Jesus is Fun

The guards at the tomb would need to be bribed.
The problem of bribing works both ways. The disciples could have bribed the guards to not say anything about them taking the body of Jesus. But, the Jews could also have bribed the guards into saying that the disciples stole the body of Jesus. In fact, the only bribing we see in the gospel accounts of the guards is done by the Jewish leaders. Matt. 28:11-15 says, "Now while they were on their way, behold, some of the guard came into the city and reported to the chief priests all that had happened. 12And when they had assembled with the elders and counseled together, they gave a large sum of money to the soldiers, 13and said, "You are to say, ‘His disciples came by night and stole Him away while we were asleep.’ 14"And if this should come to the governor’s ears, we will win him over and keep you out of trouble." 15And they took the money and did as they had been instructed; and this story was widely spread among the Jews, and is to this day."
The bribe would be very necessary since the guards were at risk of their lives if they had failed at their duty. It was the custom of the Roman military that if a prisoner escaped, then the guard(s) who was in charge of guarding the prisoner would take the prisoner's place. This is a very strong motivation to make sure that they carried out their duty, bribe or not. In Acts 16:25-30 when Paul was in prison, there was an earthquake that opened the cell doors which would have allowed the prisoners to escape. When the jailor saw this he intended to kill himself. Undoubtedly, this is because he knew he would have to take their place should they escape. But Paul called out and said in verse 28, "Do yourself no harm, for we are all here!" This shows that the guard did not want to take the place of the prisoners. In fact, in Acts 12:18-19 we read of how Herod ordered guards to be executed who had allowed Peter to escape.
Therefore, for the guards to risk their lives, a large bribe would be necessary. Who was more likely to have enough money to bribe the guards, the religious leaders or the disciples? Also, who had a greater motive, the disciples who wanted to have Jesus rise from the dead (risking further persecution), or the Jews who wanted to complete their attempt to be rid of Jesus?

Originally posted by HairyPooper
you may find all the above at www.carm.org

im still not done

The body of Christ would need to be disposed of to prevent disproof of his resurrection.
If the scenario of an elaborate plan with bribed guards and collusion on the part of many non followers of Jesus were to be effective, the body of Jesus would need to be disposed of. If the disciples could get a hold of His body and get away from the population, it would not be difficult at all to bury it someplace. It would then be necessary that the disciples promised that they would never disclose the location. This is a possibility but it would mean that the disciples were liars and thieves. Is this basis for their faith consistent with their writings about truth, honesty, etc., combined with their dedication to their assertion of Jesus' resurrection that cost them their lives?

Various witnesses would need to be arranged
As I have already stated above, many people would be to be coached into lying about seeing the risen Lord. Is this probable for so many Jews who grew up under the idea that lying was a sin? Perhaps. But, is it easy to convince people to lie about an event that they know would bring them economic, familial, social, and religious difficulties? The answer, of course, is no it is not. The Jewish people were living under Roman rule. The Romans served both as oppressors and protectors. They were oppressors and that they forced many of their own rules upon the Jewish people. On the other hand, they protected the land of Israel from hostile nations surrounding them. Friction in the region is not something people would want to have, especially if they have families with children and parents to take care of and to love. Does it really makes sense that so many people would agree to such a great lie for such a great consequence?

Pooper your copy and pastes are too much to read...Make one point at a time ....Lay off the speed. I know your on something...

