Atheists: would proof of the resurrection matter to you?

[Tonus]

Let's assume that somehow it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that there was a real, single historical person who Jesus was loosely based on, and that he really did come back to life after being dead for 3 days. What difference would this make to you, other than learning such a thing is possible?

To me it would make no difference.

Whoops typo in the poll question. How do I change it?

The possibility that we can return to life after death would make no difference to you?  Or do you mean just in terms of your approach to belief in god?

It would be world-changing for me, to know that either we might be able to unlock that secret someday, or that it points to a deity that can do it.

[Anomalocaris]

Reasonable proof that a human had been dead for three days (not in a coma or condition that looks like death but isn't - these would come under reasonable doubt) then came back to life - proof beyond reasonable doubt that the laws of physics have been broken - that would be MEGA - never mind any Jesus nonsense.

Regards Grimesy

Real proof of death suitable to the age might be obtained by cutting off his head.

If his decapitated head started to mouth words of beatitudes after three days, then I would say there was something fundamentally different about this creature.  It wouldn't prove there was a god, or he was somehow the son, or that anything he actually say of himself was anything but bullshit, in fact  it wouldn't even begin to constitute evidence of any sort in that direction.  But it would show he is substantiallly different from normal humans.

[ignoramus]

It has the potential to be a game changer.
It changes everything Rob.

We only need one miracle to occur to prove that miracles can and do happen!
Only catch to your loaded question is we know that there is no such thing as miracles.
Such a thing will change the world we live in ...

[Anomalocaris]

Let's assume that somehow it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that there was a real, single historical person who Jesus was loosely based on, and that he really did come back to life after being dead for 3 days. What difference would this make to you, other than learning such a thing is possible?

To me it would make no difference.

Whoops typo in the poll question. How do I change it?

The possibility that we can return to life after death would make no difference to you?  Or do you mean just in terms of your approach to belief in god?

It would be world-changing for me, to know that either we might be able to unlock that secret someday, or that it points to a deity that can do it.

It hardly points to any sort of deity.

Anyone with some knowledge of biology and technology has to know repairing a dead body at molecular level to make it viable again has to be theoretically possible, it is only a matter of time, perhaps quote a long time, before we can actually do it to humans on clinical basis.

So seeing it actually done in some special circumstances would not change the world for me at all, it demonstrates what I know to be in theory possible to be possible.  Unless I know how it is done, seeing it done gives absolutely no new information and thus advances us not a second towards doing it in a useful way.

[ignoramus]

Chuck, reading the OP, it sounds like the original Jesus (2000 years ago).
Fuck, I'd be impressed if the mad arabs had that tech back then, wouldn't you?

[robvalue]

Oh sure, it would be a game changer for science as it struggles to understand how it could have happened. There's no reason to think it was a "miracle" though, unless miracle simply means something we don't understand yet. I suppose if it was proved to have happened, it would maybe give a fair indication of how it may have happened in the process. Maybe not. I have no idea how you could ever prove this anyway

The question was more to do with how it would affect you on a personal level, whether you'd make changes to your life. Sorry, I should have been clearer.

I'd be investigating the science of it, of course. But I wouldn't be any closer to thinking Jesus was anything other than a man to who something weird happened or caring about Christianity.

[Nope]

I would want to know how it happened and if science could duplicate it. That would lead me to wonder if Jesus was a species unknown to humans and if others of his kind existed. It would make me wonder if other mythologies had a bit of truth and why those deities disappeared. Were they all part of the same race as Jesus?

It wouldn't lead me to worship Jesus but maybe a real Christ figure would not want worship.

[robvalue]

I don't know why anything as powerful as a deity would want worship! Especially from little scuttly creatures like us.

[Minimalist]

Actual proof of the resurrection - and not Randy's horseshit gibberish - would have to have an impact.  As Mencken said:

There is no possibility whatsoever of reconciling science and theology, at least in Christendom. Either Jesus rose from the dead or he didn’t. If he did, then Christianity becomes plausible; if he did not, then it is sheer nonsense.

"Empty-tomb" garbage aside, you can't ask for evidence and then when given it pretend that it does not change the equation.  If the evidence survives peer review ( doubtful but possible) it certainly changes the debate.

[Cyberman]

Let's assume that somehow it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that there was a real, single historical person who Jesus was loosely based on, and that he really did come back to life after being dead for 3 days. What difference would this make to you, other than learning such a thing is possible?

None whatsoever.

Whoops typo in the poll question. How do I change it?

I'll take care of it for you. Invoice enc.