Author. Jose Luis Quiroga Beltrán
Identification card. 79,523,732 from Bogota, Colombia.
Any book, script, audio or video downloadable from TodaCarne.com is open source and creative commons unless indicated otherwise.
Original title: “TodaCarne.com”
Copyright and Derechos de Autor: 2021-2023.
Licenses: GPL v3.0 and Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal.
Revision number: 4.
Hello, my name is José Luis Quiroga Beltrán, the goal of this presentation is to give you some good news and others that do not seem so good.
I love Logic. I love Truth. I love Life. I love Freedom. I love Justice. I hope to be faithful to them throughout this presentation. And show the arguments, concepts, evidence, and how that love guide me, made me love, Yeshua, my Father, his Spirit and the set of texts commonly known by the name of The bible.
So this presentation is also an invitation for you to research, study, read, analyze those arguments, concepts, evidence, historical sources, on your own and come to your own conclusions. And in a particular and in a special way, an invitation to do this with the texts known as The bible.
As a warning, I must say that throughout this presentation, and with the sole intention of making communication more effective: I am going to use any resource of acting that seems appropriate.
I'm going to act this presentation. I will emphasize at different times and in different ways. I will repeat, I will clarify, I will raise the tone of voice. I will seem excited, angry, sarcastic, mocking, sad, happy. I'm going to sing, I'm going to pray, I'm going to read the bible, I am going to dance, I am going to do what ever I consider necessary to communicate what I want to communicate. The goal is not just to keep your attention. It is to communicate an idea.
I hope to achieve my goal.
For example, at any time I can close my eyes, raise my head and hands and say something like:
Heavenly Father, I ask you in the name that is above all names, in the name of your son Jesus Christ, of Yeshua Hamashiakh, that you give me the wisdom, grace and power to communicate news effectively. That to the people who watch this presentation you open their eyes so they can see and their ears so they can hear. That you drag them to your son Jesus Christ and the truth of your history in history and my history.
Or I might start singing at any time:
Our hearts they are, completely insatiable.
Don't worry, I'm not going to convince you that the bible is true. I can not do that. What I am going to do is quote and read the verses of the bible that I consider necessary to communicate what I want to communicate. And let Logic and Life themselves, at the right time, reveal the Truth in your mind, in your heart, and in your whole person.
You have been warned.
If someone says "I believe in the bible and I believe in science", or "I believe in the bible and I believe in Truth”, or “I believe in the bible and I believe in logic”, depending on the person listening to it, it is very easy to think that said person either does not know much about one, or does not know much about the other, or he lives in permanent contradiction and does not care.
This is because when you know something about the bible, something about science and something about logic, at least that which is learned in school, at university, and in the media, many questions araise:
If the universe is 6000 years old, the time that has passed since Creation, according to the bible, how is it possible that we see stars that are millions of light years away?
How is it possible that dinosaurs lived 80 million years ago and that the bible is also true?
How is it possible that the universe has existed for more than 14 thousand millions of years and that the bible is also true?
How is it possible that the theory of evolution and the bible are both true?

If it is true what Jesus Christ says, that no one goes to the father except through him, Does Adam go to heaven or hell?

If God is good, he is love, he wants the salvation of all, and there is nothing impossible for him, why only a few ones are saved?
Someone who lived in Japan, in the year 900 after Jesus Christ, who never knew about Jesus Christ, who lived an exemplary life compared to most christians today, does he go to heaven or hell? What is it then? Is it, or is it NOT, necessary to believe in Christ to be saved?
 Does he not receive as punishment, a suffering, a torture, an evil, superior, for ALL eternity, to the one he did for only 70-and-some years? Is that from a just and good God?
Is it not a systematic, conscious, physical, eternal punishment, by fire and brimstone, of permanent torture, worse than ANY system of systematic annihilation such as the "Final Solution" implemented by Hitler's Nazis during the Holocaust of World War II? After all, once your are death, nothing hurts.  Hell seems more like an idea of the Marquis de Sade. The one from which the word “sadist” comes from.
If Jesus Christ taught us that one should love one's enemies, why does God sends his enemies to a conscious, physical and eternal suffering in hell?
How is it possible that the chronology of Egyptian history and the bible are both true? What came first the pyramids or the flood?
How to explain that a good God, who knows the heart of man, who gives him the commandment "not to kill" on some stone tablets; that he himself selects a king for his people, named Saul, through his prophet; that AFTER that, after all that, he goes and orders that King Saul, through his prophet, to go and kill, murder, assassinate, women, elders, children, even the breastfed, men and animals, EVERYTHING, and not leave anything alive in Amalek?1 That is, first he gives the commandment of "not to kill" and then goes and orders the king, that He chose, to go and kill even the “cat” in Amalek.
The king goes and kills, assassinates, women, children, even the breastfed, elders, men and animals, kills EVERYTHING, murders EVERYTHING, even the cat 2.
No, that good God, who knows everything, who many years before had given the commandment “not to kill”, but that now it seems that he has changed his mind and gives the order to kill women, elders and children, even the breastfed, to the king that He chose, says to his prophet: "I greatly regret that I have set up Saul as king, for he has turned back from following Me, and has not performed My commandments” 3. Could it be that THAT God did not know that this was going to happen? Because it seems he did not.
Saul only left alive the king of Amalek and the best animals to sacrifice them burned to the God who gave him the order, but God decides to change him. That King Saul is of no use to him. Then he tells his prophet: stop crying for Saul, quit winning for that man, I already got rid of him, go to Bethlehem because I'm going to show you his replacement 4. And the prophet tells God: but how am I going to leave?  And God tells him: take it easy, tell him that you are going to make a sacrifice to Jehovah. Who is that God that is speaking to him 5.
How to explain this good God, who knows everything, but who orders to kill after having ordered “not to kill” and that seems to live regretting what he knew it was going to happen?
That same God who forgot to put as a commandment "not to enslave", maybe because now he wants us as slaves.
And the snakes that talk?
And the talking donkeys?
And that we all came out of a SINGLE couple?
And that FIRST were the land and the seas and THEN the stars.
And that everything was created in 7 days? Sorry 6 days. Those who have morning and afternoon.
And that some guys live in a desert eating bread that falls from the sky for 40 years?
And that with a little stick the seas are opened so that thousands of people can pass, but only for short time, while they pass, and then the SEAS close on top of an army that persecuted them, drowning the whole army.
And that Noah, and the animals in a boat, during a year in which a 40-day deluge filled the entire planet with water.
And that Noah had his children when he was about 500-and-some years old. Are those shorty years?
And that before the flood people lived about 900 years?
And that a big fish swallows a guy and after 3 days spits him out in a beach? The guy Jonah.
And that people rise up from the dead.
Where are they? In heaven or hell?
It doesn't seem very “scientific” or “logical”. Does it?
Many questions arise. Many of them ASSUME other questions. Many of them assume things that the bible does not say. Many of them assume things that science does not say.
This presentation is not going to answer these questions one by one. Instead it has the intention to kill them all with one stone, as an additional goal to give some good news and others that do not seem so good.
The technical creativity of man has allowed him to build airplanes, shoes, cell phones, microscopes, telephones, watches, televisions, hammers, trains, telescopes, computers, pots, buildings, transistors, cars, satellites, refrigerators, washing machines, polishers, MACHINES that make machines, factories that use machines made by other factories to build OBJECTS that make it easier for man to meet his basic needs for food, clothing, higiene and housing.
Technical creativity always results in an OBJECT, something physical, perceptible through the senses, something material, something concrete, a machine, a technology, something that changes the perceptible and in which that change is perceptible.
If we really want to obtain an objective, verifiable knowledge, in which faith is not needed, that which we like to call scientific, but that sometimes is not so objective, nor so verifiable, and that on more than one occasion it seems to be something more religious than something in which you don't need a faith ; then, technical creativity is by far the most important, the most reliable, criteria to validate any scientific model or theory.
No one can rationally say today: "I don't believe in airplanes", "No, no, I just do not believe in airplanes”.
But about 1000 years ago it was quite easy for someone to say “NO” to the belief that one day men would built thousands of machines, made of metal, that fly, that have wings like birds, that carry hundreds of people inside, and weights tons. About 1000 years ago it was much easier to say “I don't believe in airplanes”.
No one can rationally say today: "I don't believe in computers", "No, no, it's just that I don't believe in computers”.
But only about 500 years ago it was quite easy for someone to say “NO” to the belief that one day men would make thousands of millions, or gigas, of machines that can make gigas of additions or multiplications in a second, that have memory, and that allow communication in which you see a friend, who is thousands of miles away, using something like a mirror, your tablet, in which your friend is reflected, and you can hear him, with his voice coming out of the “mirror”, and speak to him addressing the “mirror”. That was a story for children since the 1600s: the witch from Little Red Riding Hood. Today it is called video conferencing and is used by millions of people around planet Earth.
However, the same cannot be said of the very large, the very far, the very small, the past or the future.
Who has built a star, a galaxy?
Who has built something from elementary particles?
Who has built a second, a minute, an hour?
The technical creativity of the human being, the one we use on a daily basis, has not reached that point. Although there is always someone who thinks otherwise.
Technical creativity excludes any discipline that does not build its object of study or builds something with its objects of study. It studies the stars but does not build them and does not build anything with them?. It does not qualify. It studies elementary particles but doesn't build them and doesn't build anything with them? It does not qualify. It studies time but doesn't build it and doesn't build anything with it?. It does not qualify. It studies gravity but does not build it and does not build anything with it?. It does not qualify. It studies genes but it does build them and does not build anything with them?. Guess what?: IT DOES NOT QUALIFY.
That means that the scientific theories that speak of this kind of things are not so “scientific”. They are not really that objective, verifiable knowledge and in which no faith is needed.
This means that the conceptual position of this presentation for the demarcation problem is to use TECHNICAL CREATIVITY as the criteria for deciding what IS and what is NOT science. That is the position of this presentation for the demarcation problem.
When we build machines that build stars and galaxies, the ones we see through the telescope, when we build machines to travel in time, when we build machines to travel at millions of times the speed of what many believe to be the maximum possible, the speed of the light in the void, “void” that has yet to be found, belief that is assumed as an axiom of some very famous ideologies, when we go to the stars, when we can make another kind of matter based on other types of elementary particles, different from the ones that we believe exist, when ALL these can be done by man and is of common use, such as a washing machine or a cell phone, THEN, and only THEN, we can begin to say that the theories that explain these constructions are “scientific”, are “knowledge”. Not before.
When it is rationally impossible to say: "I don't think we will travel to the stars”, when it is rationally impossible to say: “I do not believe in time travel”, for the common person, in the same way in that it is now rationally impossible to say: "I do not believe in airplanes", for an ordinary person, THEN we can say technical creativity has already confirmed the "scientific" theories that explain space and time at that level.
Meanwhile, no. Meanwhile, they are just fields of study.
The word "science" and the word "know" have become synonymous with "certainty" in the minds of most people.
There are people who believe to be certain about what happened millions of years ago. "It's scientifically proven." "We know it" “Science has already proved it." THAT is the attitude.
Technical creativity is a better criteria than the more commonly used to determine if a hypothesis is scientific or not. Much more reliable, than any other criteria, because it requires to make OBJECTS that anyone can use. This criterion avoids ending up calling "science" to what is only a field of study.
The application of the criterion is limited by the technology created. A technology only validates the theories or models that were NECESSARY and determining factors for the creation and reproduction of the object. It does NOT validate any model that pretends to explain a technology AFTER it was created, or a model already existing but that was never necessary to make the technology, those which are not determinant to the technology.
An example is transistors. Necessary and determining theories for the first patents, in 1925 and 1934, of the FET, the field-effect-transistor, were electromagnetics and chemistry. The name itself tells us how it works: the word "field" refers to an electric field. Its functional parts, the semiconductors, are explained with electromagnetic logic and produced with chemistry. The first semiconductors and diodes are created in the 19th century when these theories were already mature.
