Historians broadly agree that Paul genuinely converted as a result of what he at least believed was an appearance of the risen Christ, representing a dramatic reversal from his role as a persecutor of Christians.

Paul's apostolic authority confirmed by Peter and James; 2 Peter calls Paul's writings Scripture

Q&A: question about how Paul went from persecutor to authoritative apostle.

The book of Acts as a sustained narrative of persecution — Paul's pre-conversion role as persecutor and post-conversion experience of being persecuted

Persecution is the central recurring theme of Acts

Three embarrassing facts that authenticate the disciples' sincerity: Peter's denial, James's pre-resurrection unbelief, and Paul's role as persecutor of the church

The criterion of embarrassment applied to the three key witnesses

Twitter response 7: Signed first-century testimony from Pilate — Paul is a better answer

Seventh respondent; Mike argues Paul's conversion is more powerful than any Pilate testimony could be.

The cumulative case for the resurrection: what evidence we actually have

Mike assembles the positive evidence for the resurrection after dismantling the slogan's objections.

Summary: Paul taught physical/bodily resurrection; hallucination theory fails; Paul was not grieving Jesus's death — he was glad Jesus was dead before his conversion

Concluding the section on Paul's resurrection belief

Christians are called to non-retaliation; violent protest contradicts following Jesus

Continuing the discussion on whether Jesus clearing the temple justifies violent protest.

Christianity would be the worst survival-promoting religion if it were invented for that purpose — it teaches loving enemies, not retaliating, turning the other cheek. Early Christians were pacifists for 300 years. This contradicts the "made up for survival" hypothesis.

Response to Q3 — Christianity is anti-survival by design