I attack only UNFAIR or Ill-framed questions and arguments from a Logical view-point because most questions asked here come with an implication. An implication is open for debate or a logical test.
I eat blue frog legs, why can’t you eat them too?
How can one answer such a question, the flaw must be pointed out to the questioner before debate can begin.
Other questions come as presuppositions, again they are loaded to promote an opinion or conclusion of the person asking. Example:
Why are frogs blue?
Those are the only types of question or arguments I raise issue with. The Questions you just asked above is the result of peeling away the wrong or unfair parts of a question and ending up with a dialog that may get somewhere. You still have not given us the proper foundation for you not believing it but at least you have created a fair question.
Your first question is where is the evidence of the Resurrection? Eye witness accounts verified by various people and recorded in the Holy Bible. Many other supporting evidence may be offered such as prophecy of the event, the spiritual culmination of the ritual of sacrifice among others.
Now, here is a problem with any evidence you examine on this or any subject.
First of all, evidence is relative to the observer or jury and you may demand more of it, or a certain kind of it, than the next person. Evidence then becomes your out if you choose not to look fairly at the evidence.
Most people have a very hard time looking at historical evidence such as the Bible, they conclude that because it may have a few errors in minor places that the whole book must be wrong or that there isn’t enough evidence, or evidence to the contrary exist and conclude against accepting the first evidence.
There is hard evidence and there is a soft type of evidence called circumstantial evidence. Sometimes hard evidence is what juries see that cause them to put a person in jail, others are convicted on circumstantial evidence.
Unfortunately, as I have stated, evidence is a relative term. Hard evidence also let OJ Simpson walk a free man. A good lawyer can bring sufficient cause for a jury to disregard any type of evidence. A video can be faked, a person found with a smoking gun in their hands could have been framed.
Therefore, if you want evidence to convince you of the resurrection, you will find none you can believe in 100%. You will need a culmination of many things in your life to come to the conclusion that the resurrection happened. One of the things you will need is faith in the evidence. If the Simpson jury had faith in the prosecutions side, they would have won, but they lacked it due to a small error of one man.
Will you let some small errors in the Bible or in the evidence let the master criminal go free in your life? To let him convince you that everything is wrong in the Bible?
I have attempted to answer your question by showing you it may not be the right thing by itself to be judging and looking for in making a decision on the resurrection. Since you didn't tell me why you disbelieve it, I am at a loss as to focus on the real reason for your disbelief. This is why it is important for you to ask the proper question in a proper format. Otherwise we will never focus on the "real" issue.
