[Serious] Literal and Not Literal

[Acrobat]

That just means you didn't appreciate what those people appreciated. You can't speak for hypothetical people in a hypothetical scenario that I made up myself. Lol ...

I’ve given you all the freedom to develop your hypothetical myth, In which all that took place was a story of how God made an impressive rock. The rock served no other function, according to your myth other than as showcase of God impressiveness.

Maybe you need to develop you myth more with this divinely formed rocked served some necessary purpose for the community, other than an awe of its impressiveness. I mean your rock myth, doesn’t even showcase a god with any concern for these people, or their lives.

---

The Gospel writers themselves wrote with the intent of resurrection being understand as literally true. They wanted their readers to take it this way, this is very clear within the text.

Some people would argue these stories are meant to be taken allegorically. What exactly would your argument to that be?

That it was to be taken as both, as real and symbolic.

Christ death was tragic defeat for the messiah, an irreconcilable fate, unexpected even by his own followers. If the resurrection wasn’t real, than their hope was more a product of desperation, than real, a desperate attempt to reconcile the irreconcilable. It’s becomes more or less the reality of nihilism, a clinging to hope that doesn’t exist.

The cross becomes the human symbol of despair, not of any victory or defeat of it, but the triumph of misery.