive to pursue our mutual interest in exploring how science is abused by physicalist defenders.