The first to rise from the dead?

Again Z, why must you try and make Paul out to say something he doesn't? Why the need to refer to Hos 6:2? Why not refer to MT 9:18-25? Because it shows a clear contradiction? Feel free to distort the text in any way you need to, I guess (not my "holy book" to worry about).And this comment:You're wrong. Seems you have been reading too many "biblical scholars proves the Bible as junk" books. If you want to learn about the Bible, start with those that believe in it. Then ask questions you dont understand. Starting with the assumption that guilty until proven innocent is a silly way to go about it.Leads me to believe that you are suggesting that Moses, Samual and Joshua did write those books. I hope that's not the case, but I suppose that should be it's own thread.

Any other attempts to resolve this obvious contradiction?

No, he doesn't. Paul simply and directely attests to the messianic views of 2nd Temple Judaism, with the Messiah ushering in the resurrection of the dead. This is also what stands behind gMat, who has saints climbing out of their graves and strolling around the streets of Jerusalem.

Act 26:23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.It appears that Paul does in fact say that Jesus "should be the first that should rise from the dead"...or is this an idiom too??