If AFTER the fact someone uses a statistical ideology of elementary particles to explain the FET, according to the criterion of technical creativity, this ideology is NOT validated because it was never needed for the creation of the first FETs.
An ideology of elementary particle statistics, imagined in the 20th century, was NOT used to build the first semiconductors, or diodes, in the 19th century, or to build the first transistors, or FETs, which are a logical extension of the electromagnetic behavior of the diode. Chemical processes were used to build them and mature electromagnetic theory explained them.
The explanation taught in educational institutions of how a transistor, a diode, or a semiconductor works is not from a statistical ideology of elementary particles because it is not needed to explain them. It is like explaining how to make a “soup” with a ideology of alchemy. It just isn’t needed.
The application of the criterion is limited by the technology created.
Greater technical complexity requires greater technical creativity, and vice versa. The complexity of the machines, of the technology, that can be built by man increases as his technical creativity increases, and vice versa. One is a reflection of the other.
No one can rationally say that "it is easier to make a computer than to make a knife. Make a computer? Uff easy, piece of cake, anyone can do it. Make a knife? Ahh no, no way, no idea, too hard. Making the computer requires more technical creativity.
Technical creativity is something that grows, that is learned, that is developed. It grows with experience, use and practice. It is a process of the mind. Animals don't have it. The development of technical creativity is a process in which: the greater technical creativity gets, a greater capacity to develop more complex technologies is obtained. These statements seem obvious. However, they have to be made because there is always someone who likes to deny the obvious.
We watch and download a video that we like on the Internet and forget what was needed for that to happen.
Watching a video on the Internet implies having built factories to manufacture each of the parts and machines necessary to build processors, screens, automobiles, antennas, transcontinental fiber optic networks, wireless networks, millions of lines of software in which if a single line is modified the entire program could fail, design circuits the size of a small coin that have as many switches as there are rooms in a city, design and build the roads along which the finished products are transported and build the means of transportation such as planes, trucks, and automobiles that transported said computer or cell phone until it reached your hands.
A person can use a cell phone without having a clue how it is made. You can use your cell phone, without knowing how to make one, you can use a car without knowing how to build one. The use of a technology produced by man's technical creativity does not require the user to understand the details of its development.
You don't have to be a scientist to use products of science.
Therefore, it is very easy to underestimate the great amount of advances in man’s technical creativity when its result is simply used. The children of today tend to think that the Internet has always been there.
It is easy to forget or ignore that greater technical complexity requires greater technical creativity, and vice versa.
One of the most studied fields, through machines such as the electronic microscope, which is the result of man's technical creativity, is that of everything related to plants, animals and man. The biological.
Through these studies it has been found that inside each of the approximately 37 million million, or 37 teras, of cells, that the human body has, there are very small molecular machines that all work at the same time, there are machines arming and disarming communication channels, transport channels of other molecular machines, that can also be armed or disarmed as the cell needs them, and machines exchanging molecules with the environment of the cell that must be recognized by the cell to allow their entry into the interior of the cell; and machines reproducing inside each cell a molecule that contains the program of how to reconstruct the complete organism formed by these cells, the famous DNA. It has also been found that there are molecular machines that verify the consistency of said chain, the DNA, a chain that is found in duplicate in each cell, and that if it finds any inconsistency, said molecular machine communicates with others to fix the error.
This type of machinery that is found inside each cell of the human being and that is almost as equally complex as it is found in each living organism that has a DNA, whether plant or animal, is several orders of magnitude more complex than the most complex of machines man has ever made.
The biological machinery is far more complex than any machinery that men has ever made.
We observe through man-made technologies, like the microscope, that cells of plants and animals duplicate themselves in a process we call mitosis, yet we do not see that a car, or a washing machine, or a cellphone, reproduces itself. We don't see a car split in two identical cars.
We observe in sexed animals that if a male and a female couple together, after a while, a small animal is born from the female with the same characteristics, and that grows over time. However we do not see that if a blue train and a pink one, join together, after a while, a small train comes out of the pink one that grows over time and starts looking just like a mix of the two big ones.
We also observe that if I cut my skin superficially, after a few days the wound has healed and the wound has disappeared. However I have never noticed that if my car gets a bump, after a few days, the car has fixed the bump by its self. I have always had to take my car for repair.
And if a blood sample is taken from a person, in that sample you have all the information on how to make a twin of the person, but if you measure the oil in a car, in said oil you cannot find the plans and designs of how to make each part of the car and all the information on how to assemble a car identical to which the oil was taken from. Not the same level of complexity.
We don't even understand how the biological machinery works enough to reproduce it. If I lose an eye in an accident, we do not know how to reconstruct my eye from my DNA. Or a kidney, or a lung. We know that there are “stem cells”. We don't know how to use the information, the programs, that we know is in those “stem cells”.
No one has ever created a machine that thinks, that can replace human beings. All the machines that man has created need man at some point to keep them working.
Man has no idea how to synthesize, build from scratch, without the use of biological material, the parts, the molecular machines, that are needed to build a cell. The human being has no idea how to build, WITHIN a modern laboratory, without using biological supplies, and starting from elements in the periodic table, a polysaccharide, a peptide, a nucleotide, 3 of the 4 basic compounds, or basic molecular machines, to put together a cell. And even if we could put them together, it would be like being able to write letters of an unknown language without being able to put together a single coherent sentence.
We have much less idea on how to assemble them so that they function as a cell: a machine that using what is written in its DNA, in that unknown language, it can run a specific program from the thousands of programs in that DNA, and copy itself, or build one of its own molecular machines, or build an intracellular communicating microtubule, or any of the thousands of functions necessary to maintain the cell functioning, alive.
And we have even less idea how to make different types of cells to build a human body system like an eye, or like a liver. And we have even less idea how to code a program, that contains all the information about these mechanisms, that we find in each and every one of the cells of the human body, and that when said program is executed, it can build a complete human being.
If the machinery inside a cell is several orders of magnitude more complex than any man-made machine, the human body is millions of millions of orders of magnitude more complex than any machine ever created by man. A one followed of millions of millions of ceros more difficult. It is not an exaggeration. In fact, it is a much larger number of combinations, but this one at least is an imaginable number for most people. And that is without including the complexity of the mutual dependencies between plants, animals, man and their environment.
In biology, man still does not have technical creativity. We use machines result of technical creativity to study biological machinery. It is a field of study. But according to the criteria of technical creativity, biology is not a science. We don't know how to build biological machinery from scratch, without using the pre-existing biological machinery. We have no idea how do it.
There is no doubt that man has great technical creativity.
The question that arises is:
Why do some people think that to build the simple, like automobiles, airplanes, computers and factories, it takes large amounts of technical creativity but to build something complex, something really complex, that we don't even understand the mechanism for reproduce it, like a human being, an animal or a plant, that to build that, you don't need anything, nothing, zero, nada, not a bit of technical creativity, but only time and chance?
It's absurd.
It is as if someone said:
Make a knife? Brilliant ! Very smart! Great Creativity! What a marvel of technology!
Make a Computer? Ahh no, that’s easy, piece of cake. It makes it self. You just wait a few billions of years and it assembles itself. No problem. Easy piecy. Look at them, there they are. That is the proof that they assemble themselves. No problema. That’s the proof.
It is absurd to think that to write a program, in a language that I do not know, that builds a machine that I don't even understand how it works, that I don't even have the goal to build it, that once built it is capable of executing the program, I just need to throw a coin in the air, to decide if I write, with vaporizing ink and on degradable paper, a one or a zero, and hope that after a long time, it really does not matter how long, because the more time passes the probability is lower, and without even knowing when to stop tossing the coin, obtain said program.
IT'S ABSURD !
But that is what some people believe, if they are taught that since they were kids at school.
It is as if in the future, a man-made machine, a robot if you will, which can think and learn, that calls itself smart, designer and creative because it is capable of building thousands of other machines, a robot of the future that can create machines, but does not even understand how he himself was built, and that the most complex of his creations is not capable of doing what he himself can do, that that machine would think: "I am very smart, designer and creative but my design is a result of time and luck, my first copy was put together by itself after waiting thousands of millions of years, I am simply the result of the evolution of simpler copies that were adapted by accidental changes – by luck - in my copy program, for my existence no intelligence, no design, no creativity, was needed, I have NO creator, there is no evidence that I was created.”
That machine, that robot, has a software problem. He has a virus that is killing him. A virus that sometimes makes it think absurdly. It needs an antivirus.
On the contrary, if we have that:
It is perfectly logical to conclude that:
Biological machines require much greater technical creativity than that required by man-made machines.
Then if the human being considers himself intelligent, designer and creative DUE to all the results, due to THE EVIDENCE, of his technical creativity, he has the logical need to recognize that the technical creativity required by biological machines, that EVIDENCE that we observe in day to day basis, also needs an intelligence, a design and even grater technical creativity.
And not just a little grater. Since the complexity of biological machinery is millions of millions of orders of magnitude greater than that of the machines created by man, the technical creativity that created biological machines has to be much larger. Probably also millions of millions of orders of magnitude greater than that of men.
But no, there they are, all those who believe that all those biological machines are just the product of time and chance. And they believe that it is "scientifically proven".
Which reminds me of something someone said:
"For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts.” 6.
If we are going to consider the human being as technically creative, WE HAVE to recognize that the human being was created by a much greater technical creativity.
And who created the creator? And why do we find errors in the design of the creator? And when did He create us? Did he made us and left? Is He still around but does not show? These are all questions that ADMIT the existence of a creator and questions that seek to know the creator. They are all irrelevant to determine whether there is, or not, a creator.
The point is that there IS a creator.
Do you want to know him? He wants the SAME!
All the evidence shows us that the human being has technical creativity, that he is a technically creative being.
We can see all the machines designed and built by man that with his effort are becoming more complex and more functional. That is the evidence of his technical creativity.
There is no evidence that plants or animals have the same characteristic. Birds always make their nests the same way. Nothing a plant or animal does increases in complexity. There are no buildings made by birds.
However, all the evidence shows us that those plants, animals and people, all these biological machinery has in itself a technical complexity far greater than anything created by man.
The evidence of such a difference in complexity between what is made by man and the biological machinery is made clear by observing what happens to the eye of the accident, or the liver, or the lung. We don't know how to rebuild it from my DNA. There are stem cells, but we don't know how to use them, the information, the programs, that we know it has coded inside, to reconstruct a part of our body. As intelligent, creative and designers that we are, we cannot use such information.
If we could, it would be enough to take a drop of my blood to rebuild the eye that I lost, or the liver that I lost or the lung that I lost in the accident. And we would not waste time analyzing compatibility with another person's kidney, which we know beforehand it will not be fully compatible with my body.
On the other hand, if some process, or program, or system, is the cause of biological machinery, such a system, would have to have a technical creativity far superior to that of the human being, or to have been created by a creativity that would have to be far superior to that of the human being. The greater the technical complexity, the greater the technical creativity required.
That system, understood from an informatics point of view, would have to be that of a much higher consciousness, in technical knowledge, than that of humans, and not a simple selection process, which does not add information, but it removes. Furthermore, it could not be by means of chance, luck, accident, or SPONTANEOUS, but by decision making mechanisms, based on the logic that governs the operation of what is being created. That is, similar to what man does when he is creating machinery, but far superior in technical creativity.
Nor could it be in millions of years, that all they do is decrease the probability that an interaction will happen between two parts that degrade over time, which in most cases requires of specific conditions, including actions to start and stop the interaction, which further decrease the probability for it to happen. On the contrary, it would have to be in a time lapse consistent with the technical capacity of such technical creativity. That is, similar to what man does when creating machinery, but far superior in technical creativity.
