How exactly did Jesus resurrection happen❓

[The Nice Centurion]

If a world religion claimed that 2000 years ago someone built a time machine, then people would fall over their own feet to constantly ask: "How excactly did this time machine work?"

But now we have in the bible a a main protagonist resurrect from being dead and no one, neither Christian nor Sceptic ever, bothers to ask:
"How exactly did Jesus resurrection happen?"

Marvel fans are known to intensively debate questions like:
"How exactly does Spidermans power of sticking to walls and ceilings work?"

But no one on earth gives a damn about how exactly worked "The Resurrection"!


My first question for debate: Why is that so


Now lets first see what "resurrection" is supposed to mean.

First: A resurrected being in the bible is not undead like Count Dracula as a Vampyre, who has no biological bodily functions anymore and is kept undead alive by magic alone.

A truly resurrected being is supposed to have regained live and full biological bodily functions out of the state of being truly dead.
And he is therefore not being kept alive by magic alone, though magic m i g h t have triggered his resurrection.

Everyone agrees that Jesus is supposed to have been "really dead" ! By current medical definition that does mean already brain dead.

This is the state anyone must reach to honestly resurrect.
For we have semi dead people waking up from clinical death all the time and no one is claiming miracle of resurrection for them.

But lets see what naturally happens after brain death:
"Decomposition (of the brain) often occurs within minutes after death, which is quicker than other body tissues, likely because the brain is about 80% water. Rotting starts in normal ambient temperature at about 3 days, and the brain is essentially vaporized within 5-10 years."

Said all that we can begin trying to find out how Jesus resurrection might have happened in detail.

Bible gives a hint by intensively implicating that Jesus resurrection was triggered by magic.

Bible explains that Jesus died sometime P.M. during first day, was dead the whole second day and resurrected on third day before daybreak.
(Lets say he was dead for somewhat 36 hours.)

Now, said all that; What is possible?

Magic, as the Great Joe Quesada stated when he destroyed the Spiderman comic series for the fans, must not be explained.

But what that magic did do can be researched.

Did magic stop Jesus brain and therefore his body too from decomposing, kept it in a somewhat timeless state and make him arise 36 hours later?

Did Jesus naturally decompose and magic made him re-decompose later to let him be able to better resurrect?

And then we have still the problem that Jesus died supposedly on the cross because fatal hurts and woundings to his body caused his heart to stop.

How therefore did his body compensate this fatal wounds, to still be able to resurrect?

I will stop here explaining, starting the debate with the second and main question:


How exactly did Jesus resurrection happen

[Diogenes]

I think people should understand that the Gospels are witness testimonies that don't have all possible information. They tell only part of a bigger story and are like small pieces of bigger image. When you understand that, you can also fit them together without contradictions.

Well put! It can be illustrated by the story of "the blind men and the elephant" where truthful and accurate but limited testimony leaves the reader to harmonise all the information to get "the big picture".



Is it possible to harmonize the four different gospel accounts of the resurrection?
viewtopic.php?p=1125082#p1125082

This sort of answer is, of course, utter nonsense. In the 2000 years or so since the New Testament NO ONE has even taken a serious attempt at trying to explain the 'soul' or the essence of gods or spirits or any of the hocus-pokus of 'miracles' or any of the magic of the Bible. NONE of it makes any sense. Just like any conman's 'con,' supernatural biblical 'stuff' is imaginary rubbish that cannot be examined as natural phenomena.

[UnObt-137]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #120]

1. Noah's Flood has to be connected to the state of Creation Day 1 not an ordinary example. that is a connection that obviously would only be available to believers and I tried very carefully to write what Scripture presented us. I kinda figured that would happen and someone would dive off that point. I never presented any evidence of supernatural, I presented the best model for any supernature as an explanatory basis. Not all of it conforms to this structure so I use it to rule nonconformance as fairy tale that lacks integrity. Scripture has suggested to me that it has a self consistency cover to cover in this special way.
2. everyone's eyewitnessing is saying that it is happening all around us at a mediocre level but - and pardon my science-- I think the source is able to "rear it's ugly head" and "snap back" into place to avoid disrupting everything...all because it was preexisting and always present. Sometimes it can sheer off a verifiable thing...or a partial thing like a ghost that cant be recalled but remains exactly there in unobservable ways.
3. Other religions have various parts and pieces but not the whole presentation as given in OT/NT with first examples occurring as stated and the consistency and central case in Christ. Kali, as an eight armed woman, could be understood as the resonances of her limb positions occurring over time. People understand what I mean when they watch Dr Strange in Marvel movies because he has the time stone. They don't tend to reapply that explanatory structure to other observations and story characters presented to them indirectly like the observation of angels. You could say also that The Force in Star Wars works in the Many Worlds Interpretation of QM if a jedi has all the possible actions available to his/her present moment. The violations of physics that are proposed in that story are sort of limited in that way as if they had access to it to "chose which path". George wrote all of them but Scripture was not penned the same way yet has the same consistency from the first to last.

