WHERE WE ARE In Part 8 of this series, I presented a careful analysis of Peter Kreeft’s Objection #4 against the Swoon Theory. In Part 9 of this series, I argued that the key premise (1b) in Objection #4 is supported by an argument consisting of two FALSE premises: premise (B) and premise (3b). Thus, … Continue reading Kreeft’s Case Against the Swoon Theory – Part 12: Evaluation of Premise (C)