Nor do we observe spontaneous processes that have technical creativity. If so, we would have to observe all kinds of machinery of different types and functionalities, not all biological, but some resembling human-made machines, something like “transformers”, the movie characters, or like those of avatar, increasingly complex, appearing day to day. But no. We do not observe them in biological systems, only in our imagination and in the movies that we ourselves imagine. They may exist, but we do not observe them. On the contrary, all evidence indicates that the biological machinery was designed by a technical creativity far superior to that of humans because it has a complexity far superior to the machinery created by man.
Technical creativity, if it really is, allows repeating over and over the same process, allows repeating the mechanism by which it makes an object, a machine, a technology. It allows us to reproduce the machine, the object. That ability is what gives us the necessary confidence in the set of reasonings, mathematical models, scientific theories, in the information that explain said process. Reproduction of the object gives us the trust that this information, these programs, these processes are indeed true, that they are correct, that they actually make the desired machinery, and that the machine will work in the desired way.
If we manufacture gigas, or thousands of millions, of cell phones in an almost automated process, that gives us confidence that the information that explains the manufacturing process and the operation of the cell phone, effectively works, that such information is indeed scientific.
If my cell phone is stolen or completely destroyed, I can get another exactly the same and if I have a copy of the information I had in the cell phone, I can get another cell phone that works exactly the same way as the one that was destroyed.
The same does not happen with an ant, or with a dog.  I can't get another one mathematically identical to the one that was destroyed. We don't know how to get a backup copy of the brain of an ant or a dog. We can't reproduce it identically because we did not design either the ant or the dog. We don't have the necessary information.
The most we have achieved is the equivalent of running the copy program, we call them clones, because the result is an animal with exactly the same DNA. But we don't understand how the program works. We only know how to start it.
If we understood how it works, we could build an eye, or a kidney, for you, from a drop of your blood. We can not. We do not know how. Maybe one day we will, and when that happens all we will have achieved is to show that great technical creativity was required to understand the biological machinery. We would be adding evidence to the argument of the existence of a creator of biological machinery.
But that creator, who by logic and evidence must exist, that is if we are going to call ourselves designers, intelligent and creative, that creator knows how the little program works.
That creator could, if he wants, reproduce any of these biological machines that he designed, should they be destroyed, the same way we do with a cell phone. What's more, if he wishes, he could take the backup of the software, and place it in a more advanced version of the hardware, of this biological machinery. He could, for example, place all the software, all the memory, the one that a human had at the time of his physical death, and place it in a version 2.0 of a human body, one with greater durability, a more resistant one, one that resists, for example, fire. Sure, in this case we would NOT be talking about the creator that the bible speaks about, but about one imagined by a person of this century. We would be doing something that the bible calls sin.
Today, with advances of human technology, it is easy to imagine a future, no matter how distant, let’s say of a million years, in which it will be possible to make exact copies of a very complex biological machine: the human body. If in said future it is possible to obtain a backup of the position of each atom in any object and reproduce said object, why not with the human body?
The resulting atom-by-atom three-dimensional 3d printed human being could remember everything the person remembered up to the time of the copy. Then, when printing is finished, the printed person could wonder: Who won the game of Russian roulette that we were playing?
And of course we can imagine a future in which the aging of a person can be avoided by avoiding that, during the mitosis of the cells of said person, the number of telomeres in the chromosome gets decremented by one, that copy counter that determines the maximum number of copies that can be made of a given cell.
Technologies such as cloning, cell regeneration, three-dimensional printing and computing, allow us to imagine a future in which man, with technology created by himself, could simulate an eternal life and a resurrection. There are already several movies dealing with the subject.
But if this is the eternal life and resurrection that a man of the year 2022 can imagine, counted from the approximate year that the King of Kings was born, the Meshiakh of YHWH; What is it like the eternal life and resurrection that was imagined by the person who designed and created this brain that can imagine and create things in the image and likeness of his creator?
How are those things that eye did not see and ear did not hear to which Paul refers in the second chapter of the first letter to the Corinthians? 7, And that were prepared before the creation of heaven and earth, according to the first chapter of the letter to the Ephesians? 8
Let's see what the bible says.
The resurrection described in the bible is physical.
Yeshua, according to Luke 24, after being resurrected, appears to his apostles and says to them: ”Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does NOT have flesh and bones as you see I HAVE” 9. And at that moment he accepted and ate fish in front of them. To Thomas in John 20 he says: ”Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing” 10. And Thomas kneels down and says: ”My Lord and my God” 11. The bible tells us of a physical resurrection, he has a body, he can be touched, he can eat, the person who resurrects, it is not something abstract, it is not just a spirit, it is something physical and it has flesh and bones.
It also tells us about a resurrection that has memory, they recognize him as the same person who was crucified, who died, and who was buried, and that is now among them again. They can hug him, they can touch him, he eats fish, he has an interaction with them equal to the one before he died. He has the same physical appearance as before he died, he has the wounds in feet and hands. The resurrected does not return in a body of a woman or a child, or in a completely different body, or in a chicken or a dog. No, it is not a reincarnation. It is the same person. He has the same memories and they remember him. That's the resurrection which the bible speaks about.
So if I see and talk to the dead but I can't touch them and they cannot eat fish, if it is not something physical, but purely spiritual, like the dead man seen by King Saul through a witch in the first book of Samuel, he is most likely talking to a spirit that will be anything but Holy, one of those that impersonate the dead, an evil spirit, and not simply a mental problem. The rising from the dead that our Lord promises is physical.
 Yeshua tells some Sadducees, in Luke 20, that: ”nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection” 12, it is a resurrection that is forever. That's the resurrection our Lord talks about.
Paul, in 1st Corinthians 15, explains that ”So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption” 13, it can no longer die. Plus later also in 1st Corinthians 15, it says that: ”And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man” 14. That is, in bodies similar to those of angels, or to that of our Lord after being resurrected. In Philippians 3, Paul explains that Jesus Christ ”will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself” 15. A body that can no longer die. One like his own.
In Luke 24, on the third day after Jesus was buried, some angels appear to the women who went to the grave and the women are full of fear they bowed to the ground, but those men said to them, “Why do you seek the living among the dead?” 16.
The resurrected is alive forever because he can no longer die !
So if I die, they revive me, I rewrite the Divine Comedy and then I die again, as probably happened to the widow's son when Elijah revives him, or the dead man who, when they are going to bury him, accidentally touches the bones of a dead Elisha, Elijah's successor, and revives, we are not speaking of the “YHWH heelitta min Sheol”, of the raising from the grave that YHWH promises.
Of course, the obvious question is: Well, if he's alive, where is he?
I haven't seen him. Where is Yeshua?
Where is that body that Thomas put his finger in, that ate fish with them, that talked to them and that interacted in the same way that he had done before he died?
And the answer is given by the bible in the first chapter in the book of Acts of The Apostles: He is in heaven. Or rather in the "shamaim", that vault that Genesis speaks of, that vault that can be seen and that has clouds and that at the time of Adam had waters below and waters above, and that Elohim, or God, called it heavens. It is a physical heaven, we can see it, it has clouds, it is a vault, and at Adam's time it had waters below and waters above.
The bible says that after Yeshua was resurrected he appeared several times and in one of them described in the Acts of the Apostles, while speaking to some of his followers, and while they were looking at him, Jesus was lifted up to the sky until a cloud covered him and they could no longer see him. And while they stared at the sky, at the "shamaim", watching Jesus depart, two men dressed in white, two angels, appeared next to them and said: ”Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven” 17. He's in heaven, and he'll be back just the same way he went up there: physically. The same, not another person, the same person, with the wounds on his feet and hands, with all his power and glory, Yeshua himself announces that to us in Matthew 24. He will come and reign for a thousand years from Israel.
This resurrection that the bible speaks of is for everyone, for everyone who has lived since Adam and Eve, everyone who is alive and everyone who will ever live. Everyone. Good ones and bad ones. That is what the bible tells us. Yeshua tells us in John 5 that ”Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which ALL who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of” 18 “judgment” 19.
Paul tells us in Acts of the Apostles 24 that “I have hope in God, which they themselves also accept, that there will be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust” 20 and in Revelation 20 The bible tells us that: ”The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works” 21. All the dead are resurrected. The resurrection of the bible is for everyone.
The resurrection that the bible speaks about has not happened.  No, in the bible, if you die, you cannot do anything, ”for there is no work or device or knowledge or wisdom in the grave where you are going” 22, there is no memory of God and he cannot be praised or known 23. A dead body is in the earth, in the grave, made dust and his spirit has returned to God who gave it 24, in other words everything returned to how it was before that person was alive. Or as our Lord says: he is asleep. A dead man can only start doing those things when he ceases to be dead, when he has returned to life, when he has risen from the grave.
YHWH heelita min Sheol.
This has not happened with the exception of Yeshua and a few others: more than five hundred, less than 144,000. A few. In Revelation 20, the bible tells us that these few came back to life and reigned with Jesus Christ for a thousand years 25, and that ”the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished” 26. One thousand years that the day of the Lord lasts. The day of Yeshua Melekh HaMashiakh. One thousand years in which there will be peace because the Satan will be chained. In Revelation 20 the bible also tells us that “when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison” 27 for his total destruction, and AFTER that then it happens: ”The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works” 28.
Jesus explains in John 6 that: ”This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day” 29. Not before. The resurrection of the vast majority is until the LAST day.
Paul explains in Second Timothy 2 that some have strayed from the truth saying that our rising, our resurrection, has already happened, and they are thus upsetting the faith of some 30. It has not happened. Not for the vast majority of those who have lived, are alive and will live.
According to John 11 Jesus Christ affirms that: ”Our friend Lazarus sleeps, but I go that I may wake him up" 31 and then explains "Lazarus is dead" 32. For a dead one, it is necessary to awaken him so that he can live again.
And according to Mark 5 and Luke 8 Yeshua affirms: ”she is not dead but sleeping" 33. And then he revives her.
Jesus Christ refers to the dead as asleep. And like all sleeping people, they have no consciousness. They are asleep. Asleep ones than he can awaken temporarily, as in the case of Lazarus, or in a permanent way, on the last day, when he promises to give them a body that cannot die, like that of Jesus Christ himself, and bring them back to life. Not before. The dead ones are actually alive in the eyes of Jesus Christ but without a body and without consciousness, that is why he calls them asleep. He promises to awaken them so that they can know him, so that they may have life and life in abundance. In the mean while they're asleep they can not know the one that never sleeps, the Father, nor the one who slept three days and three nights, Jesus Christ, because those who are asleep are unconscious and cannot speak with the awake ones.
 They can't do anything, they cannot know Jesus Christ and much less the Father.
Another question that the bible answers about this supposed resurrection is: Where are those 20 to 30 billion people, that would be resurrected, going to be?
In Heaven?
No. In Revelation 21, John tells us that it will be on a new earth with new heavens 34. Apparently without seas, without sun and without moon 35, but right here on this very planet. An Earth where God lives with men in a city that comes DOWN from heaven and that John calls the new Jerusalem. And that the nations will walk in the light of that city, and that the kings of the world will give him their riches 36. John says that the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in that city and his servants will adore him, that they will see him face to face and that they will carry his name on their foreheads. There will be no night and those who live there will not need lamplight or sunlight because God, the Lord, will give them his light and they will reign for all the centuries 37.
John claims to hear a loud voice coming from the throne and saying: ”Look! The residence of God is among human beings. He will live among them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them. He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death will not exist any more, or mourning, or crying, or pain, for the former things have ceased to exist” 38.
It is not in heaven. It is in a new earth with a new heavens. It is not that the resurrected ascend to heaven, but that God descends to a new earth to live among men.
