We can be certain of NO resurrection - A Response

[Aractus]

After sunset on Saturday, it would have been possible to go to the tomb since the Sabbath was over. However, it was after sunset...it would have been dark. Still possible, I suppose...but the gospels say that the women waited until daylight on Sunday morning since they had much work to do in annointing his body with spices, etc.

Passover takes place during the full-moon Randy, it wouldn't have been that dark at all at night.

Further, you still run smack into the problems of maintaining a conspiracy and you cannot account for the conversion of Paul and James who would have been more likely than not to believe a theft rather than a resurrection.

Well we don't know how wealthy Jesus's family was. Jesus lead a modest life when he was preaching - however that tells us nothing about his family's potential wealth. He was of David's lineage and Joseph was a builder in a location that at the time was experiencing growth - there would have been plenty of work, he would have been well paid. Assuming that James, Joseph (jr), Simeon, and Judas were also builders the family could be very well off.

The wealthy man was JoA, not Jesus. He hadn't worked in years, and before that, he was a common day laborer (not technically a carpenter). Joseph had died years before, and Jesus was an only child. This was not a wealthy family.

The fact that Jesus has detailed knowledge of the scripture and has studied it suggests that he was taught and mentored by a Rabbi, and that was not cheap. The fact that the family could afford this tuition for Jesus also suggests they were quite well off.

Or that Jesus was God and knew the scriptures because He inspired them to begin with.  

I can certainly account for the conversion of Paul. By his own account in Galatians he never sees Jesus on the road to Damascus - he simply "has a revelation".

That's a different account to Acts 9. The author of Acts 9 (either Luke or an associate of Luke) did not have first-hand knowledge of it; the first-person narrative in Acts begins in chapter 13, therefore Acts 9 is hearsay.

And the Bible is silent on how James gets converted. For all we know he's also a secret follower of Jesus before Jesus dies.

The wealthy man was JoA, not Jesus. He hadn't worked in years, and before that, he was a common day laborer (not technically a carpenter). Joseph had died years before, and Jesus was an only child. This was not a wealthy family.

Or that Jesus was God and knew the scriptures because He inspired them to begin with.  

Jesus was not an "only child" Randy. That's just some stupid made up RCC doctrine. His brothers are mentioned by name, and Mark and Matthew both say he also had sisters.

You also can't back-up your claim that labourers were poorly paid, can you? Or that that Joseph wasn't really a carpenter, or that Joseph had died before Jesus, can you?