Russell DiSilvestro (a colleague in my Philosophy Department) and I are going to do a series of debates about the resurrection at CSUS (California State University, Sacramento--where our dept. is) next week, Monday through Wednesday. Here's the run down:
McCormick: The resurrection has frequently been supported by appeals to the quantity and quality of historical evidence that we have, primarily from the Bible. But by a parallel argument, we should believe that there were really witches with magical powers at Salem, Mass. where we have evidence of greater quantity and quality. Therefore, by the standards we already employ, we should reject the resurrection.
DiSilvestro: Salem and Jerusalem are disanalogous in ways that make the latter stronger than the former.
McCormick: Large numbers of alleged miraces at Lourdes, France and elsewhere that have turned out to be mistaken have shown us that miracle testimony is very unreliable. These cases and other considerations reduce our confidence in testimony about the resurrection to the point that we must reject it.
McCormick: The evidence we have for the resurrection and other miracles is sketchy at best. It would be well within God’s power to produce compelling miracles. Since he has not done so, it must not be God’s intention for us to accept them.
It should be a good set of discussions and it will be well attended judging by the early interest.
Russell and I have also been slated to be interviewed on Capitol Public Radio with Jeffrey Callison on Monday morning at 10:00. Tune in if you're interested. http://www.capradio.org/
There will be videos of the debates and we'll get them posted soon.