1) You are willing to believe anything other than the actual story of Jesus! You are unreasonable!
a) Am I? Remember how I qualified my argument? “I do not claim knowledge in this realm.” What this means is that regardless of what I really think, it is most important to demonstrate that in the absence of objectivity within even a seemingly plausible resurrection account there is still room for other possibilities that are as equally extraordinary regarding the actual source! Why play favorites in the absence of a clear bridge into our present knowledge? Why should the disciples of Jesus even have played favorites when all they really ever claimed to have witnessed was a living Jesus, a dead Jesus, and then a bodily resurrected Jesus? The rest can be chalked up to what Jesus simply taught these men and women to believe.
How important is confirmation and regularity within religion? These things are what drive the engine of a genuine pursuit of knowledge within the world. Apart from such a pursuit even the viable possibilities are vast! Just think of Sherlock Holmes or the more kid friendly mysteries within the Scooby-Doo series. Sometimes weird anomalies unfold but where do we allow our own judgment to fall in such cases? This is key. I can’t think of any more appropriate moment than right now to say: KNOWLEDGE IS KEY! Both then and now.
b) Allow me to approach this question in another way. The primary reason that I brought up the Chinese notion of the power of Chi in the case of Jesus is because in the absence of any kind of bridge that verifies the Judeo-Christian God as being the source, then other religions are in fact justified to reinterpret the resurrection account in light of their own conception of God and the supernatural. Even a resurrection does not establish an exclusive commitment to Christian belief alone. It also says nothing in regards to a polytheistic view.
2) God did establish a regular presence within the world at least until it culminated in the person of Jesus! Great, but how is this helpful in establishing this knowledge right now? The further away we get from such alleged events the more justified it becomes to question these matters in light of what is either known or unknown in the present. What is the opposite of regularity? Quite logically it would be irregularity and a lack of justification. At the end of the day the resurrection still does not help to establish viable knowledge of God within our present lives. We are still left guessing, hoping, waiting for some kind of vindication.
Here is another intriguing question. When should we predict that our present circumstances will quite naturally tip the scales in favor of modern knowledge so that religion will remain on a consistent decline? Is it possible that religious explanations are going to predictably become less compelling due to having no justifying principle that can be called upon in the present or possibly ever? Time will do the telling.
3) Finally, extraordinary claims require an extraordinary kind of justification. This is because we are trying to establish what is by definition a clear abnormality within the world. This God would have been more wise, at least in the interest of a worldwide plan of salvation, to maintain a clear and undisputed relationship with his people from the past and leading into our modern day. Indisputable intervention on a repeatable basis would solve the problem of human knowledge once and for all. I rest my case friends. Go where the evidence leads!