What I gather from the happenings of this thread is as follows:
Frank is desperately trying to hold onto the beliefs he was indoctrinated with as a kid, perhaps to guard his sense of community and family ties that probably depend so deeply on such a faith.
My theory on the resurrection is as follows:
I have studied history a great deal. I remember that in many cases scratch marks were found in coffins. This was because the advanced medical technology that lets people know if someone is alive or dead didn't exist - no heart monitors, no EEGs, etc. I assume thus that mistakes were sometimes made as to whether someone was actually dead or not, and the evidence seems to corroborate with that (e.g. nail marks on coffins).
It is therefore my belief that maybe Jesus was presumed dead but actually wasn't. Perhaps he was just unconscious, came to 3 days later, and somehow got himself out of his tomb. This would have appeared to an untrained, uneducated eye as having been resurrected.
Another possibility would be that Jesus played dead so that they would take him off the cross, and then when he was buried he just escaped from his tomb.
There are so many possibilities that are somewhat plausible. The belief that the laws of nature could be put on hold or circumvented at random seems to be utterly nonsensical. In fact, having faith in general is a key indicator of the lack of critical thinking skills, the favouring of comfort over truth. Again, I cannot believe in God without feeling concurrently aware that I am deliberately fooling myself. The belief in something that 1) Goes against the laws of nature and 2) Does not have any concrete evidence to it is something I will never understand.
Nevertheless, those who have been responding to this post with irrelevant ad hominems are doing nothing to help bolster your point of view - in fact, it doesn't appear to me that they even have any purpose as they do not argue any point, rather vaguely say things like "This is why she didn't get into x school!" I'm not a person who likes hints all that much - this is not helping me understand whatsoever, rather, I think the purpose is to bully me above all else.
Moreover, nowhere in this thread have I EVER said that I would not be friends with someone because of differences in faith. These differences can be easily put aside and are by no means insurmountable. All I ever asked in this thread was HOW people reconcile their belief in the concept of faith with their scientific training and background. I NEVER said ANYTHING about having my nose stuck too high in the air to ever attempt to befriend those people. In fact, I have totally succeeded at befriending those people. A very small number of them know I am an agnostic and I told them only when they asked me directly. Also, to their credit, none of them have tried to convert me. My choice of friends has nothing to do with religious affiliation, and my friendships do not involve religious affiliation at all. It seems like people on this thread are looking for something about me to pick apart without any evidence that my lack of understanding of the concept of faith as shared on this board only is affecting how I am treating them in real life. In fact, my classmates who are lurking here (as I know at least one has done in the past) could probably confirm this.
I am therefore not posting these comments as a snob, rather as someone who is curious about learning about another world view that I can't seem to wrap my brain around. Is there anything wrong with that, and the fact that I see faith as inherently unscientific?
A final quote: "He who is wise is he who admits he knows nothing." - Socrates. I never once claimed to "know" anything. Everything I write are simply conjectures and possibilities. As a human being I feel I cannot and will not ever uncover the metaphysical truth if it exists, because I feel that it is by definition a realm beyond our grasp.
