I wasn’t actually talking to you there; that post was in response to @T_aquaticus.
Not believing that the resurrection occurred is not the same as concluding as a matter of historical fact that the resurrection did not happen - something that historians acting as historians can’t actually do if they are constrained by methodological naturalism.
In fact (as the resurrection is an inference from, and does not deny, established historical facts) your analogy is way off. A better analogy would be an article arguing that the evidence for the big bang supports the metaphysical thesis that the universe had a beginning.