Kreeft’s Case Against the Swoon Theory – The Objections Based on Other Gospels
WHERE WE ARE
In the Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli attempt to prove the resurrection of Jesus. An important part of their case for the resurrection of Jesus is an attempt to refute some skeptical theories, such as the Swoon Theory. If they FAIL to refute the Swoon Theory, then their case for the resurrection of Jesus also FAILS.
Kreeft and Tacelli raise nine objections against the Swoon Theory, and I have previously examined four of those objections that were based on passages from the Gospel of John. Here are the conclusions I have reached about those four objections:
My conclusion that all four of these objections FAIL to refute the Swoon Theory is argued and explained in a series of 18 posts published here on The Secular Frontier:
More recently, I have carefully examined and evaluated three more of their objections against the Swoon Theory, objections that were based on the other three Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) or at least on more than just the Gospel of John. Here are the conclusions that I reached about those three objections:
OBJECTIONS AGAINST THE SWOON THEORY BASED ON OTHER GOSPELS
MY POSTS ON THESE THREE OBJECTIONS TO THE SWOON THEORY
Analysis and Evaluation of Objection #6
Analysis and Evaluation of Objection #7
Analysis and Evaluation of Objection #9
FUTURE POSTS
In future posts in this series, I will analyze and evaluate the two remaining objections that Kreeft and Tacelli raised against the Swoon Theory. The remaining two objections are not based on any specific Gospel passage(s):