[1213]

...NONE of it makes any sense....

To me Bible makes sense, so, is the problem in you or in the scripture? Can you give one example of what doesn't make sense to you?

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #120]

1. Noah's Flood has to be connected to the state of Creation Day 1 not an ordinary example. that is a connection that obviously would only be available to believers and I tried very carefully to write what Scripture presented us. I kinda figured that would happen and someone would dive off that point. I never presented any evidence of supernatural, I presented the best model for any supernature as an explanatory basis. Not all of it conforms to this structure so I use it to rule nonconformance as fairy tale that lacks integrity. Scripture has suggested to me that it has a self consistency cover to cover in this special way.
2. everyone's eyewitnessing is saying that it is happening all around us at a mediocre level but - and pardon my science-- I think the source is able to "rear it's ugly head" and "snap back" into place to avoid disrupting everything...all because it was preexisting and always present. Sometimes it can sheer off a verifiable thing...or a partial thing like a ghost that cant be recalled but remains exactly there in unobservable ways.
3. Other religions have various parts and pieces but not the whole presentation as given in OT/NT with first examples occurring as stated and the consistency and central case in Christ. Kali, as an eight armed woman, could be understood as the resonances of her limb positions occurring over time. People understand what I mean when they watch Dr Strange in Marvel movies because he has the time stone. They don't tend to reapply that explanatory structure to other observations and story characters presented to them indirectly like the observation of angels. You could say also that The Force in Star Wars works in the Many Worlds Interpretation of QM if a jedi has all the possible actions available to his/her present moment. The violations of physics that are proposed in that story are sort of limited in that way as if they had access to it to "chose which path". George wrote all of them but Scripture was not penned the same way yet has the same consistency from the first to last.

Your arguments are always welcome, but it's necessary to point out where they fail as a coherent and credible explanation. When it comes down to it the OT waved a magic wand just like the other religions did, and word -juggling to introduce magic (dressed up as 'metaphysical') fails intrinsically even before we get to other religions and their miracles.

It appears you touch on another claim to make the Bible more credible than the others. 'Consistency'. I see no more than any other Holy Book. In fact notoriously the NT completely changes everything the OT wrote, in accordance with Pauline Christianity scrapping the Jewish rules for Christian ones, which inconsistency is ignored by Christians who insist on the Commandments the NT superseded and the reverence for the Sabbath (although the day was changed) when Jesus consistently preached against it.

No, trying to make the Bible something more credible than other Holy Books is just falithbased preference that should not twist anyone's arm who is aware of the situation.

[Diogenes]

...NONE of it makes any sense....

To me Bible makes sense, so, is the problem in you or in the scripture? Can you give one example of what doesn't make sense to you?

It would be much easier to list the stuff that DOES make sense. What part of the myth of the resurrection in the NT makes sense to you? The part about dying and being in Hell for 3 days? The many contradictory accounts by believers about the resurrection? It's supernatural nonsense from start to finish, told decades later by anonymous "witnesses" recounting hearsay upon hearsay. This is the very definition of myth and legend.

[Diogenes]

I think people should understand that the Gospels are witness testimonies that don't have all possible information. They tell only part of a bigger story and are like small pieces of bigger image. When you understand that, you can also fit them together without contradictions.

Well put! It can be illustrated by the story of "the blind men and the elephant" where truthful and accurate but limited testimony leaves the reader to harmonise all the information to get "the big picture".

Quite correct to compare the fictitious story about "The Blind Men and the Elephant" with the fiction about the resurrection. NOT A SINGLE ACCOUNT OF THE RESURRECTION was made by a verified actual person. All accounts are written decades later by anonymous sources. It's not that that each account tells a different part; each version contradicts another.


