There’s been a recent debate on twitter over the question of whether one must believe in the physical resurrection in order to be a Christian.
The responses have ranged from the extreme
The teaching that Jesus is not risen bodily from the dead is from the spirit of Antichrist. It is damnable heresy, and merits excommunication from the visible church absent repentance, for which we pray. A church that teaches this heresy is a Synagogue of Satan. A pastor who preaches it is Antichrist.
To the more mild rebuke
Folks are debating whether the literal resurrection of Christ is an essential doctrine of the Christian faith. Beloved, if you don’t believe in the physical resurrection of Christ you’re not a Christian, you’ve adopting another faith.
If you look on Twitter for literal resurrection, physical resurrection and bodily resurrection you can find and endless number of posts making a similar point. Along with the assertion that is this is indeed the consensus of Christian faith.
The nature of the actual physical bodily Resurrection is one of airtight ecumenical consensus…every creed, confessional document is unanimous. It’s basic Christianity, a true, undisputed boundary.
“He drew a circle that shut me out-
Heretic , rebel, a thing to flout.
But love and I had the wit to win:
We drew a circle and took him In !
From the poem ” Outwitted”
―

Christians are a Juqaicised form of Mithras worship which predates Christianity and is the same story! Happy Mithras on Dec 25!
Point 1 is subject to attack.
First, on philosophical grounds: Science cannot disprove anything except its own theories. That something hasn’t been observed doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist.
Science must account for all observed phenomena. There are obvious aspects of material reality that science cannot explain, such as “Why do particles have different masses?” Given that, why should we believe theories that say that spiritual phenomena are impossible?
What is even sadder is when eye-witness accounts of phenomena are discounted because science can’t explain them. Past-lives, out-of-body experiences, etc.: All were considered an active part of human experience until the 20th century, when science began telling us that only crazy people had such experiences.
And without the resurrection, why would this one prophet have had any significance? Why would all of the Apostles except one have gone to their deaths testifying to the truth of the event? Something unusual must have happened.
Eventually it boils down to ego: “I didn’t see it, so it isn’t real.”