<<It's always been a favorite of mine, but my experience has been that
Christians value it highly, nonchristians don't. And the nonchristians
have objections like those of Russell Stewart: that some alternatives have
been left out to force the uncritical listener to choose from less than the
available alternatives.>>
If you delve into the quintilemma in full, I think you'll see that the
excluded "alternatives" violate the rule of probability. E.g., that Jesus
"could have just been having fun" is so weak it is not a real alternative at
all. The quintilemma depends on reasonableness, and holds up solidly.
IOW, people can come up with just about anything to avoid accepting the
obvious. But they do so based not on reason, but for spiritual or
psychological reasons.
BTW, I was reading Tertullian's "Apology" (c. 200 A.D.) last night, and found
his section on proving the divinity of Christ quite remarkable. He cuts right
to the chase: the miracles and the resurrection. That's it. Proving them
proves Christ's divinity. And he does so, brilliantly. He was a lawyer, of
course. ;-)
But in this discussion we ought not to forget that it isn't just a matter of
rejecting the less probable alternatives. We also have the strongest positive
case: the empty tomb.
Jim