Why people ask it
Because they have correctly identified the load-bearing claim. If this is false, nothing else in Christianity matters.
Short answer
The strongest case starts from facts most scholars grant regardless of belief and asks which explanation covers all of them. Every naturalistic option covers some and leaves others unexplained.
Deeper answer
The minimal facts approach avoids arguing two things at once. Rather than establishing biblical inerrancy first, it starts with widely granted points: Jesus died by crucifixion, His followers sincerely believed they encountered Him alive, a persecutor converted after claiming such an encounter, and the proclamation began early in Jerusalem where it was most checkable.
Then test the alternatives against the full set. Theft explains an empty tomb but not the sincere belief of the alleged thieves. Hallucination is psychologically plausible but private and individual, and does not account for a hostile convert. Legend struggles with how early the claim appears.
The case is about explanatory scope. No single item is decisive; the resurrection is the explanation that covers the whole set without additions. Reasonable people weigh that against the prior improbability of a miracle, and that weighing is the real conversation.
Common mistake
Saying "nobody dies for a lie." People do. The claim is that nobody knowingly dies for what they know they fabricated.
Conversation-ready response
""Set the Bible’s authority aside for a minute. Just take the handful of facts most historians grant. What do you think best explains all of them at once?""
Source notes coming soon.