How did the myth of Jesus' resurrection originate?

[MindForgedManacle]

So you think it was moses who parted the red sea, moses who sent the plagues to egypt, Moses who took his finger and wrote the 10 commandments into stone, and thought it was Moses' strength and power who saw israel to victory after victory???

When did I say that? Misrepresenting your opponents claim is dishonest.

Truth known? God DID Set up Judaism Himself, and over time 'we'/man/jews though our afinity to worship Religion it self perverted what God had established.

And further dishonesty. I was specifically talking about your nonsense that God was unhappy with the ways the Jews were in terms of religious practice and such. I said nothing about the establishment of Judaism, I was specifically noting that it is the case that if God had wanted the Jews to do as he apparently wanted them to, he coould have easily done so (omnipotence) by making himself appear incontestably as the God of Abraham to the Jews themselves and told them to do so.
The closest you get is Jesus, and yet many of the, what you might call, higher-up Jews thought him to be a fraud. So you cannot use Jesus as an example of God doing so. Neither can you claim that it were those particular Jews' fault, since God's omnipotence and omniscience would allow him to convince them that he was God with ZERO chance of failure. To say otherwise is to treat your God as not supreme.

When we are given a list a rules, legalism is always the result. It does not matter who delivers the rules, in the end given enough time the rules themselves get worshiped, and what God orginally intended get forgotten.

Then why did God give the Israelites a list of rules? Are you forgetting you're a Christian? If your answer is that it was to demonstrate their sinful plight and point to the coming of the Son of Man, then you're failing to realize (again) coherent, possible alternatives God could have done to ENSURE that (you know, TELL his people that himself while demonstrating he's God so they'll do it).

This happened with Judaism durning the period of the judges and in the time of Christ. This happened in Christianity durning the dark ages.

Again, you're treating the actions of we (on your worldview) sinful, depraved, limited humans as if they're limits on the capabilities of the Almighty to actualize his will. Again, that seems to border on heresy.

What do you mean boarding hersey? It is hersey to all who practice legalism.

So let me get this straight: Comparing God's abilities to humans, and placing incoherent restrictions on the power of the almight because his human creations have them, is not heresy? This has nothing to do with legalism, it's straightforward logic. On your worldview, God does not have our limitations, hence you cannot coherently defend God by pointing out human limitations and errors. That's an indictment on God.

What I have found over the last 5 years of doing this 95% of self proclaimed atheists are atheist because they once believe in a legalistic God, which contradicts The bible description of God and the common sense view of God. So in light of these two contradictions one has grounds to dismiss their legalistic faith.

No, God in any particular definition contradicts. I certainly didn't stop being a Christian because I was a legalist.

The foolishly proud part of this is, that they believe and never questioned the traditional legalistic view of God they had in the first place. They seem to assume to question whether or not that their former church had the 'correct' version of Christianity, or not would be an 'unforgivable sin.' So even though they claim not to believe in God they 'think' they completely understand Christianity. which ultimatly leads them to believe the no matter their understanding of God, what ever they understood, it was complete. So rather than risk hersey, they just dismissed their faith all together.

Christianity isn't even 'fully' understood by it's adherents. The absolute best you could say is that you believed you had a full understanding of it. And had anyone had a full understanding of it, there wouldn't be the mountain of philosophical problems with it, ones even honest Christian apologists will admit exist. Heck, even the one strictly (for the most part) Christian philosopher I'm somewhat partial to, St. Augustine of Hippo, acknowledged the need to try and tackle these appparent problems with Christianity in his book "City of God" (or maybe it was in "Confessions", I forget).
Further, I never brought up 'unforgivable sins' here, so that's just a red herring fallacy.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?sea...rsion=NKJV

The above link is a whole book of the bible that says God lead or guide the Jews.

I was talking about in regards to God's dislike of the ay the Jews practiced, Again, you need to stay in context.

So again Parting of the red sea, Manta from Heaven, Being lead through the desert by a pillar of fire, plagues, water from rocks, time literally standing still, so a battle could be fought and won in the day light, insanly out number victories, walls of Jericho being destroyed by just marching and trumpet blasts... To you none of this seems God like or Godly?

You seem to have missed the gravity of my point. None of those events had to do with God unambiguously revealing himself and the exact, proper way(s) the Jews should go about religious life. Those might as well have been supernatural parlor tricks, for all relevance they have to God making it impossible to misunderstand what exactly he expected of his people.

Even if you say No, If you read the book I gave you a link to The people who were apart of those things knew It was God who lead their way, which is why they orginally adopted His laws..

Point? Even if those people knew every relevant thing necessary so as to keep with God's vision of the faith, clearly that failed to propagate, despite God's obvious ability to make it do so.

But again given a few thousand years and the 'religious/legalists' take what God has given and they pervert it to serve their own purposes.

Because God allowed for it to be possible that such could happen. That has been a main point of mine, which you've repeatedly dodged.

Who are you to say "we"/Christians don't?

If you're only incontrovertible 'proof' is a personal experience, I've already shown the futility of that non-argument in this thread: http://atheistforums.org/thread-21738

I as you can see did not ignore anything. I just did not baby step you through the whole line of thought. For some reason I skiped a step, and thought you could still see it.

No you didn't. You've completely failed to, even in your response to me, in every possible point. For some reason, I thought you would realize the simple demonstration of a contradiction in your reasoning, so I didn't baby step you through the whole line of thought.