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?

[r~]

Your theology is typically wanting. I don't have to go all the way back to Leviticus, I can go to Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, and other passages.

Old Covenant Words can be found in both the Old and New Testament.

Fourth, you don't seem to have any problem judging me and what I write, so why the obvious double standard on your part?

As you judge and condemn, so will you be judged and condemned with the measure that your use.

Flail is simply fulfilling a Bible Prophecy that you would deny. Forgive, stop judging and condemning and you will be forgiven, and the cycle will end.

ItS
Peace
r~

[Flail]

ItS ...precisely the point...I am not judging that Easyrider is going to Hell...wherever and whatever Hell may or may not be....I do have opinions but they are not Judgements regarding Godly powers of sin and atonement and eternity....we are simply to help and to forgive...and leave the rest to Providence.

Peace

[Flail]

Easyrider

I do not judge you...I disagree with you but come in peace with my simple analysis and opinions in order to gain knowledge and insight with open debate and discussion with people of obvious intelligence such as you...however, it is the very close mindedness or Religion that obfuscates clear thinking.......I think basic judgments and opinions are part of the human experience.... on the other hand, Jesus taught that we are not to make 'Godly' Judgments about 'who is saved and who is not'...'who is chosen and who is not'...'whose sin is forgiven and whose is not'....

"for many are called but few are chosen"...by God

[Easyrider]

Your theology is typically wanting. I don't have to go all the way back to Leviticus, I can go to Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, and other passages.

Old Covenant Words can be found in both the Old and New Testament.

Fourth, you don't seem to have any problem judging me and what I write, so why the obvious double standard on your part?

As you judge and condemn, so will you be judged and condemned with the measure that your use.

Flail is simply fulfilling a Bible Prophecy that you would deny. Forgive, stop judging and condemning and you will be forgiven, and the cycle will end.

ItS
Peace
r~

You boys obviously glossed over the link / material I provided you on that. Didn't Jesus say to "Make correct judgments"?

Your (and Flail's) "condemning" is also a bad choice of terms. Like judging, it can mean that one is remanding an individual to hell, which isn't the case with just taking a stand for God's Word.

Did John the Baptist screw up when he confronted King Herod about his adultery? Nope. Certainly Jesus never condemned him for it.

How about Stephen in Acts 7, who the scripture says was "full of the Holy Spirit" when he leveled the stiff-necked crowd?

How about the numerous condemnations Jesus gave out against various sinful behaviors?

How about Paul ("Expel the wicked man from amongst you.")?

How about Samuel in the OT? Nathan to King David? Moses calling the people rebellious and stiff-necked? Isaiah? Jeremiah? Jude? Peter, and so on?

You guys just don't want someone's conscience tweaked so they might repent and turn back to the Lord. So you try to stifle them. Typical political correctness....

[Easyrider]

Easyrider

I do not judge you...

Seems pretty clear from your following statements that you are judging:

"Why is it your business to cast aspersions on homosexuals?....you have to search all the way back to Leviticus to even find support in your supposed Holy Book for your postition...give it a rest...read the Gospels of Jesus Christ and you will find nothing to support your self-righteousness and your judgement of homosexuality....Jesus did, however, speak at length regarding the evil of self righteousness.....and evil is greater than sin.... so first "get the plank out of your own eye"...you are hurting the world."

Of course, if that's not judging but "coming in love," then that's what I'm doing too.

[r~]

You boys obviously glossed over the link / material I provided you on that. Didn't Jesus say to "Make correct judgments"?
Your (and Flail's) "condemning" is also a bad choice of terms. Like judging, it can mean that one is remanding an individual to hell, which isn't the case with just taking a stand for God's Word.
You guys just don't want someone's conscience tweaked so they might repent and turn back to the Lord. So you try to stifle them. Typical political correctness....

Like Jesus said "Make correct judgments"... for yourself. Like Jesus said: Do not cast your stones or stony words or laws or votes against sinners unless you are without sin. You are not.

Your definition of "tweaking someone's conscience" is also considered "harassment". And that is a crime. Trust me, gays know your position.

You may end my concerns about your soul by simply stating that it is wrong to deny homosexuals equality under the law. Otherwise your hypocrisy is showing.

We are off subject. Please respond to "go and sin no more" in "Why is homosexuality wrong?"

The question for this OP: Is it possible that Jesus, and all those declared dead since, were actually dead and resurrected, or is it possible that humans can make mistakes, even by historical accounts.

Please answer: were Jesus and all these people actually dead, or is it possible the historical accounts were mistaken?

ItS
Peace
r~

[Easyrider]

You boys obviously glossed over the link / material I provided you on that. Didn't Jesus say to "Make correct judgments"?
Your (and Flail's) "condemning" is also a bad choice of terms. Like judging, it can mean that one is remanding an individual to hell, which isn't the case with just taking a stand for God's Word.
You guys just don't want someone's conscience tweaked so they might repent and turn back to the Lord. So you try to stifle them. Typical political correctness....

Like Jesus said "Make correct judgments"... for yourself. Like Jesus said: Do not cast your stones or stony words or laws or votes against sinners unless you are without sin. You are not.

Your definition of "tweaking someone's conscience" is also considered "harassment". And that is a crime.

Either call the cops or file suit. Otherwise you're mistaken.

Trust me, gays know your position.

My position is they should repent of their sin and turn to Christ for salvation, just like any other sinner.

You may end my concerns about your soul by simply stating that it is wrong to deny homosexuals equality under the law. Otherwise your hypocrisy is showing.

