a) Jesus Christ was a real person; b) Jesus Christ rose from the dead.
but
score: 13
The claim that Jesus rose from the dead is an extraordinary claim. To substantiate this claim, we must be supplied with extraordinary evidence. We have not been supplied with extraordinary evidence.
Is there any reliable historical evidence for his existence? If we can establish there is, is there any reliable historical evidence for his rising? (Don't define it as unreliable because it speaks of something we believe to be impossible; analyze the sources in their own merit).
The necessity of "faith in the unprovable" within Christianity mean if Jesus is the son of God it would be appropriate that his resurrection has unprovable. Lack of proof that he rose from the dead may be a necessary consequence him being the son of God. It it was proven, it wouldn't require faith.
I think the more interesting debate is why would a deity place the insane stipulation on himself, in order to allow "sinners" into heaven, of having to torture his son to death? Like c'mon, god! Don't be that guy! Why not just open the door? Purification through the blood of an innocent? Weird...
a) Extra-biblical sources mentioning Jesus were written by historians Josephus and Tacitus. Other sources include the Church fathers, as well as the first-hand testimony of Paul.
This does not prove any of Jesus' or his follower's claims. That is because Jesus (as recorded by his followers decades later in the Gospels) asserted that he is God, which is idolatry. The Torah demands we reject all alleged prophets that violate the Torah.
b) The reliability of the Gospels can be argued for based on criteria of dissimilarity, embarrassment, multiple attestation, and cultural and historical congruency. Once accepted as reliable, then the empty tomb, and the events that followed, compellingly suggest that the resurrection happened.
daft_monk
