If we are going on the premise that the bible stories are based atleast on a bit of fact, the Lazerus being dead for three days would probably not have been dead at all. there was incidents where the physicians, ahving no intricate instruments to determine life beyond touch and hearing, could ahve just assumed he was dead..and he ended up waking back up.
If you go into it, there's compelling evidence that a lot of key biblical events are describing actual historical occurrences. However, it seems they might have been given supernatural attributes to sync it up with people's faith at the time. I watched a special on, for example, a prehistoric flooding which I believe was in and around the Black Sea region that may have been responsible for the story of the great flood. The key here is the known world at the time, as the classic civilizations on the Eurasian and African continents had limited geography at the time.
Lazarus was likely medically dead for the times, but I'm sure today the guy wouldn't have made the headlines. We must be mindful that centuries past the time of Christ we still tied a string to people's fingers with a bell to alert someone because maybe even the creator doesn't know how many people were buried alive.
The strongest case I've seen is when I researched for a class project the possible science behind the ten plagues of Egypt. There is actual geologic evidence that at least one eruption on the Greek isle of Santorini sent a volcanic fallout to the southeast that blanketed Egypt during its classical pharaonic dynasties.
Fire and hail and days of darkness should of course be obvious when we're talking about a pyroclastic or ash fallout, but the rest are just as interesting. The event could have triggered an algae bloom that turned the Nile red, and disrupted the local ecosystem, triggering things like the animal plagues, but of course locust plagues are still pretty common in parts of the world to this day. It’s easy to figure out the boils and pestilence after you're dealing with the death and destruction in the aftermath.
When I did the research, the one weak link in the chain appeared to be the final plague, the death of the firstborn...of course what sort of natural disaster might have been so selective? Well, turns out that's got a strong chance of veracity as well. The fallout would have decimated Nile crops, and triggered a mold growth in food stores like grains, that was potentially fatal if ingested.
Being as families would have indeed given priority to the firstborn male among multiple children, as has been the case in a number of cultures, the kid would have been the first to go from contaminated food, a type of black mold IIRC. Once I did the research I went from intrigued by the topic to pretty much convinced that the OT was describing an actual event. The Jews just gave it a supernatural spin to describe it as god's punishment on Egypt for their captivity. Did this event actually change history by changing the pharaoh’s mind? Hard to say, but in the ensuing chaos one wonders if Egypt would have had the capacity to contain the Jews when they we're most likely doing nothing but licking their wounds.