Wrong, I believe there is ample scientific evidence there is a higher power. It is only your opinion that there is no evidence. I will not reply to your attempt to derail this thread because you cannot provide evidence to support the OP.
Scientific evidence for a higher power? Fascinating. Go ahead and derail the thread if you have such evidence.
We already discussed my error. Whether you believe my explanation is not evidence on of the validity of your OP. Your attempt to derail your own thread is evidence you do not have anything to back it up.
Wouldn't you be employing the slippery-slope fallacy here?
Then how did they know the body was no longer in the sepulcher? They knew and reported it because they investigated.
The Bible does not say this.
You cannot explain this. That is why you play this game of pretending you will when we "catch up".
I'll make you explain it for me. Read Matthew, or any gospel, and count how many times people were skeptical of Jesus. I'll start you off by noting that even one of his own disciples doubted the resurrection. So when you see how doubted he was in his own life, it is curious that no one outside of his circle doubted the resurrection enough to go look at the tomb. I would think Thomas eventually would have gone to look for himself had Jesus not appeared to him. Peter certainly went to see for himself. Was that moronic of him?
To clarify:
A slippery slope fallacy is when you say because event A happened then event B will follow and you have no evidence that event B always follows event A. I do not base my evidence of there being an investigation on the premise that an investigation would follow an unexplained phenomenon. However since we both agree that an investigation would follow the events that took place on Easter Sunday then it would not be a slippery slope argument to posit that premise. I based my evidence on the verse that says the guards reported the events to the chief priest. How could they report the body was missing if they didn’t investigate the sepulcher? You agreed with me that the investigative tools available to the guards would have simply been their observation.
I repeat the slippery slope fallacy you made because you have yet to offer a defense for making the fallacious argument. Instead you continue to demonstrate that you do not grasp the concept of that fallacy. This is the crux of your argument and you are held responsible to defend that position. The challenge remains.
Once again, the Bible doesn't say the guards looked in the tomb. To assume so is erroneous. It is quite clear, reading the four Gospels, that this sequence occurred:
1. Angel appears to guards
2. Women arrive, guards not present, one or more angels present
My reasoning for this is that the guards never interact with the women. Either because they were already gone or because they were "like dead men."
So if the guards were terrified of the angels, are you suggesting one of them said, "Pardon me, sir(s), whilst I peek into the sepulcher to ascertain the status of the corpse we are charged to guard"?
Simply put, you have not thought this through.