The resurrection of Christ was fabricated, added in later stuff.

The reasons why I say they were fabricated, is not because I deny the crucifixion of Jesus, but because of the earliest writer, Paul, is way different to the gospels, and let me point out why to prove fabrication. 1. Paul never speaks of the empty tomb and the question to you is why would he not say this if he wants to make people believe in a physical resurrection? 2. No physical resurrection and appearances but written in a spiritual way because that was what there religion was then. It's belief was that when you die you get raised in a spiritual body and go to heaven, this indicates where the soul and heaven belief in Christianity originated from, and to back this up here are some things Paul says. .. .. -It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. -If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ was raised. -He says that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven -He says you are born perishable, but are raised Imperishable 3. Paul said Jesus first appeared to Peter, yet the gospels say it was women 4. Paul says that Judas did not hang himself, but was still alive (contradicts what matt says) 5. Mark, the first gospel writer, has no mention of the resurrection 6. No historians during the time Jesus lived mention him, only later ones such as Josephus written 95AD and there is some forgery in that one. So this is just some of the proof (There's more), proving my point that the resurrection was just a fabrication of orals that turned the spiritual resurrection to form the physical legend. Put it this way, Paul the earliest writer, wrote some time around 50-57 AD, so 20 years after Jesus died, writes of things that differ greatly to the gospels that were written 65-110AD, which I just mentioned. Also the first Gospel mentions of no resurrection, yet the later ones do. So this is crystal clear proof that as time went on, people added in stuff. There are also some problems with the stories such as. .. -There was no third day prophecy in the Old Testament -The messiah was ment to be a super soldier to defeat the Romans but instead tries to pacify them. As for what you said about Romans persecuting Christians, that is an incredible exaggeration and that is because. .. -There were periods of time when the Christians were more secure -The first actual persecution happened by Emperor Nero in 64 AD (That is after the stories were first made), and this persecution was only in the local areas of Rome -It was not until Decius (249-251), did any ruler order an empire wide persecution against Christians as you described and imagined ( Roman empires a big place so lots of places to hide). -Out of the 54 emperors, only a dozen actually harassed Christians. -Out of 300 years the Christians were 10-12 years of scattered times when they were singled out for persecution and even then, the level of how bad it was depends on which region of the massive empire were it ranged from ok to dangerous. -Most stories of matyr were a complete invention of the church, and even the most historical have some things that were added in. -Christians did hold office. So the Christians weren't persecuted for the whole 300 years, empire-wide, but only had scattered periods with the first persecution in 64AD.