The Resurrection Story We Never Mention

The Resurrection Story We Never Mention! 

What is more plausible, an executed religious leader who fronted a growing movement, abruptly raised from the dead? Or a group of his followers hiding his body to claim the same thing? 

This topic resonates with me because of the intellectual biasing I've seen from my  encouragable family members and the fact I go obsessed with religion when I'm turning kooky. People throw all common sense out of the window just to believe biblical narrative. Thick books with stained glass windows on the covers, exist, sitting on the bookshelves of gray haired men discussing such pointless topics; issues which can never be resolved. The Empty Tomb: Was Jesus Resurrected? No. Obviously not. Don't be silly. However, the impossibility of it is never sufficient in breaking the paranormal premises disguised as some variant of academia. I advise leaning on the laws of nature and medical science, but folks are strange! 

'No this is nonesense! It says in all four of the gospels that Jesus rose from the dead!' 

'Of course it does, early Christians compiled these stories didn't they?' 

'Those disciples went from being afraid to hiding. Why would they suddenly proclaim the resurrection? No, no sorry, it's unlikely these followers would endured hardship for something they knew to be false!' 

'Did early Christians write that? Of course they did, listen, in reality, people charged with committing sedition against Rome would have been left on the cross as an example, those followers of his had good motive to retrieve the body,' 

'Yeah but still, the fact remains, why risk death for something you know to be untrue?' 

'The movement was only important if the teacher was resurrected somehow, but such resurrection stories were common then anyway and easily circulated. They had the means, motive and opportunity to swipe the body—the corpse was on display,' 

'The followers knew he was Gods son!' 

'That epithet came well after his death, so no, sorry.' 

'Oh for goodness sake, look. . . there was a Roman guarding the bloody tomb, and we know the tomb was sodding empty! Witnesses existed!' 

'Is that a bible source again? Terrible, why would a Roman guard an empty tomb? Nevermind!'

A little backstory: A man was impressing everyone around him, garnered a huge reputation, rumours exist of him being the annointed one are spreading, like a prophet, mysterious and charming. With his apostles, they will change the oppression of the land, a country for the divine. Captured, mocked, humiliated, ridiculed, tortured and crucified as an example. The entirety of his message is over. Killed. Disbelief, shock. I'm just saying, his closest circle swiped the body, continued the myth, grew the faith, established a footing. 

This does challenge the heart of Christianity, but so what? Things have to be challenged, it's how we uncover the truth. Indeed, we can say Jesus was resurrected as a concept, and idea, religious or spiritual ethos of their collective which evolved into the church. But, it must be said, his remains didn't get up and walk off! This is not walking dead. Don't you agree? 

Its more plausible that the body was stolen resurrected. The movement was crushed and the crucifixion was a major blow, the body had to go. They had means, motive and access. Christian sources are biased toward the christian narrative.