Is There a Difference Between Trusting Scientists and Trusting Preachers?

[Esquilax]

Ok... so why do you say that science has "proven" that a man who has been dead for three days cannot come alive again?

Even the simplest life requires the specific arrangement of a complex sequence in order to carry out the functions for life.  In the case of a being that was once alive, the material is already present and arranged.  It just needs to be made living again.  I would agree, that in Christ's case that some repair was necessary; however is this any more difficult than the arrangement in the first place?    Keep in mind as well, that it was not just natural forces and random chance, that are behind the resurrection of Jesus.  The description attributes an outside and intelligent interaction (God) as the cause.  

So by what distinction do you say that science as proven against the one, and yet accept the other?

You're being a little self-serving in your description there, I feel. I mean, just to begin with, the specific mechanism by which this specific resurrection you're discussing is purported to have been carried out has never been observed and, in fact, is directly contradictory to many of our observations. Now, one could make the case, if memory serves, for specific kinds of biological resurrection based on animals who put themselves into suspended animation and come back from being super near death, but the thing is that if you're going to dip your hand into science you need to apply it consistently: such restorative abilities have never been observed in human bodies, after all. They also happen in very specific conditions not present in the resurrection account.

You ask whether simply instilling life into pre-arranged material is any more difficult than abiogenesis, and the simple answer is that we don't know. It may very well be impossible, but we've got no data with which to even begin to test it, other than those observations on why it can't happen- cell degeneration, the apparent non-viability of restarting certain human organs, etc. Science is a probabilistic field based on available data, which at the moment suggests that human bodies do not resurrect even a few hours after true death, let alone several days.

Abiogenesis is a different matter entirely, partly due to the fact that the arrangement of physical matter that might give rise to that would be a great deal simpler than a complete human body, but also because we have experimental data that suggests that it can happen. Incomplete data is still data, and it's more than we have for bodily, to say nothing of divine, resurrection.