Hopefully, you will not interpret my response below is/was written in a mean spirited manner. I just want to honestly respond to your significant comment. EMET! And, I am positive that you are a good, decent, and sincere person…
An idea to think about: Supposing that someone, an evangelical attempts to evangelize/witness someone of the Jewish faith. During that encounter, the evangelical presents NUMEROUS contradictions [you know the extensive list] from the Christian Bible to the person he/she is witnessing. Ultimately, what the evangelical seeks is for the person being witnessed to reject his or her “faith” / “religion” which, according to the Tanakh, has incredible implications [Ex 20; Deut 13], especially if the action is equivalent to idolatry: e.g., believing in false gods, God is a “plurality”. The “Christian” [I will employ this term as an umbrella for believers in Orthodox Christianity = Catholics and most Protestants] concept of God is quite different from the Jewish or Muslim concept of the “Almighty”.
Now let’s think about this for a moment: Jesus’s purported resurrection will be one of many topics employed to convince [= via supposed proof texts] the Jewish observer to accept Jesus as his savior and presumably to accept the line that God exists as a Trinity, Jesus is God incarnate, Jew is God, Jesus died for our sins, through the Son to the Father, the Sabbath is now Sunday, the eucharist, and the list could go on… And, please, please, please, read Hebrews 8:13. So, if Judaism is correct, do you think that God will be a happy camper with that member of the Jewish community who has now committed virtual idolatry. Yes, the resurrection is not a court of law.
Respectfully, I do not think that you are comprehending/looking at this issue through the lens of a Jew, and perhaps those of other faiths (although I could be wrong). Respectfully, you write: “We also are not discussing the “crimes” of Jesus, but the Resurrection.”
RESPONSE: YES! But…
PS This topic is discussed in the epilogue of Volume II.