There are some people who claim the resurrection was physical , and others that claim it was spiritual. Do you subscribe to one or the other, or do you discount the entire thing?
And, is it something that just Jesus has gone through, rather than other people who were 'raised from the dead', such as Lazarus?
It is not necessarily about discount. But speaking of the story of Jesus we are talking about a physical resurrection that became spiritual as well. Now there are a few different takes on this, and we do need to at least acknowledge the potential pitfalls of translations and splintering of Christianity, but according to at least Luke those that went to the tomb where Jesus was placed found the heavy stone covering the entry to the tomb rolled away and they also did not find the body of Jesus. So according to that story physically and perhaps spiritually as well Jesus was gone. The remains of Jesus were not discovered suggesting an aspect to the story that perhaps does not fit in the confines of saying it was physical only or it was spiritual only.
Now Lazarus is only mentioned by John, and in that story you do have a more physical aspect to the condition where Jesus brought Lazarus back to life four days after his burial. Theology is mixed on the meaning of the story. Some suggest it was a prelude, a reason among many, for Jesus' own crucifixion. Others suggest it became apart of a bigger conspiracy to kill Jesus, the witnesses to Lazarus' resurrection became central to local council (Roman) and local priests (Judaism) to then kill Jesus. Either way, there is little comparison between the resurrection of Jesus and Jesus' act in the resurrection of Lazarus because of the meaning. Again, consider the theology of the story not to much the practical aspect of it in philosophical terms. Most of the scripture of the period was about purpose, not really some evaluation of any one story in our context of this discussion. On the level of meaning, the resurrection of Jesus associates to savior while the resurrection of Lazarus is about place and witness.
I am agnostic, so I have no real faith in this story or really any other biblical accounts of various miracles. I have no vested interest in them being fact or not. But I do pay attention to history.
I will add that there is plenty of bronze age myths that made their way into many religious across the period, some going as far back as the days of polytheism. The *idea* of resurrection predates both the authoring of John and Luke. Egyptian mythology gives us the story of Osiris, which is more associated to reign and symbolism. And we happen to be talking about something some 1500+ years before the authors of the NT talked about Jesus. Going even further back to Greek mythology there are dozens of accounts of Gods taking the form of man (or woman,) only to be killed then resurrected and/or going back to the afterlife. Dionysus and Attis, from Greek mythology. Odin, from Norse mythology. All had some mystical account of life, dying, then some sort of divine act bring them back to life. And basically we are talking about stories anywhere from 2500 BC to 1500 BC. In our context these beliefs may have been cult like, but they are all based on various stories from around the Bronze Age that ended up in all sorts of religions.
You guys really think Christianity was original with the idea of resurrection? Or, original with the idea of a God producing a man on earth by some mystical means? Or, original with the idea of a "Creator" in any context? Humanity has developed many beliefs over history, well into the thousands of systems of belief.