I'm free from the writing dungeon, I can finally live! 😆 Okay, the Skool title is a little bit clickbait😅, but here's the manuscript I submitted to a certain Philosophy of Religion journal. Feel free to read it and let me know y'all's feedback regarding the argument's validity and/or how to popularize it! Thanks everyone!😎 Btw, I've made some slight adjustments in the manuscript from the last email I sent y'all @Than Christopoulos @Tim Howard Abstract. The hypothesis “Jesus became alive after execution” leaves open one persistent objection, that its cause remains underdetermined - deceptive spirits, advanced beings, syncretic deities, or natural laws could explain it. However, read against Jesus’ public claims, the signal fixes its meaning (Israel’s god vindicating Jesus). I argue that rivals are either parasitic on the Christian hypothesis or forfeit predicted specificity. The Christian hypothesis is antecedently constrained, while rivals lack independent attestation - causal adequacy does not entail evidential parity. Other evidence or priors can affect posterior probability, but the resurrection with historical context is discriminating evidence favoring the Christian hypothesis. Keywords: signaling theory, resurrection, agent identification, underdetermination, divine deception, Bayesian model comparison