This resurrection that the bible describes to us, which is physical, in which you can't die, that is for everyone, that hasn't happened, that is in this same planet, is the basis of the faith in Yeshua. Unfortunately for some people like Hitler, Pablo Escobar, or Stalin, they will have to wait until the raising of the dead to be able to believe in the raising of the dead. And by the grace of YHWH for the ones who already believe in the resurrection that the bible speaks of, the process of entering the Kingdom of God, to the Kingdom of Heaven, it has already begun.
That Kingdom of Heaven that our Lord speaks of: It is already among you and in you, but no one can say “here it is” or “there it is” because it cannot be seen. That Kingdom of eternal life, of Absolute Truth, of Freedom of Sin, of Salvation from death, of Divine Justice in the hearts, of indescribable Gladness, of Kindness, of Joy, of total delivery and without conditions, of Forgiveness, of Mercy, of True Love, of unending Peace, the Peace of the Lord, in YHWH, in Yeshua, in the Ruakh HaKodesh. A True and eternal Peace.
That Kingdom of Heaven is already among you.
The answer to the question: “Is it possible the resurrection described in the bible?” It is obvious if we only take into account the fundamental aspects of it: which is physical, in which one cannot die, which is for everyone, which has not happened, which is on this very planet. This resurrection is imagined in futuristic movies as a real possibility. However, the resurrection described in the bible has additional characteristics:
Yeshua, according to Mark 12, tells us that we will be like the angels in heaven 39, and these, according to 1 Chronicles 21, can float between heaven and earth 40. Similar to how Yeshua himself rose into heaven, after resurrected, according to Acts 1 41.
Furthermore, Yeshua himself, according to Luke 24 and John 20, appears in the midst of the apostles, these being behind closed doors 42, something similar to the teleportation that science fiction movies show us. Thus, a resurrected person does not need to walk to go from one place to another.
They can also become invisible to some eyes and at the same time visible to other eyes as happened to Balaam and his donkey 43 in Numbers 22 or as happened to Elisha and his servant 44 in 2nd Kings 6.
And according to 1 Corinthians 6, the body of a resurrected one will not need to eat to keep being alive 45. Apparently it will be something optional, because our Lord ate grilled fish after he was resurrected 46. Something very convenient that would leave plenty of free space for all those resurrected, in that new earth with a new heavens, because it will not be necessary to grow food if it is just something you want and not a necessity.
And if the body of the resurrected is like that of the angels, it will be resistant to physical fire. In Daniel 3 an angel protects Ananias, Misael and Azariah 47, and in Judges 13 an angel stands above the fire when announces the birth of Samson 48.
Thus, the answer to the question: “Is it possible the resurrection described in the bible?” includes aspects that are more complicated to project to a future with technologies that most people can use in day to day basis. But, if the bible is true, in the future every person will have access to the explanation of these other aspects of the resurrection because the bible assures that ”For nothing is hidden that will not be revealed, and nothing concealed that will not be made known and brought to light" 49.
Perhaps this is why Our Lord Yeshua, according to John 6, assures that ”No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me” 50 “drags him first” 51.
So if the bible is true, no one, absolutely no one, after resurrected, will be able to answer "NO" to the question:
“Is the resurrection described in the bible possible?”
To the image found on the piece of cloth known as The Shroud of Turin they have made technical studies of spectroscopy, thermography and infrared photography, ultra-violet photography, fluorescence spectroscopy, x-ray radiography, transmitted and reflected light photography, optical and atomic resolution microscopy with electron microscopes and x-ray scanning microscopes, carbon-14, biological studies of pollen, studies of blood, criminalistic, forensic, artistic, cultural studies and many others. In summary is the most studied piece of cloth with a wide arrange of techniques and technologies known to man and has been found to have some features that make it different from any other image known to man.
The image of the body on the Shroud of Turin is the only inverted colors image or "photographic negative" dated before the 1800s known to men. This was only evident until photography was invented in 1800s and years later Secondo Pia took a photograph of the shroud in 1898. While developing the photograph, he watched the negative of the photograph and observed that it was the positive of the image on the shroud. There is a historical record of the Shroud of Turin since 1357 when it was exhibited in Lirey France. If photography was invented in the 1800s and there is no negative image of person, animal or thing, before the 1800s, with the exception of the Shorud of Turin and its artistic copies: who made the Shroud of Turin?
The degree of detail in the anatomical proportions of the human figure of the shroud is photo-realistic and the amount of information per image area on the shroud is greater than any photograph made with a modern 15 megapixel cell phone. Thus, the shroud presents photographic characteristics and quality but it is not a photograph. There is no image prior to the invention of photography with this level of realism and detail. So who made the Shroud of Turin?
The material of the shroud where the image of the body is found is linen. One of the main components of linen is cellulose. The threads of the fabric that forms the shroud have thousands of microfibers.  The image of the body in the shroud is formed on the surface of the outer microfibers of the shroud threads and only in the parts where said microfibers are external to the thread they form. If the microfiber penetrates the thread, in said part it is not modified. The image is formed by very small dehydrations, oxidations or "aging" of the surface cellulose that makes up the shroud microfibers. Billions of them form the image of the body on the shroud. Thus, the image of the body is part of the shroud, of the microfibers of the shroud. There is no pigment in the microfibers. And there is only modifications where there is no blood. There are no modifications below the blood. The image of the body is posterior to the blood. It is as if with a laser someone would have modified, burned, the microfibers, aging nanometric parts of each microfiber, burning the surface of each microfiber. The burnings have no directionality so each modification is independent of each other. The image is on the very surface and constitutive part of the microfibers of the threads that form the shroud. This is why the image has not moved, shifted or distorted neither by fire nor by water to which the shroud has beeen exposed. This is also why, as the shroud has aged, the image has lost contrast, but the information itself about the image of the body has been preserved. There is no image of person, animal or thing, prior to the year 1978, apart from the shroud of Turin, with this characteristic. And then from 1978, just some attempts to reproduce an image like the one in the shroud claim to have this characteristic. There is no image and has never been a man-made image exhibiting this feature. It was not even known that the shroud had this characteristic before 1978. Thus who made the Shroud of Turin?
When analyzing the image of the body in the shroud of Turin, it is observed a correlation between “image density” and distance from the body to the fabric. At a greater distance, the image is clearer, and at a smaller distance to the fabric, the image is darker. This allows you to create computer images that have three-dimensional characteristics. Thus, the shroud has holographic characteristics but is not a hologram. The level of detail in the bone features of the image it is comparable in some parts to an x-ray. Thus, the shroud also has radiographic features but is not an x-ray. There is no image of a person, animal or thing, prior to the year 1978, apart from the Turin shroud, with both characteristics. And after 1978 only some attempts to reproduce an image like the shroud claim to have these characteristics. No photograph taken with a cellular, neither before nor after 1978 presents these characteristics. It was not even known that the shroud had these characteristics before 1978. So who made the Shroud of Turin?
The separation of blood in serous phase from blood in corpuscular phase only occurs at the time of death. Blood serum and other substances in human blood are invisible to the human eye but visible under ultra-violent light, these techniques are used in the modern crime scene investigation. The shroud presents this type of separation in the flank wound. If this kind of evidence was only perceivable until the invention of modern forensic techniques using ultra-violet light and the shroud is from before the 1900s, who before the 1900s was so careful to separate the two phases in the bloodstain on the side of the body and thus differentiate it from other ante-mortem wounds in a forensic analysis that was only possible until the 20th century? Who made the Shroud of Turin?
In cases of violent death with torture, hemoglobin production is very high. When hemoglobin breaks down one of the products is bilirubin. The shroud blood remains red due to high rates of bilirubin in the blood. This forensic information was only known until the 20th century, so the body that was in contact with the shroud of Turin suffered a violent death with torture, because no one before the 20th century could falsify a detail that he did not know he should falsify: that the blood of a violent death with torture presents high levels of bilirubin. So who made the Shroud of Turin?
There are multiple forensic details that are present on the shroud of Turin and which are consistent with modern forensic science and a death by crucifixion as described in the gospels: inflammation of the belly, hiden thumbs, high levels of bilirubin in blood, blood phase separation in post-mortem wounds, small subcutaneous hemorrhages or hematohidrosis, the body position with rigor-mortis, threads of blood on the face and arms consistent with a crucifixion, the wound to the side, the wounds of feet and hands from a Roman crucifixion, head wounds consistent with a thorny helmet exclusive to the execution of Christ, the wounds throughout the body consistent with a whipping with a Roman flagrum, the dislocated shoulder, the portion of beard torn off, the bruises on the face, the various types of pollen from the Jerusalem area in times of spring consistent with the helmet of thorns, the flowers, oils and ointments from a burial of a wealthy Jew like Joseph of Arimathea, and many others. That is, the shroud presents all the evidence of someone who died just as the Jesus Christ of the gospels died. There is no other piece of cloth in the whole history of humanity, apart from the shroud of Turin, with all the criminalistics and forensic evidence consistent with the death of Jesus described in the gospel, even if some of these evidence were completely invalid or unacceptable for a hard sceptic. So who made the Shroud of Turin?
There is no replication of the shroud that even meets with a tenth of the characteristics of those in the shroud of Turin. Perhaps the most complete (whole body) and thorough attempt (trying to imitate the characteristics that were known in 1978) has been that of Garlaschelli in 2010. This attempt could not overcome resolution, pigmentation, thermal stability and ultra-violet analysis that has overcome the shroud. That not to mention all the forensic details that the shroud presents.
The truth is that today with today's technology, year 2022, counted from the approximate year of the birth of Jesus Christ, of the king of kings, of the Meshiakh of YHWH, the man has not been able to produce a fabric with the characteristics of the shroud in Turin.
And even if he could do it, even if he could replicate it in the future: Where, in what part of the world, where is an image of person, animal or thing, with verifiable historical record, prior to 1800, when photography was invented, that is a photographic negative, with photographic realism in its anatomical details? And that’s just without asking about its holographic, radiographic characteristics and all the forensic evidence only known and verifiable until the 20th century that was found in the shroud. Where? Negative? From when? With verifiable historical record? With photo-realism?
It does not exist, nor has existed in the world another linen shroud that presents the characteristics of the Turin shroud. Period. So if the image in the shroud of Turin was not made by man, who made the image in the shroud of Turin? Could it be that it was made by the same person that has enough technical creativity to reconstruct a human being? The creator? Because all the evidence indicates that it was not made by humans.
To determine the past, the human being has developed a method. It is similar to judicial systems. For each event, the historical sources, whether physical or narrative, are studied to determine the who, when, how, where, and why of each source. The credibility of each source is evaluated and then the historical sources are crossed examined to try to establish the coincidences, analyzing the sources, and then that information is used to establish the best explanation of the past.
The sources of the recent past have been made a little more credible with the possibility of man to record audio and video and easily spread it using the internet. And since the 15th century, with the invention of the printing press, and the dissemination of the written medium, it has been much easier to stablish a credible past.
Thus, the method for determining the past has benefited from the technical creativity of man, but this only affects the ability to determine the recent past. Sources for the past before the 15th century are more scarce.
When a person wants to search for information on the Internet, he chooses a set of words that are are as specific as possible to the information he is looking for. If I search only for "Jose" I will not find the page of the person I am looking for, but if I search for 4 words “Jose Luis Quiroga github” I will find exactly the page that I am searching despite the immense amount of information that is on the Internet.
With only 3 or 4 words that identify what I am looking for, that make a unique set, exclusive of the information I am looking for, I will find the information. That set of words begins to function as a key for the page containing those 3 or 4 words.
It is the power of coincidences. Despite the vast amount of information on the Internet, it is possible to find an specific page with only 3 or 4 words that are mandatory and exclusive to that page.
In judicial processes, when evidence is analyzed, a similar process is used to try to establish the truth of an event of the past. Most processes are decided based on circumstantial evidence, that is, that by coincidence it favors or disfavors the accused. When the coincidences are too many in one way or another it is easy to make a decision. Each coincidence decreases exponentially the statistical probability of an event different to the one that the coincidence supports. The effect of cumulative coincidences is of exponential kind.
