Could “resurrection” be faked?

[Zzyzx]

.
Could “resurrection” be faked?

1. A supposed death could be an illusion (as is done for stage, movies and television regularly), or it could be in error, or it could be a fabrication.

2. OR, A dead body could be put into a tomb and later secretly removed (for publicity purposes).

3. OR, Supposed witnesses to the “empty tomb” could be unidentified so their reliability and honesty could not be investigated, or they could be mistaken or untruthful, OR their “testimony” could be fictional.

4. OR, An illusionist after faking death and entombment could later appear to witnesses.

5. OR, churchmen writing decades or centuries after the supposed event could have invented the tale in order to promote their interests and their religion.

6. OR, a combination of the above.

7. Harry Houdini could probably have arranged the trick very convincingly.

8. A clever author of fiction could write an emotional story including all the supposed conditions and characters.

9. Clever clerics have convinced people to believe their tales enough to follow instructions to kill innocent people, including children, to impress supposed gods “visible” only to clerics.


Two thousand years after the trick, no evidence is available to verify that the event actually happened as reported, and no witnesses left accounts of what occurred (existing reports are hearsay recorded decades or centuries later).

If told that a hundred years ago a dead body had come back to life, there was no evidence, the supposed witnesses could not be identified, and those who recorded the supposed incident could not be verified, would you believe it had been real?

If the “death” involved a godman for whom “death” was temporary at most, was the “death” and “resurrection” symbolic rather than literal?

Question for debate: Could “resurrection” be faked?

[Goat]

You really haven't 'discredited' the "Swoon Theory". You keep on claiming it is.. but no, it isn't.

Yes, it is:

A Lawyer Examines the Swoon Theory

http://www.godonthe.net/evidence/swoon.htm

This is really really bad logic. I will also note that it is 'an appeal to authority', since
a lawyer is not a doctor, and he did not address the medical part of the swoon theory, but only quoted scripture, and made assumptions that have no foundation (as you say).

For example, he proclaimed that the thrust would have penetrated the heart... there is no way you can reasonably come to that conclusion based on the words in
the gospel.

Did you even bother to read it? I mean, it is pretty obvious it doesn't do justice to refuting the theory. I personally would be ashamed to have that piece of writing associated with me.

But, if it makes you feel better

[r~]

You really haven't 'discredited' the "Swoon Theory". You keep on claiming it is.. but no, it isn't.

Yes, it is:
A Lawyer Examines the Swoon Theory
http://www.godonthe.net/evidence/swoon.htm

[sarcasm] That's right, because Roman executioners were much better trained than modern medical doctors. And no Roman soldier would ever take a bribe. [/sarcasm]

I am
ItS
r~

[Flail]

Perhaps it was 'staged'....to bring home the teachings of Jesus that were his life message and which are and have been ignored by Christians since Paul started the Church.

Jesus as God did not suffer....God feels no pain...there was no sacrifice...young men in WWII sacrificed on the beaches of Normandy and Iwo Jima...God being crucified is an act....no pain...no suffering..no sacrifice....staged at best...probably concocted....My God my God, why hast thou forsaken me?????

But someone penned the words of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John..it is the lessons and the parables that matter and that are ignored and replaced with Church building Dogma and mindless ritual...all of which divides us and leads to hate and judgement.....as Church edited as they surely are, these messages of Jesus contain lessons of goodness and mercy....they are anti-religious and rail against the self righteousness that defines the evil of Christianity.

We are in moral decline because our ethical and moral standards are based upon the evil of Christianity...save me , bless me.....all my sins are forgiven...so go and sin again.

[r~]

...as Church edited as they surely are, these messages of Jesus contain lessons of goodness and mercy....they are anti-religious and rail against the self righteousness that defines the evil of Christianity...

I just wanted to highlight the greatest truth in your post.

Whether Jesus is God is only relevant to idolaters.
Being Christian In Name Only is not the same as being Christian In the Spirit.

I am
ItS
r~

Many will hear the Word, but few will know the spirit.

[Easyrider]

You really haven't 'discredited' the "Swoon Theory". You keep on claiming it is.. but no, it isn't.

Yes, it is:
A Lawyer Examines the Swoon Theory
http://www.godonthe.net/evidence/swoon.htm

[sarcasm] That's right, because Roman executioners were much better trained than modern medical doctors. And no Roman soldier would ever take a bribe. [/sarcasm]

I am
ItS
r~

The soldiers reported Jesus was dead. If you want to make up your own Bible story then go for it.

[Wyvern]

The soldiers reported Jesus was dead. If you want to make up your own Bible story then go for it.

Then why didn't they break his legs as was the S.O.P. for crucifixions to make sure he was dead? Not to mention he was brought down much sooner than was the norm, he was punished under Roman law not Jewish law so no consideration would have been made for the sabbath.

[r~]

The soldiers reported Jesus was dead. If you want to make up your own Bible story then go for it.