This is very well documented in Thomas Sheehan's study which you can read for free. I've posted this link for years and have NEVER had a single apologist critique it or explain the contradictions. But the WORST is that the entire message of Jesus has been reversed. Instead of worshiping the
message, Christianity gets it exactly wrong by worshiping the messenger. This is exactly what Jesus of Nazareth warned against and what the entire Old Testament warns against.

https://infidels.org/library/modern/tho ... rstcoming/

In the 2000 years or so since the New Testament NO ONE has even taken a serious attempt at trying to explain the 'soul' or the essence of gods or spirits or any of the hocus-pokus of 'miracles' or any of the magic of the Bible. NONE of it makes any sense. Just like any conman's 'con,' supernatural biblical 'stuff' is imaginary rubbish that cannot be examined as natural phenomena.

[Diogenes]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #120]

1. Noah's Flood has to be connected to the state of Creation Day 1 not an ordinary example. that is a connection that obviously would only be available to believers and I tried very carefully to write what Scripture presented us. I kinda figured that would happen and someone would dive off that point. I never presented any evidence of supernatural, I presented the best model for any supernature as an explanatory basis. Not all of it conforms to this structure so I use it to rule nonconformance as fairy tale that lacks integrity. Scripture has suggested to me that it has a self consistency cover to cover in this special way.
2. everyone's eyewitnessing is saying that it is happening all around us at a mediocre level but - and pardon my science-- I think the source is able to "rear it's ugly head" and "snap back" into place to avoid disrupting everything...all because it was preexisting and always present. Sometimes it can sheer off a verifiable thing...or a partial thing like a ghost that cant be recalled but remains exactly there in unobservable ways.
3. Other religions have various parts and pieces but not the whole presentation as given in OT/NT with first examples occurring as stated and the consistency and central case in Christ. Kali, as an eight armed woman, could be understood as the resonances of her limb positions occurring over time. People understand what I mean when they watch Dr Strange in Marvel movies because he has the time stone. They don't tend to reapply that explanatory structure to other observations and story characters presented to them indirectly like the observation of angels. You could say also that The Force in Star Wars works in the Many Worlds Interpretation of QM if a jedi has all the possible actions available to his/her present moment. The violations of physics that are proposed in that story are sort of limited in that way as if they had access to it to "chose which path". George wrote all of them but Scripture was not penned the same way yet has the same consistency from the first to last.

Baloney! Even a beginning Biblical scholar knows many passages of the Bible were written, made up, to try to fit the contradictions and references into a cohesive whole, like painting the bullseye around the arrow after it missed the target completely.

[1213]

...What part of the myth of the resurrection in the NT makes sense to you?

All parts of what Bible tells about the matter makes sense to me.

The many contradictory accounts by believers about the resurrection?

They are not contradictory, unless you connect them in a way that makes no sense. Is there some good reason to connect them in a nonsensical way? Maybe atheism fails, if person doesn't make stuff up against the Bible.

[TRANSPONDER]

...What part of the myth of the resurrection in the NT makes sense to you?

All parts of what Bible tells about the matter makes sense to me.

The many contradictory accounts by believers about the resurrection?

They are not contradictory, unless you connect them in a way that makes no sense. Is there some good reason to connect them in a nonsensical way? Maybe atheism fails, if person doesn't make stuff up against the Bible.

The only person making stuff up that the Bible doesn't say in order to cobble contradictions together is you.

The Bible says clearly that Mary Magdalene and the other women all reported what they had seen and heard. But John says Mary Magdalene (and another is implied to be there) have no idea what became of Jesus. A clear contradiction even without Matthew's claim that they all ran into Jesus.

The 'women on different routes' excuse is stuff made up, nowhere in the Bible, and in fact is denied by the Bible, which you ignore. There can hardly be a more blatant example of you accusing gospel literal critics of the fiddling and fabrication you do yourself.

And of course, this is just one of many contradictions, and under 'clean hands' procedure, one proof of a wrong argument (I'm being VERY polite here ) means that other contradictions look real, even if a less denialist excuse is produced.

[1213]

The Bible says clearly that Mary Magdalene and the other women all reported what they had seen and heard.

Yes, they all reported what they had witnessed. It does not mean they all reported the exactly same things.

But John says Mary Magdalene (and another is implied to be there) have no idea what became of Jesus. A clear contradiction even without Matthew's claim that they all ran into Jesus.

Again, I would like to see the scripture you are referring to.

The 'women on different routes' excuse is stuff made up, nowhere in the Bible, and in fact is denied by the Bible, which you ignore.

Where it is denied? John clearly tells Mary left the tomb soon after she thought it is empty. And all other text suggests that the other women left there and were on a different situation after that.