How to debunk the resurrection?...

[Godscreated]

[quote='Godschild' pid='93300' dateline='1284355780']
I've gone to three different translations ( The New American Standard, NIV and English Standard Version ) And none of them use the words I've put in bold above.

1. I used the KJV, the darling of some fundy Christians.
2. Re-read the ones you used. They DO say "in the flesh".

You should re-read what I stated, the words "in the flesh" that I bolded are not in the passages at that particular place in the passages. Do you think I would state something so carelessly. The New American Standard is the most accurately translated Bible, it was translated from the Greek and Hebrew, the people that worked on this translation set out to make this the most accurate translation and because they had more info about the Greek and Hebrew they were able to do a better job than the earlier translations. So it is you who needs to go back and re-read those three translations.

This faith, belief or what ever you might call it is meant for those who embraced it not for the half hearted skeptic.

Faith isn't necessary when speaking of obvious and verifiable reality. Frankly, John shouldn't have even needed to discuss them at all. You don't spend a lot of time rebuking crazy people. If he did, he should have been expected to just dismiss them as crazy. Appeals to faith is a last resort for people who have no evidence.

John was trying to help those he called little children the ones he loved deeply. He did not want those who were speaking against Christ to pull them away from the truth. These three short letters are not what I would call a great amount of time, I would and do say they are of great love for his fellow believers. John was there with Christ as He hung on the cross and he was with Peter at the empty tomb so I would say that his first hand account would qualify as evidence. John knew these people were not crazy,they were dangerous people trying to rebuke Christ and lead those new christians astray. John was there and understood what he needed to do for his fellow christians,as for you 2000 years puts you out of touch with the situation and the times.

John was not condemning christians

Then why call them false prophets and antichrists instead of "unbelievers" or some such?

Why not call them what they were, John was making a strong statement to his fellow believers. John wanted them to understand exactly what these people were and what they were trying to do and that was to undermine the reality of Christ.

Why try to find a tomb that is not occupied with Jesus body.

Because the empty tomb is used as evidence, shaky as that "evidence" may be.

How is a empty tomb evidence of Christ, if they find ten empty tombs which one belonged to Christ and which ones were not used. TELL ME HOW WOULD ONE PROVE WHICH ONE OF THE TEN WAS CHRIST'S TOMB SINCE NO BONES OR ANYTHING ELSE WOULD BE THERE. It's senseless to look for something that can't be proven, this is a faith thing we are talking about.

Mary arrived in the morning

John 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark

Now you are being entirely unreasonable, many people say they rise in the morning before the sun is up, as a matter of fact my grandmother called 4:30 AM morning when I was a teen, to me as most teens it was still the middle of the night. I think you understand what I'm saying here.

Matthew 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

As the sun began to rise, dawn and still mostly dark yet morning just like the other passage.

The stone was rolled away before she arrived.

Matthew 28:2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.

I do not see where this passage says that Mary was present when the stone was rolled away. The angel was setting there waiting for Mary to arrive.

There were two angels.

Mark 16:5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.

I would be affrighted also, most likely would have turned and run very fast. This says that only one angel was inside the tomb it says nothing about the angel out side the tomb that very well may not have been visible to them at their arrival. An angel in the first passage, an angel in the second passage shows us there were two angels at the tomb.

Christ assent to Heaven was 40 days later.

Mark 16:19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

Just because this passage does not give the precise time for you it does not mean that Christ assended to Heaven sooner than 40 days, again you are being unreasonable.