[Serious] Literal and Not Literal

[Acrobat]

Sure, it was meant to be taken as a very real reality. That the resurrection, it’s embodiment of hope, the conquering of the despair of death, was as real as touching flesh and blood.

It presented mysteriously in the text, but this much is conveyed by all the NT and gospel writers.

Not a clear answer.

Were the resurrection accounts in the Gospels meant to be taken literally? Did Jesus literally rise from the dead? Or is it all purely symbolic?

Yes, the resurrection is to be understand as Jesus literally conquering death, by resurrecting in very real and concrete way, in a bodily resurrection. Not just as a symbol of hope, but the very embodiment of it, in the flesh.

It why one the gospels has a doubting Thomas, feeling the wounds of the resurrected Christ.

---

What hope is being derived by this impressive rock that does nothing? And faith in what? What were they suppose to have faith in God for?

The impressive rock, in the account you gave, even if we all acknowledged was divine, provides no basis for hope, meaning, or faith.

Says who? Acrobat?

Says your own account,duh. There’s nothing to be read in it to derive any sort of hope of faith/trust in God in.

All your account did would have shown that God could make really impressive rock, that served no actual function or purpose.