The board is usually quiet this time of day so surprised to see your response; then noticed the Australian email address [I live in Perth].
Sure, I've heard the story and accept it to be a true story. The point I was making is more along the lines that it doesn't bother me if no one else believes it to be a true story. The philisophical approach that I was referring to in my post, is the issue of having a need to convince others of what I have accepted to be factually correct [as distinct from the issue itself]
Hpothetically speaking, I could happily sit in a room of 20 people, none of whom believed in the resurrection as a physical truth, [given that I do believe in the resurrection as a physical event] and I would not need to try and convince them of the correctness of my belief.
Conversely, if another person believes something to be factually correct, but I do not, I don't have a need to try and demonstrate why I disagree with that person.
P.S. There is another angle in my original post, but as I didn't explain the above terribly well as to what I meant, I shall go away and have a little think about how to write what I mean by this other angle; it's been dreadfully hot and sticky today and my brain is a little addled!