[Taken from the program handed out at the debate]
I.) There are good reasons to affirm the Resurrection.
A.) The writings about the Resurrection are too early for legend to prevail over the truth.
B.) The tomb was empty.
C.) Jesus appeared to many witnesses.
D.) The origin of the Christian movement is inexplicable apart from a real resurrection.
II.) There are no good reasons to deny the resurrection.
A.) An a priori dismissal of miracles is illegitimate.
B.) Alleged contradictions can be harmonized and they show a lack of collusion.
C.) None of the naturalistic explanations fit the facts.
D.) The "requires extraordinary proof" charge carries a "phantom standard" that virtually nothing could meet.
E.) Pagan sources are absent and inadequate.
III.) The significance of the Resurrection.
Go to Part Two of the debate
(Till's synopsis)