The Apostle Paul

But what about Paul the Apostle? Did the disciples plan on converting one of their greatest enemies into a Christian? How did they get Paul to agree to the conversion and in so doing convince Paul to give up everything he had stood for and worked for his entire life in order to be ostracized, condemned, persecuted, shipwrecked, beaten, and finally martyred by both the Romans and the Jewish leadership? Does a faked resurrection account for such a bold and profound conversion of someone who had been seeking to destroy the very Christians that he later proclaimed? Remember, Paul claimed to have seen the Lord on the road to Damascus (Acts 9; 1 Cor. 9:1)? What would motivate him to give up everything and to proclaim Christ's resurrection? What would he have to gain? Power? Money? Fame?
If Paul wanted power, then perhaps it could be said he achieved it since he wrote much of the New Testament and had great influence in the Christian Church. But, power is not what he demonstrated over anyone. The New Testament does not demonstrate any wielding of power. Some of Paul's writings are the greatest testimonies to truth, love and wisdom that have ever been written. Are the words of Paul in 1 Cor. 13, or Col. 3, and the entire book of Romans the words of one man who knew that everything he was writing and teaching was based on a lie just so he could get power? It just doesn't make sense to say so.
If it was money Paul was after, then why did he preach without charge (2 Cor. 11:7)? Why did he often go without food (2 Cor. 11:27)? Why did he have odd jobs in order to make a living (Acts 18:3)? It does not make sense to say that he was in it for the money.
If it was fame that he was after, then he certainly attained it. Paul the apostle is still a famous person throughout all of Western civilization. But we cannot know if this was a motive or not since we cannot ask him. What we can do is read what he wrote and do our best to discern his motives there. It would be up to the reader to read his epistles and see if the quest for fame is woven into his words. Personally, I see no such thing when I read his works. I see a man who preached Jesus and Him crucified and risen from the dead.

Conclusion

It is very unlikely that the disciples faked the resurrection of Christ. In summation, this is why:

They would need an elaborate plan involving many unpredictable elements: guards, other witnesses, etc.
There is a large problem in developing a motive to deceive that would be greater than the consequences of that deception. Remember, the disciples would be risking their security, safety, families, and their lives for their beliefs.
The guards at the tomb would have to be bribed, but the only bribing we see is from the Jewish leaders (Matt. 28:11-15) who had a very strong motivation to finish what they had started with Jesus.
Various witnesses not involved with the disciples would have to be obtained in order to validate the story. But this means that a strong incentive would have to be offered to the additional witnesses since their story would likely get them in deep trouble with the Jewish leadership.
The apostle Paul. He is a wild card. What illegitimate thing would motivate him to proclaim the resurrection of Jesus when it didn't happen? Remember, he was a heavy persecutor of the church. Something happened to change him. According to him, it was the appearance of the risen Lord Jesus.

all above is from www.carm.org

First of all, saying that there are no non biblical accounts of the resurrection does not invalidate the resurrection. The New Testament documents, particularly the Gospels, were written by eyewitnesses or under the direction of eyewitnesses before the death of the apostles. Therefore there were plenty of people around who could have contested the post crucifixion appearances of Christ. We must first understand that the Gospels are historical documents and they are reliable ones.

Second, it is not accurate to say that there are no extra biblical accounts of the resurrection of Christ. There are other historians who have written about this. However, the problem with most of them is that they were not contemporaries of Jesus. They were written well after the fact. This, therefore, tends to invalidate the reliability of these extra biblical accounts according to the critics. But if the extra biblical accounts are not valid because they were written after the fact by non eyewitnesses, then that indirectly supports the gospel accounts which were written by the eyewitnesses, by those who knew Jesus, and encountered him after his resurrection.
Third, how do you have witnesses to the resurrection? Even the disciples didn't see Him rise from the dead. Instead, they saw Him after He had risen, as was evidenced by the wounds in His hands and side when He appeared to them (John 20:27). He appeared to those who most needed to see Him. They were the ones who had spent years with Him, watching Him do miracles, watching Him heal the sick, and teaching great wisdom and love. After Jesus died, their faith in Him had been shattered. It was necessary that Jesus appear to them in order to establish the truth of who He said He was; namely, God in flesh (John 8:24,58; 10:30-33).

Ya gonna paste the whole Bible?

I've read the Bible before, I already know what it says.

Make your point!

Fourth, Jesus would have to appear only to those who had seen Him before His crucifixion since appearing to someone who had never seen Him nor knew that He died, would prove nothing. This means that the ones whom Jesus would appear to were those who were following Him in the area of Israel. This further means that at best, other records of His resurrection would have to be hearsay, written well after the fact, by those who did not know Jesus.
Fifth, we do have non-biblical accounts of the resurrection of Jesus.

