Sea Breeze;
I read the link you posted. There so much I could say but consider just one point regarding historical evidence.
In your link, New Testament scholars Gary Habermas and Michael Licona list the following five criteria noting that “a historian who is able to apply one or more of the following principles to a text can conclude with much greater confidence whether a certain event occurred
First of all did you know that Bible Scholar Michael Licona starting to lean more to agnostic than a true believer in the resurrection! Yes he starting changing his believe in the bible being the Word of God after he wrote his book.
He served as an apologetics coordinator at the North American Mission Board (Southern Baptist Convention) from 2005 through 2011, when he resigned as a result of the controversy surrounding his book The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach in which he seeks to prove Jesus's bodily resurrection, but at the same time In a passage in his book, Licona questioned the literal interpretation of the story of the resurrection of the saints in Matthew 27, suggesting the possibility that it might be apocalyptic imagery alluding also to the resurrection of Jesus.
He changed his position on the resurrection of Jesus being apocalyptic imagery and now denies he ever said that about Jesus because his career was in danger of crashing. In a radio exchange with Ehrman, Licona said that if Jesus actually rose from the dead, Christianity is true even if it were also true that some things in the Bible were not.
Licona noted what he saw as several problems with the argument for inerrancy provided by American Christian systematic theologian Norman Geisler
In 2017 Licona debated Matt Dillahunty.
During the debate
Michael Licona acknowledged his belief in ghosts,
in post mortem experiences,
in demons,
In psychokinesis
in the efficacy of ouija board, which he claims to be supported by empirical evidence
NOT A VERY RELIABLE PERSON TO BELIEVE IN WHAT HE SAYS ABOUT HISTORICAL EVIDENCE of Jesus.
Gary Habermas was born in 1950 and is old school when it comes to assessing what is HISTORICAL EVIDENCE.
Today-2021- bible scholars know a lot more what constitutes RELIABLE HISTORICAL EVIDENCE.
For Example, Under the Topic; A MATTER OF HISTORY it says this;
1. Historical claims are strong when supported by multiple, independent sources.
These OLD SCHOOL SCHOLARS USED THE SCRIPTURE; 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 and would try to reason that 500 eyewitness was plenty of historical evidence to prove many saw Jesus resurrected. Here are some words used many times verbatim by these old scholars.
There is plenty of eyewitness testimony that establishes it. For example:..…
After that, He appeared to more than five hundred brothers at once,---1 Corinthians 15:3-8
This is why these types of reasoning's don't work anymore.
Can you imagine if I was accused of murdering an entire family and was arrested for a crime I didn't commit. And when my Court date finally arrived and I sat before a Judge and Jury and defended myself by saying;
"I have five hundred Witnesses who can testify I didn't commit the crime"
And the Judge says; "Name the Witnesses"
And I say; "I don't know or have their names"
And the Judge says; "Where do they live?"
And I say; "I have no idea where they live."
And Judge says; "Where are the 500 witnesses?"
And I say; "They Been dead for over 2000 years."
WHAT DO YOU THINK THE JUDGE AND JURY WILL DO?
Today we don’t have one single name of those 500 witnesses mention by the bible writer
We don’t have any addresses
We don’t have any certified letters by them
We don’t have any other sources that name those 500 witnesses.
So it’s not historical evidence like those two old Bible scholars Claim
All it is ----------is a BELIEF!------With no actual historical evidence---just anecdotal stories.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_R._Licona