You can have different criteria to decide if something did happen, or did not happen, based solely on coincidences. There is the criteria of "preponderance" which is when the balance of coincidences is greater to one of the two options. Other criteria may be that of “clear and convincing” and “without reasonable doubt”. They all involve a level of certainty as to whether something really did happen or did not happen. But all of these imply only "believing" something. Regarding the past, we can not be absolutely certain of anything.
In a similar way to how a judicial system seeks to establish the veracity of a past event, historians have a method based on coincidences to establish whether an event happened or not.
In the case of history the events are generated by human beings. And it is precisely that exponential effect of the accumulation of coincidences, and its logical analysis, which allows us to decide the direction in the balance of what is possible, of what is feasible, of the best rational explanation, is inclined to. It allows us to decide what to believe regarding that possible and credible past.
Yet another reason to say that since we cannot travel to the past, or see, or listen to the past, it is IMPOSSIBLE to be certain of said past. Even our own past may not be exactly as we remember it.
Although the sources of the recent past are more credible than those of a distant past, we can only BELIEVE the past.
In the previous examples, the one of pages in Internet, the one of events judicial or historical, it is very important to bear in mind that the events were generated by human beings, by intelligent beings with capacity of decision, with will.
People wrote those pages on the Internet, people did or didn't do those events of the past. This kind of approach to the "probable", to the “possible” is very different from assuming that the events were randomly generated by chance.
Chance has no intelligence, no capacity for decision, no will, no intention. Chance does not lie, it does not deceive, it has no personal interests or needs or desires.
I make this comment for when I refer to some religions, some belief systems, based on events generated by chance, by luck, that are popularly regarded as "science".
The reason is very simple, a machine that is good for something does not work by luck, nor by chance. There is always a mechanism, a design, a logic. That's why there is no mathematical function that generates purely random numbers. A computer cannot generate a sequence completely random of ones or zeros. The program does not exist. Do not look for it. You waste your time.
But there are some religions that believe so. And they are regarded as sciences.
Fortunately, history is about people.
Mr. Cheerful has a large family and several pets.
Mr. Cheerful enters the bathroom and finds that the sink faucet is leaking, the drain is blocked and the sink is filling up.
Mr. Cheerful has a high-tech instrument that lets him know how much water is in a container just by pointing at it. And he can take the measurement every microsecond.
Mr. Cheerful wants to know how long the faucet has been leaking in his sink and reasons as follows:
Assuming the sink was empty when the faucet was closed.
Assuming all the water in the sink comes from the faucet.
Assuming that since the faucet was closed the drain has not been unlocked.
Assuming that no one has manipulated the faucet to open it or close it anymore or anyless than it is right now.
THEN, with the high-tech instrument, Mr. Cheerful can measure at what rate the sink is filling because in one second he can check a million times the amount of water in the sink and then he can calculate how long the faucet has been leaking.
Anyone can see that Mr. Cheerful's problem is not is in his high-tech instrument, nor in the technology that is used to build the instrument.
The problem is in Mr. Cheerful's assumptions.
There is no guarantee that one of his children did not flush the sink, or that two of them were playing paper boat, or that the cat or one of his pets opened the faucet a little bit by touching it while passing by, and that therefore NONE of his assumptions hold.
This and other problems have some procedures regarded as scientific but that are actually PSEUDO-scientific. That is, they are ALMOST scientific. At least high technology is used.
For the moment I give this example to make it clear that the so called radiometric dating, permanently associated with the word "science", the word "certainty", and the word "we know", should be completely abandoned as ABSURD and useless. This technique that is supposedly used to determine the age of rocks and other objects based on the measurement of radioactive elements, does EXACTLY the same assumptions as Mr. Cheerful.
For any supposed radiometric dating, we start from the following assumptions:
Assuming the initial conditions are known.
Assuming that there are no external effects that alter the conditions of the chemical elements measured.
Assuming that the rate of change, of radioactivity, of the measured chemical elements has been maintained.
THEN, it can be calculated the date when these rocks or objects, containing such radioactive elements, were formed.
The same force that made Nazism popular in Germany makes a majority of people to consider radiometric dating as evidence. It is not the only case in which absurd methods use hi-thech instruments to give them credibility, but it is the most ABSURD of them all when it comes to determining the past.
We can only believe the past.
The statistical fact that radiometric dates are ignored when they do not give the expected result, it is just a confirmation that the method is absurd.
Dating by radioactive elements is one of the most absurd ways of using high technology to obtain completely useless results because it assumes too many things impossible to verify.
In historical methods it is better to use dating by synchronisms, two events recorded in writing that are related to each other. However, such dates are determined by man made records. People who may lie, cheat and have ulterior motives, or just be wrong. It is the logical analysis of historical sources which allows establishing the greater or lesser degree of credibility of each particular data. And it is in this logical analysis where the coincidences, those synchronisms, play a very important role.
One of the main kind of historical sources are the narrative kind of sources. The human being decides to write texts that narrate what is happening, or what he thinks has happened, or what he wants people in the future to think that happened, and he writes a record of it.
Among these texts that claim to record history there are some quite old:
Herodotus lived in 400 before Jesus Christ. The 8 oldest copies that we have of his writings are from from 900 after Christ, about 1300 years after he wrote them.
Thucydides also lived in 400 before Jesus Christ. The 8 oldest copies that we have of his writings are also from 900 after Christ, also some 1300 years after he wrote them.
Caesar lived in 50 before Jesus Christ. The 10 oldest copies that we have of his writings are also from 900 after Christ, about 950 years after he wrote them.
Livy, lived in 1 before Jesus Christ. The 19 oldest complete copies that we have of his writings are from about 1000 years after he wrote them.
Tacitus. The 20 oldest copies we have of your writings are from some 1000 years after he wrote them.
Suetonius. The 8 oldest copies we have of his writings are from some 800 years after he wrote them.
Pliny the Younger. The 7 oldest copies we have of his writings are from about 700 years after he wrote them.
Flavius Josephus. The few oldest incomplete copies we have of his writings are about 1000 years after he wrote them.
There is only one set of narratives, which are written with the objective of registering true events, which stands out above all other narratives ever written by man: the ones that we find in the New Testament.
Of the New Testament there are about 6000 manuscripts from 100 years to 150 years after writing. All of its authors were alive when the events happened, all eyewitnesses with the exception of Luke and the author of the letter to the Hebrews.
They were all alive when the events took place. Everyone. Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, Jacob, Jude. Everyone.
Matthew, Mark, John, Peter, Jacob and Jude were disciples of Jesus Christ. They ate with him, walked with him, talked with him after his resurrection.
But no. There are people who want to confirm everything with other sources that are not in the bible, those for which there are almost no copies and for which their oldest copies are from thousands of years after the events. And since you can't, they believe that everything must be a lie.
If the new testament is not a valid historical source, NO narration, absolutely no other pre-print text is a valid historical source. Assuming that the new testament is not a valid historical source is just absurd. This is not the way the human being establishes historical facts.
Jesus Christ died on the cross.
There is no fact of ancient history that has more corroboration, acceptance, disclosure and evidence that the death of Jesus Christ on the cross. If you do not accept that Jesus Christ died crucified, you really should believe absolutely nothing about history prior to the fifteen century after Jesus Christ.
People die, people get killed, the Romans crucified people, many wrote about the matter, they had no reason to lie. Easy to believe.
However, there is always the Muslim who, because his imam, his religious leader, told him that a book called quran, one that his leader claims to know, a book that is forbiden to be read in any language different than Arabic, and possibly, according to statistics, without his leader knowing how to read Arabic, a book that must be different from the one that, according to the same Muslim records, was dictated by the slaver of blacks 52, slaver that was whiter than milk 53, that had sexual relations with a 9-year-old girl 54, different because, according to those records, a goat ate part of what he dictated 55 and, according to those records, a Muslim leader, almost 300 years after the slaver’s death, and almost a 1000 years after Jesus Christ’s death on the cross, decided to burn all the qurans different from what he wanted the original to be 56, that said quran, or should we say qurans, because a quran from one region is largely different and contradicting to a quran from an other region, that the qurans say that Jesus Christ did not die on the cross but was TAKEN to heaven ALIVE, without having died, then no, he did NOT die on the cross, and that’s it.
However, all the historical evidence, far more than there is to any other event of antiquity, indicates the opposite.
Jesus Christ died on the cross. Historical fact. More than any other of antiquity. More than the simple existence of Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar and Muhammad.
The believer believes that Jesus Christ is alive because he was resurrected in body and spirit.
The first people who believed in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, believed because they saw him, touched him, ate with him, talked with him and stick their finger to him. He remembered them and they remembered him.
 Most were killed JUST for believing precisely that: that Jesus Christ is alive because he had physically risen.
That was what they believed. That they had talked, touched and eaten with a physical Jesus who was the same one they had seen dead on the cross and who they had buried.
Most historians, scholars, and people who study the older manuscripts accept that this was the belief of those early christians.
To this day that is the belief of anyone calling himself a Christian. That Jesus Christ was resurrected in body and spirit. The one who doesn't believe that Jesus Christ is alive because he physically rose, is not a BELIEVER in Jesus Christ. Believing that Jesus Christ is alive because he is physically risen is the basis of the faith in Jesus Christ.
Many were persecuted for what they believed. Many died for what they believed.
But there is no shortage of those who say no, that this was not what they believed. Although all the evidence indicates that this was what they believed and not only that but that is precisely the DEFINITION of a believer, of a CHRISTIAN.
The direct witnesses died believing that Jesus Christ is alive because he is physically alive because he is risen.
The believer believes that Jesus Christ is alive because he was resurrected in body and spirit. Historical fact.

Those believers who went out to travel the world, to tell what they had lived, seen and experienced firsthand, those who were persecuted for believing what they believed by their own countrymen, many of whom died for what they believed, those believers that went to jail, or were flogged, or stoned, or burned, or crucified, or beheaded, or hanged, or boiled in OIL for believing what they believed: that Jesus Christ had risen and therefore they had nothing to fear of physical death because Jesus Christ would physically resurrect them also as he had promised before he died on the cross ; those believers were not always so brave, nor so communicative, neither so travelers, nor so followers of Jesus Christ.
Before the apparitions that they say they had, they hid, they did not moved, they denied him, they ran away when they came to arrest him. Even when they see him for the first time, when they touched him for the first time, they are afraid, they cannot believe it. The guy has to ask for a piece of grilled fish and eat it in front of them. And one person that was not in that moment, does not believe it. They tell him but he doesn't believe. Only until he sticks his finger to one of his wounds, he believes. They were not the same before as after the appearances they believed they had.
Afterwards, they are no longer afraid to die. They are no longer afraid of what they will say. They are not afraid of persecution. They are no longer afraid of what men can do to them. And they suffer the consequences.
For the vast majority of Jews of Yeshua's time, believing in a Meshiakh crucified was astonishing. It was an offense. To die on a tree was curse. The Messiah was someone who would physically reign from Israel above all people, languages and nations. Someone that would bring peace to the whole world. Furthermore, the resurrection of the dead was an event at the end times and for ALL Israelites. It was not a one-person event. That was not what most Jews believed. The belief of a crucified Meshiakh generated a rejection, a contempt, on the part of that majority of Israelites, towards the FEW Israelites who DID believe that Jesus Christ was the Meshiakh and that he had risen in body and spirit.
Shaul of Tarsus was one of those Jews. He despised and persecuted those who believed in a crucified Meshiakh. Later he would be known as Paul the Apostle, because he changed. After an appearance, a little different to that of the previous apostles, he changed. He began to believe the testimony of the apostles, goes and meets with them in Jerusalem, to find out the details of the matter. He went to investigate, find out, confirm, make “historeó” to Peter, a greek word from which the word "history" comes from.
