Richard Carrier

[A_Nony_Mouse]

Matthew 28:

A classic example of how later xtian writers had to edit their earlier shit to deal with claims that the body was stolen by his "followers."

I realize you fall for this shit hook line and sinker but try to understand that the rest of us see it for what it is.

Horseshit.

Damned near EVERY excuse/explanation/copout has to invent something to in evidence. And there must be at least four excused because there are four gospels. And then they must never admit the four are mutually exclusive. And they must never apply one ad hoc copout for one gospel to apply to the other gospels.

These people were born brain damaged.

---

It still leaves you to explain your original implication that no one would report meeting the walking dead while the gospel writer did.

Suppose you fabricated the resurrection of Vladimir Lenin. You got all your friends to vouch with you that Lenin walked the streets of Moscow for forty days after his death. Would you, not telling your friends, throw two lines into your account mentioning how a graveyard was emptied and dead people inhabited Moscow? Would that strengthen your case?

Please explain why I would not make not of what thousands of people witnessed. There is no reason people would question me when I was merely reporting what thousands of people told me.

Yes, you are incapable of elementary reasoning.

If in fact the Christian claim is correct, that no one would expect a resurrection and therefore it must be true, why would anyone guard against what no one would expect?

The guard was against Jesus' disciples stealing his body. Matthew 27:

62 The next day, the one after Preparation Day, the chief priests and the Pharisees went to Pilate. 63 “Sir,” they said, “we remember that while he was still alive that deceiver said, ‘After three days I will rise again.’ 64 So give the order for the tomb to be made secure until the third day. Otherwise, his disciples may come and steal the body and tell the people that he has been raised from the dead."
[/quote]

Why in the world would they care about body theft? It was hardly a Roman issue what Judeans and Galileans did to there dead. Make all the claims you want. Is Rome going to notice? And why?

In the vernacular, who in the fuck would give a rat's ass if he resurrected or not? Not the Romans. The Emperor was not going to fall, the empire was safe regardless of who was king of the Judeans.

It does not make a lick of sense that any Roman for any reason would have given a damn.

The issue is the Christian claim that no one would have thought anyone would rise from the dead as "proof" of really rising yet the idea clearly dates from before he/it was born.