I do not deny that the soldiers reported Jesus was dead. I simply relayed that even today several people a year are mistakenly reported dead by doctors. If you wish to argue that they were actually dead but resurrected by God; I cannot prove you wrong.

You would have us Believe that it was impossible for a roman soldier to be mistaken or bribed. I would have you recognize that flesh is imperfect. I would have you recognize that all sins of the flesh are forgiven through Jesus – even unrepentant and abominable sins – even the unrepentant and most abominable sins of his own executioners. Yet, still you deny His Holy Spirit.

In the same sense that Jesus made up his own Bible story; so is a new Bible story now being made. Even as you do not recognize the Spirit of Christ in his old new Bible story, you will not recognize the Spirit of Christ in his new new Bible story.

I am
ItS
r~

God speaks allegory, idolaters hear literal.

[The Duke of Vandals]

8. A clever author of fiction could write an emotional story including all the supposed conditions and characters.

Picture this.

You're a Jew living in Roman occupied Judea circa 70 ce. Your lands have been conquered. Again.

Your temple has been destroyed. Again.

Due to several failed uprisings, the Romans are now taxing you for being a Jew on top of what they already tax you.

You believe in a religion that has a rich written history of which you're aware from listening to your local priest / rabbi. You've grown up being told that in every age when bad things have happened to the Jews, god has sent a sage or savior to help out. You're really hoping that god sends another one really soon. Things are doom and gloom right now.

Then, along comes one of your buddies who was just over in the next village and heard an amazing tale that he's all excited about.

He tells you that god sent his son down to earth about 40 years ago. A Jew named Jesus who was born about 70 years ago showed up and worked miracles. Real miracles. Now, you've heard about other accounts of miracles before from this era and even remember hearing about some other people named Jesus who did some similar things. It's not outside the realm of possibility that one of them was the real deal.

You listen to your buddy't tale some more and he explains how this Jesus guy died on the cross, but then came back. That he sacrificed himself for the rest of us. It's a tale that you really want to believe, but you're just not sure your can. After all, a lot of the stuff your friend is claiming is impossible.

Your budy then explains that all of the godman's followers were willing to die for what they believed in.

That clinches it. No one would die for a lie. It must be true.

------------------

And that's how Christianity started.

The idea of faking a resurrection implies there was a need to fool people at the time Jesus allegedly lived. There is no such need. We know Jesus didn't exist at this time. We have records from that era and none of them make any reference to Jesus until decades after his death... until the fall of the Jewish temple when the social climate was right for a scientology-esque cult to start getting people to believe a nonsensical tall tale using powerful emotional appeals.

So, it's pointless to argue about faking the resurrection. Why would you need to? All one needs to do is invent history after the fact and charge it with a powerful emotional appeal and voila 1600 years of repression and ignorance.

[The Duke of Vandals]

I do not deny that the soldiers reported Jesus was dead. I simply relayed that even today several people a year are mistakenly reported dead by doctors. If you wish to argue that they were actually dead but resurrected by God; I cannot prove you wrong.

You would have us Believe that it was impossible for a roman soldier to be mistaken or bribed. I would have you recognize that flesh is imperfect. I would have you recognize that all sins of the flesh are forgiven through Jesus – even unrepentant and abominable sins – even the unrepentant and most abominable sins of his own executioners. Yet, still you deny His Holy Spirit.

This is a little like arguing about whether or not Superman could survive a kryptonite bullet and whether or not Lex Luther could have known Supes was still alive. You're not discussing facts. You're discussing fictional events. Given the context of the thread, it's pointless. Jesus is no more real than Superman.

[Easyrider]

The soldiers reported Jesus was dead. If you want to make up your own Bible story then go for it.

I do not deny that the soldiers reported Jesus was dead. I simply relayed that even today several people a year are mistakenly reported dead by doctors. If you wish to argue that they were actually dead but resurrected by God; I cannot prove you wrong.

You would have us Believe that it was impossible for a roman soldier to be mistaken or bribed.

Nope, that's your argument, not mine. Mine is that there is simply no historical evidence in the Gospels that the soldiers thought Jesus was anything but dead.

I would have you recognize that flesh is imperfect. I would have you recognize that all sins of the flesh are forgiven through Jesus – even unrepentant and abominable sins – even the unrepentant and most abominable sins of his own executioners. Yet, still you deny His Holy Spirit.

No way I deny the Holy Spirit, or anything in that last paragraph, though there is one caveat: As Jesus said, "Unless you forgive others their sins against you, the Father will not forgive you your sins."

In the same sense that Jesus made up his own Bible story; so is a new Bible story now being made.

You might sell that kind of revisionism to some people, but I'll stick with the historical accounts of the NT.

Even as you do not recognize the Spirit of Christ in his old new Bible story, you will not recognize the Spirit of Christ in his new new Bible story.

"old new Bible story"? Where do you get these claims? Let me give you an update:

1 John 2:22 - "Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son."

JESUS IS LORD!