He also changed. He went from being a persecutor to being persecuted.
Because after losing EVERYTHING: fame, wealth, power, since he was a high-ranked Pharisee in the Temple, well educated and from a good family, in charge of the military part of the temple and the important task of putting an an end to that bunch of Jews who claimed to believe in a crucified Messiah and that claimed that he had risen ; after starting to believe in what that bunch of Jews believed, he had to leave everything behind, lose EVERYTHING. And he, Paul, referred to everything that he had to abandon as "EXCREMENTS", if he compared it to being a follower of Jesus Christ.
And after shipwrecks, being stoned, being flogged multiple times, being imprisoned several times, after assassination attempts, of conspiracies against him, he dies BEHEADED precisely for believing what he believed.
He also changed.
Even today, every follower of Jesus Christ shows a change, at least in his behavior with respect to sin, to that which is bad in the eyes of that Jesus Christ who he claims to follow. A Christian, if he truly believes what he claims to believe, must be careful of what he says, of what he thinks and what he does. All of this must bear witness to what he claims to believe. He must live as Jesus Christ lived.
The first Christians wanted to follow Jesus Christ, that is, they wanted to live, die and rise as Jesus Christ. That only happened after they truly believed that Jesus Christ had risen.
 Historical fact.
The Christian leader dies executed during the first centuries.
Starting with the first leader. Jesus Christ is condemned by the Sanhedrin of the Jewish priests, elders and teachers, to a death in the cross for answering "I am. You will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of the sky" to the question “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?”57.
Paul, Peter, James and the first leaders are executed for believing that Jesus Christ is King, that he is the Meshiakh of Israel, the son of God.    They die following to the one who they believe is alive and is going to return.
After the destruction of the second Temple and the seige of Jerusalem, in the year 70 after Jesus Christ, the persecution of christians by the roman empire becomes systematic. The negation to make public sacrifices to a roman emperor, as if he were God, or any other false roman god was enough evidence against a christian, a follower of Jesus Christ, who of course refused to worship anything that was not the one true God, to be sentenced to death. He normally was interrogated and, if he admitted to being a Christian, he was sentenced to death. It didn't matter if he was Jewish or not. If he was a follower of Jesus Christ and he considered that Jesus Christ had a superior authority to the emperor, said follower was a threat to the empire.
During those early centuries, being a Christian could mean suffering a violent death. Obviously the main objectives of the roman empire were the most influential ones, the christian leaders.
A follower of Jesus Christ, a christian, is one because he follows the orders of their leader. That leader died without offering resistance, without opening his mouth, like a lamb to the slaughter. That leader dies forgiving and praying for his executors. That leader dies doing what he orders his followers to do: love their enemies and pray and plead for those who persecute them.

The persecution to death by the roman empire begins to stop at the beginning of the 4th century when most of the growth of followers is starting to happen among people who can read greek, those who can read the new testament, those same people who belong to the empire.
There is a division among those who think that a purge of the believers is in order and those who think that the movement should be integrated into the empire because it does not represent a threat to the roman empire. The empire ends up under the rule of an emperor who knew how to befriend the people who believed in integration to win the decisive battle.
The Christian leader is systematically executed during the first centuries. Historical fact.
Given the above logical and historical facts:
We have that in order to explain the GROWTH of the number of followers of Jesus Christ in the first centuries, it is easier believing that Jesus Christ is alive than believing that Jesus Christ is dead.
The only social movement in the entire history of mankind that has grown since its inception with the systematic elimination of its leaders, without them or their followers putting up violent resistance, leaders executed by the dominant system for the sole fact of believing that a dead man rose from the dead just to confirm his kingship, has been Christianity.
Since the punishment for being a believer was death, the only rational explanation, is that the believer actually believed that after his own death he was also going to be resurrected, that he was also going to live again, just as his leader did and that his promises will also happen to him.
For the first followers of Jesus Christ to be able to obey their leader, who commanded them to love their enemies and those whom persecute them, to the point of violent death and without responding with violence, the only possible explanation is that these first followers really believed that Jesus Christ is physically alive.
And for the death of a leader to INCREASE the number of believers, needs that those who did not believe before the death of the leader, those future believers, those new believers, will observe, experience something that would make them believe that the dead leader was not only convinced that he would be resurrected, but that they ALSO watched, experienced something that made them believe that they THEMSELVES would also be resurrected.
If I believe that my leader died believing something false, if I don't have something concrete, an experience, something logical, rational, that I consider real and trustworthy for ME ALSO, that I am also going to resurrect, it is going to be impossible for me to be willing to die for the sole fact that the leader was willing to die for something he believed to be true, or that even I think it was true for him, but not for me too.
If I only believe "poor looney, he was good people, it's a shame they killed him", or “how good FOR HIM because he will be resurrected, but I am not going to be resurrected”, then I will not be willing to die the same way. The movement could not GROW, INCREASE.
The movement grew because those who died really believed that they were going to resurrect. And those who did not believe before the death of the leader, later, at some point, they experienced something MORE than the simple death of a leader that believed something possibly false. And they ALSO began to believe that they would be resurrected.
Those new believers had to be experiencing, living, something that confirmed them experimentally, something reliable enough, enough to believe that the leader believed something true. Something that it is also true for that new believer. That Jesus Christ, the first executed, is alive, that the dead leader will also be resurrected, and that the new believer will also be resurrected.
If Jesus Christ is dead, to explain the GROWTH of christianity in the first centuries one is forced to believe that, all the followers of Jesus Christ, all those early followers, who died believing what they believed, without opening their mouths, without opposing violent resistance, loving their enemies, praying for them, that all of them, were just CRAZY. And that all current believers are just as crazy for believing in such an absurdity. It is required to assume that no authentic follower of Jesus Christ, the one who really believes that Jesus Christ is alive because he was resurrected in body and spirit, and wants, and tries, to live as Jesus Christ teaches us, that none of them, has rational capacity. That all of christianity, the authentic one, the one that really obeys its leader and is willing to die without offering resistance, the christianity that LOVES the enemy, that FORGIVES his murderers, his killers, that does it only because it really believes that Yeshua is going to resurrect them all, that such christianity which was born and grew up in the first centuries at the expense of dead leaders, without resisting, that ALL of it, is composed of a list of MENTAL people that includes their first leader, Jesus Christ. Believing THAT is harder than believing that Jesus Christ is alive because he was resurrected in body and spirit.
It is much easier to consider the possibility that Jesus Christ actually rose from the dead, that he is alive, that they saw him, they touched him, they ate fish with him, they continued to experience signs and wonders, which confirmed them that he is alive, that his promises are true, that we are going to be resurrected, that we will live eternally, that his spirit lives in the believer, that the same spirit that raised Jesus Christ from the dead lives in the believer, and that THAT is the real reason why they are willing to die loving, forgiving and praying for the one who is going to kill them.
It is easier to consider the possibility that the movement is not just "social", but it is also from God. A movement of Sons of the LIVING God, from the Creator of Heaven and Earth, from the creator of these bodies in which we live and therefore can remake them, can rebuild them. That He can RESURRECT us as He did with his son Jesus Christ.
We don't see people resurrecting. The buried bodies decompose and the cremated ones become dust. The dead are made dust in the grave, in the tomb. That is what we observe.
And if Jesus Christ was NOT resurrected, if he is not alive because he was resurrected in body and spirit, then the little book called the bible has to be thrown into the trash. All the bible would be false because everything points to that Meshiakh of Israel. Paul himself acknowledges this in 1 Corinthians 15 when he says that ”if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty” 58.
If we deny the logical:
If we deny that:
If we are going to call the human being intelligent, designer and creative, for all the planes, shoes, cell phones, cars, for all the technology that humanity has built,
Then we have to admit:
By logical necessity, that the complexity of the machinery that we observe in plants and animals requires a technology of someone much more intelligent, designer and creative than men. A creator.
Because:
Despite our intelligence, designs and creativity we cannot even build a cell. The minimum part of the biological machinery and we have no clue how to do it.
If we deny that which is logical,
Well, it is practically impossible to understand the historical fact that the direct witnesses died believing that Jesus Christ is alive because he resurrected.
BUT if we take into account that:
Then, it is much easier to believe that those direct WITNESSES, those who say who touched him, ate and talked with him, that they died believing that Jesus Christ is alive because he was resurrected in body and spirit.
So, from now on, we will try to understand the extraordinary events narrated in the bible under the light of current technology and of what we can logically project into the future. And not under the light of the technology we believe the biblical authors had. It is just logical. It is a better approximation to the technIcal creativity of the CREATOR.
That is: with more RESPECT for the biblical narratives. WITH MORE RESPECT. IS IT CLEAR?
In addition, there are several logical observations that argue against the falsity of the biblical testimonies about the resurrection of Jesus Christ, against being a fabrication of man.
Let's see:
The differences in details between the sources is an argument against the falsity of the gospels.
When several sources are exactly the same, it is possible to suspect that these sources agreed. In court proceedings this phenomenon is called “collusion”.
It is normal and to be expected that there will be small differences in the details between different sources, and that are essentially the same.
In the 4 gospels it is observed just that: essentially they are the same, although there are differences in details.
All the information in the gospels of names, places, economy, politics, chronology, topography, geography indicates direct knowledge by the authors. This fact is an argument against the falsity of the gospels.
The writings that are currently known as apocryphal, such as the so-called gospels of Thomas and Peter, are easily identifiable as false because they do not show knowledge or time, place, politics, or economy consistent with the alleged authors. They do not provide any information regarding the topographical, economic, political, geographical conditions. They do not give names of people or places that indicate knowledge of what was happening around the supposed author.
The gospels show an extraordinary coherence, much greater than any other text from the first millennium after Jesus Christ, in all those details. This only happens with texts written by people that lived what they wrote and that they wrote it when their memories were clear.
The 4 gospels have an abundant number of events in which the details complement and support each other. So in 1 gospel the details of an event are inexplicable without the details provided by other gospels. This fact is an argument against the falsity of the gospels.
An example is the case of Bethsaida. The only verse in all of Matthew in which Bethsaida is mentioned is in Matthew 11 and it names it as a place where great signs have happened. In John 1 and 12 Bethsaida is only mentioned in two verses to indicate that some disciples, Philip among them, were from that city. And, by a literal reading of Mark 6, the wonder of feeding 5000 families with 5 loaves and 2 fishes happens before Jesus Christ and his disciples arrived at Bethsaida. According to Mark 6, once the multitude is fed, Jesus sends his disciples on a boat to cross the lake to reach Bethsaida while he bids farewell to the crowd that had come from various cities and he catches up with them at the end of the night in the middle of the lake. And, by a literal reading of Luke 9, the event takes place on the outskirts of Bethsaida. Only taking the gospels together can we understand that Jesus and his disciples left Bethsaida because there was a congestion of people coming and going and understand the reason why Jesus asks Philip, according to John 6, where they could buy bread to feed the 5,000 families: Philip was from Bethsaida. And only with John 6, which informs us that it was close to Passover time, we can understand why, according to Mark 6, there was such a congestion of people coming and going and the inadvertently mentioned detail that the event happened on green grass. Jewish Passover is in spring and all the men of Israel must go up to Jerusalem.
The gospels are interdependent: they support and complement each other. Each match exponentially decreases the statistical probability that these are planned by the authors. This type of internal evidence is exponentially cumulative.
The fact that the 4 evangelists were alive when the events took place is an argument against the falsity of the biblical testimonies about the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Myths and legends are generated with centuries of difference between the moment in which the events take place and the authors of the narrations.
The fact that the authors were alive when the events took place it is a very strong argument against it being a legend or a myth.
From the very day the witnesses spoke, ate and touched the Risen Jesus Christ they began to spread the story.
Myths and legends begin centuries after the events.