Nuts. See you at the polls on the gay marriage issue. So far we're winning, and there isn't any political or theological injunction against it.

The question for this OP: Is it possible that Jesus, and all those declared dead since, were actually dead and resurrected, or is it possible that humans can make mistakes, even by historical accounts.

Possible? Remotely. Probable? Highly improbable. I doubt all 4 Gospel writers, Mary, the other Mary, the Roman guards, etc., etc. were collectively confused. Which is what you're basically arguing. A gross, collective hallucination or confusion.

[r~]

Either call the cops or file suit. Otherwise you're mistaken.

"Call the Gestapo" might be more accurate but does not make harassment less of a crime. In your world view, genocide could be legal if the majority approves.

You may end my concerns about your soul by simply stating that it is wrong to deny homosexuals equality under the law. Otherwise your hypocrisy is showing.

Nuts. See you at the polls on the gay marriage issue. So far we're winning, and there isn't any political or theological injunction against it.

Tyranny by the majority is still tyranny. Would you say the same if Muslims held the majority?

The question for this OP: Is it possible that Jesus, and all those declared dead since, were actually dead and resurrected, or is it possible that humans can make mistakes, even by historical accounts.

Possible? Remotely. Probable? Highly improbable. I doubt all 4 Gospel writers, Mary, the other Mary, the Roman guards, etc., etc. were collectively confused. Which is what you're basically arguing. A gross, collective hallucination or confusion.

I am arguing that even modern medical doctors make mistakes. You are arguing that it is "highly improbable" that roman guards etc. etc. could make a mistake or have ulterior motivation.

The death and resurrection of Jesus is only relevant to idolaters that would impose their tyranny on others.

ItS
Peace
r~

[Easyrider]

Either call the cops or file suit. Otherwise you're mistaken.

"Call the Gestapo" might be more accurate but does not make harassment less of a crime. In your world view, genocide could be legal if the majority approves.

You've gone off the deep end on both counts. This is not Canada and the US Constitution protects my freedom of speech to present my Biblical views on gay sex, or any other topic. If stating one's Biblical position about gay sex is "harrassment," then so are your attempts to dehumanize those who hold such traditional American and Biblical values.

Tyranny by the majority is still tyranny. Would you say the same if Muslims held the majority?

Tyranny by a minority, or judicial fiats against the majority, are no virtue. As for the radical Muslims, maybe that's what the liberals are going to get with their continued efforts to hogtie anyone who is fighting against them.

I am arguing that even modern medical doctors make mistakes. You are arguing that it is "highly improbable" that roman guards etc. etc. could make a mistake or have ulterior motivation.

Listen, come up with some evidence they did make a mistake. Until you do this ubiquitous "what if" game is just a waste of time.

The death and resurrection of Jesus is only relevant to idolaters that would impose their tyranny on others.

Well, this predominately Christian society has been going on for over 200 years now, and you don't seem to have lost any protections that I can see. I doubt that would have held true if the politically correct had been running things. Rather than truly embrace “freedom,” the politically-correct liberal fundamentalists seek to control virtually every aspect of the lives of the masses that are unfortunate enough to be under their fundamentalist rulership. They seek to outlaw SUV’s, impose smoking bans while advocating marijuana use, prohibit freedom of religious expression in government and public schools, advocate compulsory training in politically correct opinions and attitudes, seek to enforce Bible bans in schools and the workplace, embrace a de-facto litmus test against pro-life judicial nominees, seek to criminalize pro-life demonstrations through the RICO racketeering statute, try to squelch legitimate religious speech via “hate-speech” laws (note Canada), and generally engage in a wide range of behaviors designed to subvert the U.S. Constitution and traditional American values.

If they'd been at Valley Forge they would have folded up their tents and went whining to their mothers the very first month.

[r~]

As for the radical Muslims, maybe that's what the liberals are going to get with their continued efforts to hogtie anyone who is fighting against them.

It was not the "liberals" that brought on this "Jihad". It was the "conservative" US that trained and financed the Jihadists that became the Taliban and Al Qaeda. History shows over and over that when tyrants are empowered to fight other tyrants, they will quickly turn and bite the hand that feeds them.

It is much better to hogtie all tyrants.

Liberty: The God given right of peaceful and well-regulated pursuit of happiness.
Tyranny: The denial of liberty, especially by law.

Gays do not deny your liberty to marry the consenting adult of your choice. A married gay couple living in peace is not a threat to you or your children or society or God. You would deny homosexuals the very rights you demand for yourself.

Tyranny by a minority, or judicial fiats against the majority, are no virtue... Rather than truly embrace “freedom,” the politically-correct liberal fundamentalists seek to control virtually every aspect of the lives of the masses that are unfortunate enough to be under their fundamentalist rulership.

I stand against all tyranny; theirs also. Would it not make more sense to join forces and stand for the peaceful and well-regulated pursuit of happiness for you and all? The denial of peace is strife no matter how you justify it.

Well, this predominately Christian society has been going on for over 200 years now, and you don't seem to have lost any protections that I can see.

You are not the one to judge whether my peaceful and well-regulated pursuit of happiness has been denied. I am. You are not the one to judge whether my sins are forgiven. God is. The same goes for your liberty and your sins.

If you will simply take a stand to secure the right of peaceful and well-regulated pursuit of happiness for all; We and I will do the same for you. Is that really such a dear price to pay for the peace of your children?

ItS
Peace
r~

ZZyzx:
Apologies for the hijack.