Isn’t that the only way it would be logical? 
In any case, I’m fascinated by,
as that seems the complete opposite to me. To me there are a lot more logical arguments, but maybe that’s part of why I believe it and you don’t? 
Anyway, thanks for the dialog, it does help me understand your thoughts better.
Really? I wouldn’t think that was a decent basis for belief. It would certainly be a compelling subjective experience, but, you know, when I see a 63-axe-handle-high man striding across the landscape with a giant blue ox, I think that this probably says more about the quality of my observation than about reality. “Compelling,” yes, and the person unlucky enough to have the experience may have his judgment badly overrun; but decent basis for belief? Never.
Now, I think we can all forgive the poor bastard who has an experience where he believes something like that has happened. But we have enough experience with people having vivid subjective experiences that we know not to take these seriously except in the neuro-psychological sense. Whether anyone actually had this experience in the Christian case or not is an open question, as our accounts are badly attenuated and filtered through the folkloric processes; but surely we should not take such an account then any more seriously than we would take it now.
Actually, it’s Babe that’s 42 axe handles and a plug of Star tobacco, exactly. And it’s not height, it’s the distance between his eyes. Let’s stick to the facts.
Aren’t they?
50 And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.51 At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split 52 and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53 They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
I would suspect that most deconversions likewise look at ‘the whole package’ rather than at specific Bible stories, and continue to accept those stories until they lose faith in the whole package. I have certainly never heard of anybody deconverting because they lost faith in the Resurrection.
Speaking for myself, I deconverted largely because I did not see the world I saw around me as being consistent with an omnibenevolent god, so this could be considered to have been connected to ‘The Problem of Evil’ (though I had not encountered that term, and the argumentation surrounding it, at the time). I must admit that I cannot remember having thought in any detail about the Resurrection until it was brought up by Christians on this forum.
I get the 63 figure from this source, which I have always taken to be an eyewitness account of the highest quality. https://www.nlsd.k12.oh.us/userfiles/34/my%20files/raz_lo24_paulbunyanandbabeblueox_clr.pdf?id=172933
Now that I re-read this thread, I do agree with @Jordan both because I already believe and because his exposition of his current understanding in response to others in this thread was well put. However, I do understand the others, @Faizal_Ali , @Tim , and @Puck_Mendelssohn . So, I still stand by what I said earlier last week that it remains on faith. The evidence we use is, indeed, subjective. And I am very well familiar with Biblical Studies where top scholars have already dealt with these issues of Theodicy (Problem of Evil), Gospel differences, Resurrection, etc.
I do agree with Jordan that it has already been demonstrated in NT scholarship that the writings of the NT portray the disciples believing that Jesus resurrected not a priori, but because they became convinced that God resurrected (transformed the body of) Jesus. Jesus is then portrayed primarily in Luke and Acts as being able to materialize and dematerialize at will (appearing and disappearing). Jesus is portrayed as being able to eat a piece of fish post-resurrection to show that he was not a ghost (scholars have written on this comparing with Greco-Roman literature on ghosts).
Thus, the raising of Lazarus was a resuscitation to distinguish it with Jesus’ resurrection (his body was transformed, it was not simply resuscitated and then passed away again). Presumably, Lazarus died again as it can be inferred from Gospel of John. As to the “Zombies” of Matthew 27:52-53 (the saints that were raised after Jesus died and that temple curtain was torn and an earthquake stroke), some take it non-literally (e.g., Licona, but I dont know if it still take it this way), and others take it literally. Either way, Jesus’ resurrection is always portrayed as unique, or one of a kind, or even as “the first fruits” of raising of believers (i.e., 1 Cor. 15:20).
This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.