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, (9) those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; (10) as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
There is debate among scholars as to the authenticity of this quote since it is so favorable to Jesus. For more information on this, please see Regarding the quotes from the historian Josephus about Jesus

No sign would be given

Jesus typically would not demonstrate anything miraculous to those who refused to believe in Him. It is, therefore, consistent with Jesus' method to demonstrate Himself to those who were in need of Him and who did not mock Him and doubt Him. Like it or not, this is how He operated. It would be logical to assume that He would deal in the same manner after His resurrection and only appear to those who knew Him and followed Him. For verification of Jesus' denial to those who doubted him, please note the following quotes.

"And the Pharisees came out and began to argue with Him, seeking from Him a sign from heaven, to test Him. 12And sighing deeply in His spirit, He *said, "Why does this generation seek for a sign? Truly I say to you, no sign shall be given to this generation." 13And leaving them, He again embarked and went away to the other side," (Mark 8:11-13).
"Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered Him, saying, "Teacher, we want to see a sign from You." 39But He answered and said to them, "An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign; and yet no sign shall be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet; 40for just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth," (Matt. 12:38-40).
"And the Pharisees and Sadducees came up, and testing Him asked Him to show them a sign from heaven. 2But He answered and said to them, "When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.’ 3"And in the morning, ‘There will be a storm today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ Do you know how to discern the appearance of the sky, but cannot discern the signs of the times? 4"An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign; and a sign will not be given it, except the sign of Jonah." And He left them, and went away," (Matt. 16:1).
"For the heart of this people has become dull, and with their ears they scarcely hear, and they have closed their eyes lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart and return, and I should heal them," (Matt. 13:15).

If you don't just make a point, I'm gonna put you on my ignore list and not see anything you post.

Jesus plainly taught that He would not "perform" for those who denied Him. He did, however, do public miracles in order to validate who He was, God in flesh (John 1:1,14; 8:24; 8:58). This great truth is a matter of faith and is not something proven with a calculator or a camera. Jesus claimed to be the Son of God which, in that culture, meant to claim equality with God (John 5:18). Jesus said that "Before Abraham was, I AM" (John 8:58) a statement that infuriated the Jews who were familiar with God's self description to Moses in Exodus 3:14 when He said, "I AM that I AM. Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, I AM has sent me to you." It is a claim made real by evidence. The evidence was His miracles.

Conclusion

The real issue of the resurrection deals with its evidence. This evidence consists of the testimony of many people who stated that they had seen Jesus after His crucifixion and death. The same people who testified of the resurrection of Christ also gave up their social and economic security and put their lives on the line in order proclaim that Jesus had risen. Does it make any sense at all to say that they knew Jesus did not rise from the dead and had concocted an elaborate plan in order to deceive a great many people into believing that Jesus had risen? Why would they do that? Does it also make any sense that they would continue in this lie while being persecuted, ostracized from family and friends, beaten, imprisoned, and finally killed for what they believed? It makes more sense to believe that their actions were consistent with their teaching. In other words, they taught about self-sacrifice, dedication to truth, love, peace, etc., and they based it all on the risen Lord. It was based upon the truth that they had seen.

see www.carm.org

Originally posted by debbiejo
If you don't just make a point, I'm gonna put you on my ignore list and not see anything you post.

see www.carm.org for more interesting things to read.

Im not done yet.

Jesus Christ's resurrection from the dead is one of the cardinal facts and doctrines of the gospel.

See a dramatic video on-line about the resurrection, a scene from The HOPE (or watch the entire film

First century tomb at the Church of Holy Sepulcher, Jerusalem.

"Jesus' tomb" (Church of Holy Sepulcher, Jerusalem). "There are two sites claiming to be the location of the tomb of Jesus: the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Garden Tomb."

"Jesus' tomb" at the Garden Tomb (Jerusalem). "The Garden Tomb was identified as the tomb of Jesus only in the late 1800s and lacks historical credibility."

"A long tradition going back to the first century, however, maintains that Jesus' tomb is at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in the Old City of Jerusalem. In the 4th century, Constantine supposedly located the tomb site beneath a second century Roman temple. He constructed a church over it. This church has been restored and maintained over the centuries ever since. It is today shared by six faiths: Latin Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Armenians, Syrian, Copts and Ethiopians."

Information provided by Associates for Biblical Research. Photos provided by ChristianAnswers Associate, BiblePlaces