If someone were to respond like in the title, straight off the bat, it seems like you’d be getting into evidence very quickly.

“How do you know Jesus raised from the dead?”

“Because he appeared to 500 and the disciples, and Paul converted after being blinded for 3 days… the proof is everywhere!”

From here, I’m not sure where I’d go. I’d want to agree on what good evidence is. But more importantly, the resurrection is ridiculously complicated. Paul’s blindness and scales story was not written by Paul, mass appearances weren’t actually talked about by eyewitnesses, and were likely exaggerations of sources they used, etc.

But, I feel like digging into the weeds like that via questions could be problematic, especially so early.

Would it be better to zoom out and look at the Bible as a whole? The ark, and zombie uprisings are easier to disprove, so I could ask things like “if there were errors elsewhere in the Bible would your belief go down?”

How would you approach the situation if someone immediately started jumping to evidence like Jesus rising from the dead?