Atheists: would proof of the resurrection matter to you?

[robvalue]

Thank you

[tonechaser77]

It could be a game changer. If it could be proven that he was truly dead (not just pseudo-dead) and all other similar instances could be proved as pseudo deaths. However, if a supernatural event has been proven to occur that merely takes it out of the supernatural category and puts it into the natural.

[Rhondazvous]

As an African, it would make no difference for me, because:
1. Jesus said he only came for the lost sheep of the house of Israel
2. Paul called himself the apostle to the gentiles. According to Genesis chapter 10, the gentiles are the descendants of Japheth. If you look at a map of the missionary journeys of Paul, you will see that he never goes into Africa.

Since I am neither Jew nor Gentile, the resurrection, proven or not, has nothing to do with me.

[downbeatplumb]

I am of the opinion that if you see someone walking around who had been pronounced dead I would assume that the examining dr had made a mistake and not that there had been a miracle.

In the case of crucified people I doubt there was any medical examination, if they stopped moving they were dead.

[Dystopia]

Well as much as I hate to say it proof that Jesus actually resurrected in an impossible way would probably mean Christianity is right, or at least partially right.

[Whateverist]

What would it mean? Not much. It would more likely indicate that your hypothetical evidence that it really happened is suspect.

[Minimalist]

I am of the opinion that if you see someone walking around who had been pronounced dead I would assume that the examining dr had made a mistake and not that there had been a miracle.

In the case of crucified people I doubt there was any medical examination, if they stopped moving they were dead.

And even then, they didn't take them down for burial.  That would defeat the whole purpose.  If the Romans just wanted to kill someone they did understand how to do it cheaply and effectively with a single sword thrust.

You don't have this shoved into your chest



and make any plans for the next day.

[Dystopia]

What would it mean?  Not much.  It would more likely indicate that your hypothetical evidence that it really happened is suspect.

It would at least mean that it's possible to resurrect outside of scientifically verifiable scenarios. And probably that Christianity is true. The foundation of Christianity is that Jesus rose from the dead. If he did, then the case looks promising.

[Salacious B. Crumb]

This is a more interesting poll than all of the others I've seen so far. If it was proven that jesus was executed the way he did, and if no one but jesus has come back to life, after all of those days after being executed in that manner, then I'd say it would make some difference. As for, how I'd live my life, I'd say it would make practically no difference. If it was also proven that he was savior somehow, I'd say, it would still make no difference how I would live my life. The way the stupid religion is set up, you have to accept jesus as savior and be saved. You get to be forgiven for everything, if you simply repent. That means that I won't be changing my life one bit, but I'm already screwed, because I blasphemed against the holy spirit, so, no change at all. Blaspheme against jesus = forgiveness. Blaspheme against holy spirit = fucked. But, isn't this based on jesus being god and the holy spirit at the same time? But, if you make this rule about the holy spirit, doesn't that affect jesus and god too, because they are a 3 in 1 being? If you blaspheme against jesus, you are also blaspheming against the holy spirit, so based on this religion where anyone can be saved, actually no one that has said anything bad about any one in the trinity, can be saved. Very confusing and assholian for an omnibenelovent, omnipotent being..

[Rhondazvous]

Let's assume that somehow it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that there was a real, single historical person who Jesus was loosely based on, and that he really did come back to life after being dead for 3 days. What difference would this make to you, other than learning such a thing is possible?
[...]

Learning that it's possible to determine with any level of certainty, whether or not a human was dead for 3 days, 2000 years ago - well, that would be amazing. Yay, science!

Especially since we wouldn't have the actual body as evidence. He was supposed to have ascended to Heaven, so if we have a body, that ends the whole deal.