The spread of the testimony beginning in Jerusalem is an argument against the falsity of the biblical testimonies about the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The myths and legends, as well as the false narratives of the ancient world, they do not start on the scene. They start where hardly anyone or no one can testify against due to lack of information.
The resurrection story begins on the scene: It begins in Jerusalem.
That the testimonies we have today are equal to the oldest manuscripts is an argument against the falsity of the biblical testimonies about the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The testimony has been the same from the beginning: Jesus Christ is alive because he rose on the third day.
On the third day after his death, early in the morning, some women went to the tomb and found it empty. Some angels tell the women to go and tell that the dead has risen and is alive. They, out of fear, decide not to tell anyone except the apostles. Mary Magdalene and others meet Peter and John first and tell them what happened. Some return to the tomb with Peter and John, the rest of the women continue to seek for the others to tell them. The two men run and reach the grave before the women, still incredulous of what happened, but they do not see angels only the empty tomb and the cloth with which they covered him. Some women stay a little longer than the two men and Yeshua appears for the first time to Mary Magdalene and the others who also stayed. They return to tell everyone that this time they huged Yeshua and they don't believe them either. Some time later He appears for the first time to a man: He appears to Simon Peter also known as Cephas. And that afternoon Jesus Christ appears to two men on their way to Emmaus, who only end up recognizing him when they arrive at their destination. At which point he disappears in front of them. They rush back to Jerusalem. That night they find the apostles and other followers gathered behind closed doors. Since they tell the travelers what happened to Peter, the travelers tell them what happened to them in their way to Emmaus. At that instant, Yeshua appears among them. He sees that they are paralyzed with fear and invites them to touch him and shows them that he has flesh and bones, that he is not a spirit. They go into a state of euphoria and they just can't believe what is happening. So he eats grilled fish before them and explains the scriptures to them in the same way that he had done with the two travelers to Emmaus. He explains that it had to happen. That everything is written. Thomas was not there. He is late. They tell him but he does not believe. He says that until he touches his wounds and sticks his finger on his side he won't believe.
And that's it. That is the testimony of that first day of the week. Jesus Christ is alive because he rose on the third day.
From that day until today it has not changed. Always the same.
Of course, this narration, which is consistent with the narrations of the gospels is mine. That is precisely the point. In the case of original sources, despite being slightly different from each other, are consistent with each other, otherwise I could not draw my own version consistently with the Gospels.
False testimonies change according to the intention of the liar. Especially if the lie is very difficult to believe and you want them to believe it. Lies get bigger, or they mutate according to the convenience of the moment.
That does not happen with a truth. If you believe it, fine, if not, it is your loss. Which is precisely what has happened with the resurrection of Christ. He is alive because he was resurrected in body and spirit.
Listing names of witnesses to the resurrection is an argument against the falsity of the biblical testimonies about the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The new testament gives lists of people who ate, talked and touched Jesus Christ after resurrecting. Listing names is invitation to investigate the facts, to confirm the facts. those names are given while people are still alive. False testimonials tend to be ambiguous and diffuse in the information so that they cannot be easily contradicted.
The fact that the first witnesses are women is an argument against the falsity of the biblical testimonies about the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
For a Jew of the time of Yeshua, the testimony of a woman had no statutory value. It wasn't relevant.
The fact that the testimonies of the gospels agree that the first people to see Yeshua resurrected were women is an indication of truth in the testimony. This fact shows that the intention of the testimonials is not to convince the listener but simply to tell the truth. What actually happened.
To ask a Jewish woman what happened, at times of Jesus Christ, was like asking the family dog. His testimony was simply irrelevant. If the intention was to convince the other Jews relying on prejudices of the time, they made a lousy job. The alternative is that it is just what happened.
The fact that there are appearances to groups is an argument against the falsity of the biblical testimonies about the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
In several passages of the new testament the testimony is that Jesus Christ appeared to several people at the same time. They touch him, eat with him, they walked and talked with him. Several people at the same time. They remember and he remembers them. He recognizes them and they recognize him. The recall of the apparition remains the same through time and the person is willing to keep his testimony at the cost of great suffering and even death.
That doesn't happen with hallucinations. I repeat: THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN WITH HALLUCINATIONS.
The fact that most of the first witnesses lost everything by believing in Jesus Christ is an argument against the falsity of the biblical testimonies about the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus were members of the Sanhedrin. for being believers in Yeshua they lost everything. They lost their money, their position and their family rejected them.
Even today for a Jew, believing in Yeshua implies great sacrifices. It implies losing your previous life. In the vast majority of cases he suffers family rejection and the rejection of other Jews.
But the testimony indicates that these people were willing to stand by their word that Yeshua is alive, because he was resurrected in body and spirit, at the cost to be imprisoned, flogged, stoned, boiled in oil, crucified or behead.
That doesn't happen with someone who makes up a lie that to keep it means dying.
The inexistence of testimonies that contradict the disappearance of the dead body of Jesus Christ is an argument against the falsity of the biblical testimonies about the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ had anticipated his resurrection, the Jews knew of this and that is why they requested to place guards at the tomb. To end the testimonies of a resurrection, the only thing that the jewish or roman authorities had to do was to present the body of the deceased to stop the alleged lie. It was in the interest of both authorities to stop the movement. For the Jews for the same reason they killed him, prevent that they believed in the Son of YHWH. And for the romans to avoid the political disturbances. But the response of the Jews was to persecute those who believed the supposed lie and the response of the romans was silence.
And the followers were the ones who suffered the most with this alleged lie. They did not even have to confess where was the body they had supposedly hidden or destroyed in order to stop the persecution. It was simply enough for them to confess that they did not believe what they believed, that Yeshua was the Meshiakh of Israel and that he is alive because he is risen, to stop the persecution. They didn't.
The movement increased without even appearing a body impersonating the dead one.
Furthermore, according to the testimony of the gospels, the religious leaders implicitly accepted the disappearance of the body when they claimed that the disciples had stolen the body to explain the disappearance. If the Jews spread that lie early, then that is the reason why later they did not try an impersonation. If we say that the disciples stole it and destroyed it, then it does not make any sense that afterwards we end up finding the body that others destroyed.
The body of a dead man who was supposedly resurrected does not disappear so easily especially if his grave is guarded by those who killed him.
The fact that embarrassing events are claimed by the witnesses is an argument against the falsity of the biblical testimonies about the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The testimonies of the gospels show some witnesses who abandoned their leader, who denied knowing him while they were prosecuting him and that even after he was resurrected they refused to believe until they touched his hand and foot wounds and stick their hand on the side that they had seen pierced by a roman spear. They recognize that he appeared first to women and that the men did not believe them when they told them what happened.
Acknowledging embarrassing issues is a positive criterion for determining the credibility of a testimony in a judicial or historical method.
Believing in airplanes today is not hard, but a thousand years ago talking about a machine that flies, that has wings like birds, that is made of metal, that weights tons, that carries people on its inside sitting, that flies ten times faster than a dove, and that some day, hundreds of thousands of such machines would be built to travel great distances, was quite difficult. Perhaps it would be necessary to see an airplane in operation to believe it.
Something like this seems to be what happened to the first believers, they saw something really extraordinary. Something that only the creator could have done. They saw a dead man who had come back to life. Just as Yeshua had anticipated before he died. As it was written more than 500 years before. They ate with him, touched him, hugged him, talked to him, and walked with him. That's why they believed what they believed and that's why they changed how they changed.
Me personally, I cannot stop believing it anymore. It is already something real. For me it is already a faith. But the reasons stated here are not the only ones. So far the reasons have been rational. But the reasons are becoming experimental and more logical reasons are found and more physical evidence. The reasons feed off each other. You start a new life. You are born again. You begin to live what you believe. It is a battle. Paul calls it the good fight.
Once I begin to believe that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is something possible, something even feasible, it can start a radical change in the way I see life. Because death is no longer the end, life becomes eternal, because it continues after the resurrection, and priorities change.
I say "it can" because it depends on how much the one who is alive, the one who is in the sky that we see, the one who loves me, the one who looks for me, is finding me.
But the promise is that He will find us, because AFTER the resurrection of the dead, when we physically meet again face to face with the people that we have hurt and with those who have hurt us, it will be impossible to say:
"No, no. I just do not believe in the resurrection of the dead”.
After your resurrection, you will remember this presentation. You will remember me and all the people with whom you interacted, one way or another, before your resurrection.
We're going to see each other again.
When they asked Jesus Christ, according to John 6: “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” 59. Yeshua answers: “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent” 60.
Believe in the one that God has sent. But what is the minimum to be able to call someone a believer? What is the minimum to believe in the one who God has sent? To do the works of God?
Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15 that: “And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty” 62.
Which is the climax of Paul's explanation of what seems to be a kind of song, canticle, chant, recitation, creed, which was already repeated among believers at the time of writing 1st Corinthians, a song that says: “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures” 63.
The good news, the gospel, Faith in Yeshua, is summed up in that canticle, in that recitation, in that initial creed quoted in 1st Corinthians 15.
That is the base, that is the beginning, that is the foundation. That's the faith of the believer in Yeshua, the one commonly called Christian. It's what should unite all believers regardless of their understanding of the rest of the writings and the state of their development as new creature in Christ Jesus.
The believer begins to be a believer when he believes that Jesus Christ, Yeshua, is alive because he was resurrected in body and spirit according to the scriptures. I repeat, according to the SCRIPTURES.
The scriptures that Paul speaks of in 1 Corinthians 15, when proclaims the Christian faith by saying that “Christ DIED for our SINS according to the Scriptures, and that He was BURIED, and that He ROSE again the third day according to the SCRIPTURES” 64, are the scriptures that he knew as a Pharisee, as a hebrew, as a Jew. They are the hebrew scriptures, the tanakh.
Jesus Christ after resurrected, according to Luke 24, explains the scriptures, the tanakh, to two disciples on their way to a village called Emmaus. Luke tells that: “Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them the things written about himself in all the scriptures” 65. And later that night when they were meeting with the apostles tells them “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled” 66. The word Tanakh is precisely the abbreviation of Torah, Neviim and Ketuvim, the hebrew words for the books of Moses, the books of the prophets, and a book of writings that include the Psalms.
These explanations that Jesus Christ makes to his disciples and apostles, and all the explanations that Paul does to the Jews in different parts of the Mediterranean, are AFTER the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
If a Jew does not believe that Jesus Christ was resurrected, it is impossible for him to come to understand that the entire Tanakh, absolutely ALL the Tanakh, points to his Meshiakh, the Meshiakh of Israel: from Adam and Eve, through the patriarchs, judges, and kings, to the last of the prophets. ALL of the Tanakh points to the Meshiakh of Israel. He won't be able to do it because he does not have the Spirit that allows him to believe in his Meshiakh. That is why Jesus Christ only explained the Tanakh, and the way in which the Meshiakh of Israel completes it, explains it, fulfills it, to those who saw Him risen, AFTER seeing Him risen.

From this point on, this is a presentation of the best understanding that Jose Luis Quiroga has of the scriptures, of the bible, until today, year 2022, based on more than 20 years of reading the scriptures, more than 15 years of study of them, and more than 10 years of study based on the codification of the bible in hebrew and greek idioms made by Mr James Strong. Study made with the intention to clarify the inconsistencies generated by interpretations in other languages. Study that takes into account the different points of view that are found on the Internet and that makes use of the information processing techniques that the author knows due to his professional technical training.
The author reserves the right to be COMPLETELY wrong and to change his position at any time without the slightest feeling of guilt or condemnation, if the Spirit that gives him Life shows him that it is wrong.
It is your responsibility, if you are really interested, to study for yourself the scriptures and come to your own conclusions.
