Reddit mentions of The Resurrection Factor

>our religion, ie: for Judaism

I was under the impression that you didn't believe the Torah. Do you?

>Put up or shut up.

I'm not sure how you would like me to, but I'll list some resources below. If you would rather delve into it by having a strict dialogue between the two of us, that's cool too. I may not be able to respond quickly every time, depending on how this carries forth, but I'll do what I can. As you mentioned, your soul is "at stake and all that."

Gary Habermas and N.T. Wright are the top two resurrection scholars. Michael Licona is also a leading scholar on the resurrection debate. Philosophers such as Richard Swinburne and Antony Flew have even shown their faces on the scene as well.

Books

• The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Gary Habermas & Michael Licona
  
• The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach by Michael Licona
  
• The Resurrection of God Incarnate by Richard Swinburne
  
• The Resurrection of the Son of God by N.T. Wright
  
• The Resurrection Factor by Josh McDowell
  
• The Son Rises: Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus by William Lane Craig
  
  Presentations
  
  
• Gary Habermas - "The Resurrection Argument That Changed a Generation of Scholars"
  
  
• William Lane Craig - "Did Jesus Rise From the Dead?"
  
  
• William Lane Craig - "The Evidence for Jesus's Resurrection."
  
  
• N.T. Wright - "The Resurrection"
  
  
• N.T. Wright - "Did Jesus Really Rise from the Dead?"
  
  
• Michael Licona - "Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus"
  
  
• Michael Licona - "Evidence for the Resurrection"
  
  
• Doug Powell - "Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?"
  
  Debates
  
  Gary Habermas, William Lane Craig, and Michael Licona are the most frequent debaters on the Christian side, and Bart Ehrman and Richard Carrier are the most frequent debaters on the non-Christian side. Habermas, Craig, and/or Licona have debated the following (possibly) recognizable names on this issue: Bart Ehrman, Richard Carrier, Antony Flew, John Shelby Spong, Gerd Ludemann, Shabir Ally, Arif Ahmed, John Dominic Crossan, Robert M. Price, and Dan Barker.
  
  YouTube is great for finding those debates. There are also, of course, dialogues in book form.
  
  >if you don't like my tone
  
  I'm actually enjoying your tone, haha

Ok, so looking at your book links, this one appears to be the only one even trying for actual, historical rigor rather than Evangelical rationalization of belief in the literal truth of known-unreliable literature.

Now, what I want to know before I shell out money for a bloody religion book is:

A) What's the archaeological evidence? As in, not testimonies, because human testimony is supremely unreliable, so much so that many people want it thrown out of modern forensics.

B) If Jesus existed and was resurrected, why does all evidence for the Torah fail? After all, Christianity is premised on the initial correctness of Judaism: no Judaism, no Jesus.

C) Why are all authors appearing to write on this issue theologians and philosophers of religion, self-labeled "apologists", instead of reputable historians and archaeologists? After all, you're the one claiming it's a simple matter of fact provable by looking at the evidence: plainly all reputable historians of Second-Temple-era Israel ought to know quite unequivocally about this event, with far better archaeological and records-based evidence than personal testimonies by the members of a crazed messianic cult.

D) If God can resurrect the dead but does not do so, except through an afterlife granted by faith in Christ, is He not a complete massive asshole? In fact, why even bother making a world precisely crafted to cover-up His own existence by yielding naturalistic explanations for everything while also holding the possibility for naturalistic immortality in several different forms? It's like He wanted His own religion to fail!

E) Why on Earth should we trust that the Gospels contain any facts whatsoever and aren't totally fabricated? Hell, as long as we're supposing fabrication, literary analysis tells us there's only a few actual authors, so it's not like we need to explain tons of people all lying in the same way (which they could easily do, to promote an ideology they sincerely fooled themselves into), just a few people lying in the same way (which is even easier, especially after you account for self-delusion).

While we're at it, here's some Jewish apologetics; I hope your standards of evidence are higher than this shite.