What happened to Matthew's zombies?

[orangebox21]

Do you have ANY proof this happened - by mention OUTSIDE of the bible?

Do you have any proof that 2+2=4 outside of math?
Do you have any proof of evolution outside of science?
Do you have any proof of the law of non-contradiction outside of the laws of logic?

The bible clearly states things that are NOT TRUE. Once you accept that the bible is NOT always true - the actual truth of any passage rests upon the proof OUTSIDE of the bible.

Example - the bible gives at least TWO different BLOODLINES of the christ

Bloodlines in that era ONLY went through men (Who supplied the seed - the entire basis for the child - women only were carriers)

Both bloodlines say that the christ's blood father was Joseph.
The religion claims the christ had NO human blood father

So - both of these statements are false as far as xtianity is concerned
IT is clear from the bible text - that Joseph had NO marital relations with Mary until after the christ was supposedly born - so he could NOT had been the blood father anyway.

For every alleged untruth in the Bible there is a truthful interpretation. The accounts you are referring to, in Matthew 1 and Luke 3, are not in contradiction if viewed in the understanding that Matthew is naming the successive heirs to the kingdom from David to Jesus, while Luke gives Joseph's private genealogy or actual descent. Or in the light that Matthew gives Joseph's genealogy and Luke gives Mary's.(Paraphrased from Haley, John. Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible. pg. 323) Why do you choose to interpret it the way you do?

I expect that YOU would not accept a long list of Koran quotes to prove a muslim point - why do YOU list a bunch of bible quotes that are equally noit proven?

I do not judge Koran based upon how 'proven it is'. I judge it as to what it claims. Mohammad did not claim to be God as Christ did, but rather the final prophet of Jehovah. So I test him as the Bible tells me to test a prophet. In doing so I would judge his prophecy against the Bible to test it's consistency. It is not consistent with what the scriptures teach even to the point at times it denies what the Bible says. That is why it is to be rejected.

Having said that - the problem is that there is NO reason to believe the christ actually lived - to have risen from the dead. THERE remains not a single mention of him or his "parents" in the historical record of his supposed time - so claiming that OTHERS were brought back from the dead - when there is NO mention of that in other writings is just as comical.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus