Poor TR all touchy touchy and has to misrepresent and use ridicule to keep his rank stupidity alive and angry.
TSK TSK. I did not say any one had used CPR on Jesus but, made a point to contradict you assertion that "Dead people stay dead. They do not, and cannot come back to life."
A normal person would acknowledge such arrogant and rank stupidity in making such a bonehead statement considering the fact that thousands of people are brought back to life each day on the streets and in the hospitals around the world every day.

I suggest you read some of the works of ibn Sina (Avicenna). Bringing people back from the dead is powerful magic to those who have not the knowledge or understanding. 1st century, the relative time of both Avicenna and Jesus few would understand the nature of medical science but would appreciate the same in terms of being magical or of the supernatural. This lack of general education was one of the main reasons for writing the Bible in the form of parables rather than a documented historical account. It was written for that time to be understood by the majority at that time in hopes of educating them to events they may have heard with in their towns and villages as part of their local news. These missives or gospels were not only written letters but the contents conveyed abroad by word of mouth by the Apostles and others to not only bring news but teach the lessons one has to learn by such events.
Your out right dismissal of such a method of conveying news, socialisation, and education with such hostility is unconscionable. Meaning both excessive and unreasonable.

The primitive history of Christianity makes fascinating reading.

Two Christian groups existed - those of the Church of Jerusalem comprising of Jesus’ original apostles and desciples, including James (Jesus’ brother), Peter and John. This group not only denied that St Paul had been an apostle, but they also taught a ‘Christianity’ at such variance with Paul’s account that he referred to it as “another gospel” - “another Jesus”; especially concerning Jesus' trial and death. The Jerusalem community perished during the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 CE (AD).

Unlike the Twelve Apostles, Paul did not know Jesus in life. Evidence of Jerusalem group comes from Paul himself in a letter to the Galatians.

“ I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man ... but came though a revelation of Jesus Christ”.

Pauls’ intentions were to show that his teachings were by divine origin and independent of that being taught by the original apostles in Jerusalem.

In Paul’s Second Epistle to the Corinthians he appears to be defending himself from accusations of being of unsound mind; rebutting the claim by the Jerusalem group that he was deluded. This centres round the idea of Jesus’ death being a ‘human event’ (held by the Jerusalem group), to Paul’s idea that it was a ‘mystical event’.

“even though we once regarded (oidamen) Christ from a human point of view, we regard (ginoskomen) him thus no longer”

I have drawn the above from “Trial of Jesus of Nazareth” (impeccably researched and referenced) by Professor S.G.F Brandon.

Brandon held impressive academic qualifications in Comparative Religion, authored works, presented the Wilde lectures at Oxford, the Forwood Lectures at Liverpool; held memberships of the Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas, the Society for Old Testament Study, and the International Society for the Study of Time.

An Army Chaplain, prior to academia, I presume Brandon, Christian; his research is so rigorous, it is not apparent.

My personal belief is that Jesus was a Rabbi, or a Jewish teacher. He was insightful and had important things to say.

Yabby,

Just a point on the hearing of voices - particularly in ancient peoples have a look at
Bicameralism (psychology)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Jaynes

In greater detail see
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Origin_of_ Consciousness_in_the_Breakdown_of_the_Bicameral_Mind

This theory was first presented by Julian Jaynes in his work, The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. Whilst scientists like Daniel Dennett and H. Steven Moffic think bicameralism intriguing, but “probably” wrong, others think it worthy of study.

Apparently, if someone (quite sane) hears a voice, some scientists believe it is residual bicameralism. In London, there is a research program looking at this.

Danielle, I read a bit about Jayne's hypotheses, but to me it simply
opens a can of worms and is yet another hypotheses from the 70s,
when people got so much wrong. Just look at the "Tabula Razza"
story for example. Freud, Jung etc, lots of speculation, little
evidence.

Today we have moved on, with much better neuroscience, fMRI
scans, evolutionary psychology and other fields. Thts the beauty
of science, the mountain of information keeps growing, we keep
learning more. Unlike religion, which is bogged down in the past.

Firstly the definition of consciousnous is open to debate. If
you define it as self aware, well chimps are self aware, as we
can show. I'd say that even my dog is self aware.

Secondly, just about everyone I know hears voices, as people
regularly talk to themselves and think to themselves. Thats
just a matter of brain function. There is however a big difference,
between talking/thinking to yourself and claiming voices from
the supernatural can be heard. People deluding themselves about
all sorts of things, is in fact very common human behaviour.

The thing is, we are an anxious species, who crave certainty to
feel better. We often also kid ourselves that its all about
thinking. Emotions colour most of our thoughts, even if on
a subconscious level, as various centres of the mind, compete
with one another.

Religions have thrived as they give people perceived certainty
and play on hope ( no you won't really die) and fear (you
will burn forever). Even today, some of the fundies I know,
when they run out of arguments, threaten me with judgement
day. I keep telling the born agains, that I was born fine
the first time :)

Facinating posts Yabby and Danielle!

The 'All in the Mind' radio programme from the ABC has an interesting webpage. It begins thus;

'Around 10 per cent of the population hear voices that aren't there. Some people can live harmoniously with them, but for those whose voices are associated with a psychiatric illness, they can be frightening and menacingly real. We discuss the latest research on how auditory hallucinations occur in the brain, what it's like to live with voices in your head—and the healing power of the international Hearing Voices Network.'

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/allinthemind/stories/2006/1689941.htm

What a shame that men like the Prophet Mohammed were not able to join support groups like the 'Hearing Voices Network' and gain help.

It is now obvious due to modern medicine that the Prophet Mohammed did not really have an 'angelic experience' but suffered from schizophrenia. Of course he would not of been to tell the difference because the science of neurology did not exist in 7th century Arabia.

Aqvarrivs, why do religiously inclined people like yourself insist in making simple concepts complex.

I would assume that obfuscation is a tool used by converts to preserve the 'mystery' of religion and to maintain its psychological 'spell'. Why present something in a clear cut fashion when you can shroud it is a load of convoluted nonsense and make it appear more important than it really is.

So, dead is dead. Jesus is dead. And does not exist anywhere.