[seán s. (nonbeliever)]

I seriously doubt there is any way for science to disprove the Resurrection.

seán s.

• This reply was modified 1 week, 6 days ago by  seán s. (nonbeliever).
• This reply was modified 1 week, 6 days ago by  seán s. (nonbeliever).

[James]

I agree with @sean_s. I think there is plenty of reliable evidence which points to the fact that the resurrection never happened (this is strong language, but we would accept it as a fact, if it was someone else, any other text and we had no emotional investment in it). I would summarise the reasons for this as (happy to go into more detail later):

1. A lack of contemporary and verifiable evidence of a risen Jesus (contemporary and verifiable appearances). Under circumstances where Jesus was actually risen and God wanted everyone to believe it, we would not expect this level of evidence to be missing. In contemporary terms, Jesus is just as absent as anyone else who died and stayed that way, despite claims to the contrary.

2. There is evidence of appearance narratives being added over time and to make a theological, rather than a historical point.

3. In appearance narratives and even if the appearances did occur and involved a tangible human being, there is evidence that resemblance to the original Jesus was not a factor when concluding that an appearing person who claimed to be Jesus, was Jesus (it was rather, based on feelings) even if the appearances did occur.

4. Other discrepancies. In the appearance to Thomas, the body of Jesus still had wounds from cause of death (big enough to place his hands in!) which Thomas expected to see. Why did Thomas have that expectation? If you saw someone with wounds that large, you would not conclude that the person was now immortal and incorruptible, would you (I hope)? So why does Paul say that the body of Jesus is now immortal and incorruptible? Because Paul’s narrative is earlier, it is reasonable to think that appearance to Thomas never happened or was significantly embellished. If you expected the risen Jesus to look like the original and had information about your shared time together that only he could know, why would you need to see wounds (see problem 3)?

Christians have been taught not to see these issues via the promotion of other rationalisations and interpretations and by not asking or entertaining certain questions (eg, by encouraging believers to dismiss them a priori because it is Satan attacking their faith, take every thought captive etc) and to conclude that the evidence for resurrection is much stronger than it actually is. It is a type of confirmation bias. This leaves them with a position that cannot be disproven, even if it is false. The only way out for a Christian, is to be open to the possibility that they are wrong and there are various reasons why that’s very difficult for people.