Nuts. Here's an example of the worthless arguments made in your link:
Quote: "Second, the willingness of the early apostles to die for their faith also means nothing, for a very simple reason: people of many other religions believed so strongly that they were willing to die for their false beliefs, too. Jews were willing to die for their belief that Yahweh didn’t want them to eat bacon.3 The early Muslims were willing to die for their beliefs, for example Sumayyah bint Khubbat and Husayn ibn Ali – to say nothing of modern suicide bombers. Thousands of adherents to Bábism (an offshoot of Islam) were put to death for their faith in the 1840s.4 Hundreds of Bahá’ís have been executed for their faith.5 Martyrdom for Vahiguru is a central practice of Sikhism. There have been martyrs for Zoroastrianism, Jainism, Scientology, paganism, Shintoism, and many other faiths. Martyrdom around the world shows the strong appeal of blind belief, not the actual truth of what is believed."
The reason THAT REASONING is faulty is because those people given as examples (Muslims, babism, Baha'i, Vahiguru, Sikhism, etc.) died BELIEVING THEIR BELIEFS WERE REAL, not false. They may have turned out to be false by pundits later, but they died believing their beliefs were true.
The apostles died for what they believed was true, and no one has yet to demonstrate their beliefs were false.
Here's another farce: "(3) (the Gospels) are internally contradictory, (4) and are contradictory between sources, too."
Give me your best ONE (1) example. Just ONE. And don't give me a half-baked laundry list. Just pick out the ONE (1) best example you have. Cite the scriptures involved. And make sure it deals with one of the central tenets of the faith, rather than some largely unimportant issue.
And for the record, all four Gospels, plus various epistles, confirm the resurrection.
