Settle down and look at the facts.
atrib:
. . . it always required centuries for the miracle legends to become established in the culture. We can't find evidence to show otherwise even though we've desperately searched everywhere.
A story about a resurrected corpse flying off into the sky under its own power does . . .
What is this flying corpse nightmare you keep having?
The Jesus story is about the instant healing acts, and also about the resurrection event. The latter is reported in 5 sources, which makes it credible, with no evidence contradicting it. And the miracle healings are reported in 4 sources. His bodily ascension into the sky is less certain, being mainly from one source only. It isn't essential that the bodily ascension must have happened rather than being an embellishment added to the basic resurrection event. Either way, what's important is the overcoming of death as shown in the physical resurrection, even if this possibly was embellished later by the ascension story being added.
. . . does NOT become credible just because someone wrote a story about it decades later, and some other people copied the story even later and . . .
Yes it does become credible when later sources report it, just as all our reported historical events become credible because they are reported in sources from the time. Without these later sources, usually decades later, or even 100+ years later, we would not have our ancient history events which virtually all are known to us from such later sources. Usually they are known to us in only 1 source, and sometimes 2. Rarely are they known to us from sources contemporary to the reported events, but usually many "decades later" than the events happened.
And all of them are "copied" from someone later, seldom reported directly from the first writer. At least 3 of our sources for the Resurrection are not copied from each other but are totally separate. But even when an account did copy from an earlier account, this doesn't undermine the credibility at all. It shows that the writer is careful to rely on earlier written reports rather than try to remember an oral report, and rather than inventing or paraphrasing something he's not sure about. That they copied from the earlier account shows they are being careful to get the correct facts rather than risk making an error.
There's no reported event in the historical sources which is rejected or considered less credible because the writer copied something from an earlier source.
. . . copied the story even later and changed/embellished it. It is not reasonable to believe in resurrected flying corpses. Period.
Getting hysterical and sensationalist about the "flying corpses" is irrelevant to the point. This is not what the Resurrection event is about. It's possible the ascension is a later embellishment, but either way it doesn't matter. We have 5 sources for the Resurrection, or his physical return to life and rising from the grave and being seen alive by many witnesses. Being reported in 5 sources near the time, rather than 500 or 1000 years later as was the norm for ancient miracle myths, makes this reported event credible by comparison to most miracle legends which are fiction.
You have to address this point instead of repeatedly going bezirk over the "flying corpses" you're having nightmares about.
. . . Myths often take very little time to develop, for example, the cargo cult mythology in certain Asian and Pacific islander communities . . .
These are irrelevant. These are not about any reported miracle events or acts by miracle-workers. Our topic here is about miracle myths, or reports of superhuman or supernatural acts, or something so unusual that it defies normal experience and is unexplained by current known science. This is not what the "cargo cult" myths are about.
Such reported miracle acts or miracle events, where the gods send something that strikes 1000 soldiers dead, or an Egyptian Pharaoh's dead body is brought back together so he can have sex with his wife, etc., are legends which evolve over many centuries and do not suddenly appear within a few years. Not even within 100 years. You don't have any examples of such instant miracle events, or instant miracle-workers.
And we know that the mythology involving a savior human creature who overcame death or a great passion to come back to save his followers is common in that part of the world at the time the Jesus mythology originated, and had been around . . .
No, if that were true you would have found an example of it and provided the ancient text which narrates it. There were no such savior humans in the ancient literature, especially not the period approaching the time of Jesus. Of course you've been told there were such reported miracle saviors by gurus you believe who did not give you any evidence, because you just wanted to believe them, and you no doubt have a list of names of ancient deities or "divine men" or saviors you think fit this description.
But what you do not have is any ancient text (such as we have 1st-century written accounts reporting the Jesus miracle acts) which report anyone of the time who "overcame death" or performed other miracle acts. All you have are some legends from poets or other writers eulogizing an ancient deity 1000+ years earlier than when the writer lived. Yes, there were 1000-year-old legends about the ancient deities. But no written accounts of such miracle-workers during the period when the poet or writer eulogized the ancient miracle-working deity. You need to do your homework and figure this out, about the dating, about when the alleged miracle happened compared to when the later poet wrote about it.
. . . had been around for centuries prior to alleged Jesus.
Yes, Homer and other earlier poets wrote about ancient miracle myths 500 years earlier than when they wrote about them. Those are the miracle legends which required centuries to evolve in the culture. There are many such ancient miracles reported 500 or 1000 years after they allegedly happened. The ancient pagan worshipers and their poets did eulogize the ancient deities. But not any recent miracle-worker charlatans near their time. There were some charlatans, but no writers reported on them other than a few cases they reported as charlatans.
(this Wall of Text to be continued)
