> So a Scientist will say the Resurrection never happened and proceed with their proof leveraging physics and biology. The Scientist makes the first mistake by

> So a Scientist will say the Resurrection never happened and proceed with their proof leveraging physics and biology. The Scientist makes the first mistake by trying to engage on these grounds, as if any of that fundamentally mattered to the Religious person. In doing so he also makes the mistake of confusing his practical methodological assumptions for something more fundamental than they are, so his proof ends up begging the question.