One of the skeptical pages opens with this quote:

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"

I personally agree with this principle...and so does God, apparently...why else would there be such an emphasis on it in the bible?

The only issue I would have with the skeptic would be how 'extraordinary' does it have to be before it counts as 'extraordinary'?

For example: How far does one have to go down this list before post-death appearances of Jesus count as extraordinary?

I maintain that the claims that Jesus of Nazareth made of his Godhood and mission (extraordinary claims!) were backed up by the resurrection (extraordinary evidence). What the skeptic often wants to do is turn my 'extraordinary evidence' into an 'extraordinary claim', requiring its OWN extraordinary evidence (an perhaps on and on, in infinite regress?)...

And I think God actually goes this next step as well: the extraordinary claim ("I rose from the dead") is supported by extraordinary evidence (post-resurrection appearances). And maybe even one more time: claim ("he appeared") with evidence ("recorded eyewitness accounts of extraordinary range, scope, variety, detail").

I tend to agree with the skeptic in so many, many areas--the list in the Lippard's HomePage looks almost like one I WOULD create.

I just really believe that God has given us abundantly 'extraordinary' evidence in the resurrection, in fulfilled prophecy, in the archeological record, in the witness of our hearts...



The Christian ThinkTank...[http://www.Christian-thinktank.com] (Reference Abbreviations)