Dear Dr. Craig, as a Jewish person from Israel who has read the New Testament and developed a sincere interest in the

historical claims of Christianity. I am writing to you after having watched many

of your lectures and debates, as well as those of Dr. Gary Habermas on YouTube.

Your scholarly approach to these matters has been both intellectually stimulating and challenging for me.

I would like to inquire about a historical and theological question

that has been troubling my mind regarding the resurrection narratives

and their immediate impact on first century Judaism.

Given your extensive work on the historical evidence for the resurrection, I would

appreciate your insights on what appears to be a significant historical incongruity. If Jesus'

resurrection occurred as a verifiable historical event in Jerusalem, why was there not a more

widespread and immediate conversion among the Jewish

population where the event transpired? The Book of Acts thus record that thousands

join the early Christian movement, yet this represents a relatively modest proportion of Jerusalem's

Jewish population at that time. One might reasonably expect that

an event of such unprecedented metaphysical significance, a publicly crucified individual

returning to life, would have catalyzed mass conversion, particularly among those geographically

proximate to these extraordinary occurrences.

What is particularly striking is that the historical record suggests that Jewish conversion to Christianity

gained more traction in the diaspora communities throughout the Roman Empire,

rather than achieving dominant status in Judea itself, the very epicenter of the resurrection event.

This geographical distribution of early belief seems to present a challenge to the public nature of the resurrection accounts.

Does this pattern of limited local conversion and more successful distant mission work, not raise legitimate historical questions about either the public demonstrability of the resurrection appearances.

...