This warning is also an invitation for you to not only read, but also seek to understand the original scriptures by yourself. You don't need to speak hebrew or greek for that, you just need the Internet. A site that I recommend is biblehub.com because it has the entire bible encoded in Strong codes, so that the original bible can be navigated in different ways and understand the original scriptures in hebrew, the language in which the original hebrew authors thought when they wrote their books under the inspiration of the Spirit of the Living God.
According to the bible, Yeshua is Lord.
In John 3, John the Baptist says that: “The Father loves the Son, and has given ALL things into His hand” 67.
In Hebrews 1 its author tells us, speaking of Jesus Christ, that: “whom He has appointed heir of ALL things, through whom also He made the WORLDS” 68.
And Paul affirms in Ephesians 10 that God's plan is that: “He might gather together in one ALL things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth” 69.
Paul also explains in Colossians 1 that Jesus Christ: “is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over ALL creation. For by Him ALL things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. ALL things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before ALL things, and in Him ALL things consist” 70.
So Jesus Christ was the first and THROUGH Him everything was created, listen EVERYTHING, all of it, the whole thing, TODO, todito, todo. And everything, all of it, the whole thing, was created FOR Him. And IN Him all things consist.
And according to Matthew 11 Yeshua himself tells us that: “ALL things have been delivered to Me by My Father” 71.
And in 1 Corinthians 15 Paul explains that God: “has put all things under His feet. But when He says ‘all things are put under Him,’ it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted” 72, meaning the Father is not under the Son’s feet.
That means everything, all of it, the whole thing, TODO, todito, todo, except the Father himself. That's why in the entire New Testament, Yeshua is called "our Lord."
And just to be clear about what is included when it says "all things" in Deuteronomy 10 can be read that: “Indeed heaven and the highest heavens belong to the Lord your God, also the earth with ALL that is in it” 73.
All things are his because he made them, according to Nehemiah 9: "You alone are the Lord; You have made heaven, The heaven of heavens, with all their host, The earth and everything on it, The seas and all that is in them, And You preserve them all. The host of heaven worships You” 74. Not only He made them but he keeps them running.
In 1st Kings 8 it tells us that: “Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain thee” 75. Not even the heaven of heavens can contain the Father. And he repeats it to us in 2nd Chronicles 2 76 and in 2nd Chronicles 6 77.
And in psalm 68 he also tells us about the heaven of heavens 78. And in Psalm 148 says that: "Praise Him, you heavens of heavens, And you waters above the heavens!” 79.
In several of them a difference is made between the heavens and the heaven of the heavens. And according to Nehemiah, YHWH, the Father, also made them and not only made them but He "preserves" them.
Of course the angels are part of "all things" and since Yeshua, according to Mark 12, tells us that we will be like the angels in heaven 80. It seems like a good idea to know what the bible says about these characters.
The angels, or messengers of YHWH, according to the bible, look and act exactly like men. According to Genesis 18, when Abraham was in front of his tent, some men suddenly appear, next to him, that he recognizes and calls them YHWH and then the bible calls them with the hebrew word for angels. In this passage of the bible we can see that these characters talk, eat and walk 81 and that the bible uses the hebrew words for "men", "YHWH" and "angels" to refer to them. In Genesis 19, just before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, we see that they can also have sex and in Genesis 32 an angel fights with Jacob 82. The angel touches him and Jacob is left lame. In 1 Kings 19 an angel touches Elijah several times 83. And in Zechariah 4 an angel shakes Zechariah to wake him up 84. Angels have a physical body. Such as Jesus Christ after resurrected. Philippians 3 says that Jesus Christ “will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body" 85. And they can also kill people. In 2nd Kings 19 a single angel kills 185 thousand people in one night 86.
But remember that it is not the only thing they can do. According to 1 Chronicles 21, they can float between heaven and earth 87. Similar to how Yeshua himself was lifted to heaven, after being resurrected, according to Acts 1 88.
Angels can appear from one moment to another in any place, just like Yeshua himself, according to Luke 24 and John 20, who appears in the midst of the apostles, being these behind closed doors 89. Something similar to the teleportation shown by science fiction movies. Thus, angels apparently do not need to walk to get from one place to another.
They can also become invisible to some eyes and at the same time visible to other eyes as happened to Balaam and his donkey 90 in Numbers 22 or as happened to Elisha and his servant in 2nd Kings 6.
Furthermore, John says of his vision of Heaven in Revelation 5 that: “I looked and heard the voice of many angels in a circle around the throne, as well as the living creatures and the elders. Their number was ten thousand times ten thousand" 92, so there are quite a few angels. In fact, according to Jeremiah 33 they can not even be counted 93.
In Nehemiah 9 we are told that: “you keep giving all of them life, and the army of heaven continuously worships you” 94. And Jesus Christ, according to Matthew 26, tells Peter who tries to defend Jesus when they come to arrest Him: “Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?” 95. Armies and legions of angels. They are definitely organized.
In Joshua 5 we are told that: “the Commander of the Lord’s army said to Joshua, ‘Take your sandal off your foot, for the place where you stand is holy.’ And Joshua did so” 96. They have a Chief of their army.
And the author of Hebrews explains to us in Hebrews 1 that Yeshua, Jesus Christ, was made superior to the angels and inherited a name more excellent than theirs, because God never said of an angel: “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You”, and he never said of an angel “I will be to Him a Father, And He shall be to Me a Son” and furthermore God commands: “all the angels of God worship Him” 97 quoting Psalms 2 98, 1st Chronicles 17 99 and 2nd Samuel 7 100.
Yeshua is Lord of everything, all of it, the whole thing, except the Father who was the one He gave him everything, all of it, the whole thing, TODO, todito, todo.
What angels do NOT have are wings. Nowhere in the bible we are told that angels have wings. Angels are indistinguishable in appearance from a descendant of Adam and Eve, of a person born on this planet. According to Hebrews 13: “some have unwittingly entertained angels” 101. They are indistinguishable.
Those who do have wings are the Serafim of Isaiah 6, the Cherubim of Ezekiel and the living creatures or animals of Revelation 4. 3 different names for the same creatures that surround the throne of God 102. But another meaning of the hebrew word is “extremity” 103, so they can easily be something other than wings as we see in birds.
In these 4 creatures, that John tells us about, it seems that the 6 extremities 104 correspond with those of Isaiah 105 and with those of Ezekiel 106 if 2 are calf feet with some wing structure, 2 are arms with some wing structure and 2 are wings as we see in eagles.
These creatures seem to be simple animals more than any other thing. These creatures do not appear to be very intelligent or have awareness. The most they do is repeat a phrase like parrots 107, or pass an object 108. Also when they do this, it only happens in a vision and not in a narrative that describes physical events. In these tasks, as intelligent as a dog or a parrot. In fact some times they function as watchdogs according to Genesis 3 109. Or protectors, according to Ezekiel 28 110, which directly compares the king of Tyre, and the Satan indirectly, with one of these animals, perhaps because the Satan was from the heavenly council, that is, very close to YHWH.
The translation of Seraf, the singular of Serafim, is serpent. An animal. And 3 of the total of 4 faces that the Cherubim have are of an animal: one is of an eagle, one is of a calf and one is of a lion. And his legs are from calf, although they also appear to have some wing structure. Also, according to Psalm 18, YHWH likes to ride them 111.
Powerful animals, very intelligent, for animals, and very beautiful, but animals after all. Some kind of heavenly pets. Creatures that only the creator could have designed because according to Ezekiel they seem to have the body of a man 112 and have extraordinary capacities like changing their face to any of 4 possible 113. A kind of biological transformers. They emit light that comes from their interior that appears to be like burning coals of fire 114. One of them even take with their hand of said fire inside them and give it to a man dressed in linen 115. And, according to Ezekiel 1, they run like the lightning 116.
Powerful animals but animals after all.
The bible describes creation, or what the author of Hebrews 9 calls “THIS creation” 117, in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2.
Many people try to reconcile what the text of Genesis says with the ideas of a religion that passes itself off as science. Or with preconceived ideas of what the text narrates.
But there is really no need if we read the text as it is.
And if we do not deny what is logically obvious: That there HAS to be a creator.
And let's remember that it HAS to exist because
If we are going to call the human being intelligent, designer and creative, for all planes, shoes, cell phones, cars, for all the technology, that men has built,
We have to
To admit, by logical necessity, that the complexity of the biological machinery that we observe in plants and animals requires a technology of someone much more intelligent, designer and creative than the human being. A creator.
It is simple observation and logic.
That is why, let us remember that in this presentation we seek to understand the extraordinary events narrated in the bible under the light of current technology and that which we can logically project into the future. And not under the light of the technology that we believe the biblical authors had. That’s the logical thing to do. It is a better approximation to the technical creativity of the Creator. The evidence shows us that it is much more advanced.
Doing this and studying a bit of the original hebrew, the description of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 can be understood consistently with futuristic projections of the current technology of man.
The first verse specifies for us that it is going to speak about two parts: the shamayim, translated as the heavens, and the earth. “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth” 118.
Here it is important to clarify that the hebrew word for creating also accepts the idea of building, organizing, shaping, assembling.
In the next verse we see that there were things pre-existing to what he is about to create, organize or assemble: “And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters” 119. There was already an “earth without form”, a “deep” and some “waters”. And everything was dark and messy. It is not difficult to imagine a planet full of water but empty and dark from the lack of a transparent atmosphere.
It is evident the multiple interdependence of plants, animals and the environment. The functioning of the biological machinery depends mutually, in multiple ways, of other biological machines, that is why they are called “ecosystems”. But there is also a dependency on the enviroment. The biological machinery of this planet can only function at certain temperatures, certain atmospheric pressures, some only in presence of oxygen, of air, because they need to breathe, many of them need to consume water to continue functioning. The whole biological system of the planet depends on characteristics present only on this planet.
Thus, it is not difficult to imagine that everything had to be put in operation in a period of time that would allow the global system to start without collapsing. A span of time like the one described in Genesis 1 and 2: 6 spins of the planet on its axis. 6 days. Period.
The third verse of the bible tells us what Elohim did on the first day: “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light” 120. If we follow the established context, it is the moment in which the creator gives the command to use His highly advanced technology to generate an atmosphere that allows the passage of light so that it is possible to begin to differentiate day from night. The process starts and it takes no more than one rotation of this planet on its axis before it is possible to distinguish the two states: one of light and one of darkness.
The sixth verse sums up the second day for us: ”Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters” 121. Following the given context, it is the moment in which the order to create, according to a pre-established design, a separation of waters, one body of water is under the expanse directly on the planet and the other body of water above the expanse in an outer orbit. To the space between the two masses of water, to that expanse, he calls it "shamaim" which is translated "heavens".
On the third day Elohim separates the dry from the lower body of water, the one under the heavens. If the text is reconciled with the physical evidence that we observe even today, even after the times of Noah, the process generates a granite shell around the planet that has an interconnected subterranean ocean below and with large shallow lakes over said shell. Upon said shell of granite, the creator appears, or using cinematographic terminology: tele-generated by globalized parallel atomic copy, all vegetation, all the plants, already mature, with which he had thought to start the reproductive process of the plant kingdom.
The fourth day He modifies the atmosphere enough so that it can be observed the sun during the day and the moon and stars at night. It is to be observed that objects external to the atmosphere already physically existed. The plasma candle that we call the sun and the quasi-spherical object that reflects the light coming from the sun that we call moon, they already physically existed. What he creates at this moment, what he shapes, organizes, arranges, are the lights, or luminaries in some translations. He creates them through the physical transformations in temperature, distance, rotation, and so on, which are necessary to keep the biological machinery on the planet running.
On the fifth day Elohim gives the command to create all the aquatic animals adults and adult birds with which He decided, during the design stage, start the reproductive process of these animals. And he did it in similar manner to how he created all the vegetation on the planet: by globalized parallel atomic tele-copying, in cinematographic terminology. In other words, a three-dimensional and parallel atomic copy-paste.