Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 12: The Entombment
WHERE WE ARE AT In his Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), Peter Kreeft attempts to refute The Swoon Theory, as part of his case for the resurrection of Jesus. But in order for his case for the resurrection to have any chance of success, he actually needs to refute the more general view that … Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 12: The Entombment
More Reflections on Epistemology: Prove Your Authority
WHERE WE ARE AT Recent comments on Part 11 of my series defending the Swoon Theory concern some basic issues of epistemology, and for some reason I could not prevent myself from jumping in and responding to some of the comments concerning epistemological issues. So, I shared some of those comments and some of my … More Reflections on Epistemology: Prove Your Authority
Some Reflections on Epistemology
To be honest, I tend to shy away from discussions of epistemology (the theory of knowledge, the sub-discipline of philosophy that attempts to understand and clarify the concept of knowledge and the conditions or criteria for what counts as knowledge). First of all, I don’t enjoy discussing “Calvinist epistemology” which has been a big topic … Some Reflections on Epistemology
Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 11: The “Winding Sheets” Objection
WHERE WE ARE AT In his Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), Peter Kreeft attempts to refute The Swoon Theory. But in order for his case for the resurrection to have any chance of success, he actually needs to refute the more general view that I call The Survival Theory (hereafter: TST), the theory that Jesus … Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 11: The “Winding Sheets” Objection
Older Books Defending the Resurrection
I’m looking at some older apologetics books to see what kind of objections have been raised against the Swoon Theory in the past. I found a helpful bibliography of older books on the resurrection in the back of Our Lord’s Resurrection by W.J. Sparrow-Simpson (1905): Some of the best older books defending the resurrection are … Older Books Defending the Resurrection
Hinman’s Pathetic Defense of his Sad Little Argument
HINMAN’S SAD LITTLE ARGUMENT AGAINST THE SURVIVAL THEORY In response to my criticism of Peter Kreeft’s weak and pathetic objections against the Survival Theory, Joe Hinman wrote the following in one of his blog posts: The second issue Bowen argues the book of John Implies the Romans were confused about Jesus’ death, quotes passages John … Hinman’s Pathetic Defense of his Sad Little Argument
Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 10: The “Blood and Water” Objection
WHERE WE ARE AT In Part #6 through Part #9, I have argued that Peter Kreeft’s “Break their Legs” objection, Objection #2 against The Survival Theory (TST), is a complete FAILURE. Objection #2 has two main components, and can be summarized like this: 1. A Roman soldier decided to NOT break Jesus’ legs while Jesus was hanging … Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 10: The “Blood and Water” Objection
Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 9: More Problems with Objection #2
WHERE WE ARE AT Kreeft’s Objection #2 (the “Break their Legs” objection) against The Survival Theory (hereafter: TST) has at least three problems: PROBLEM 1: Roman Soldiers were NOT Medical Doctors PROBLEM 2: The Same Passage Implies the Soldiers were NOT Sure Jesus was Dead PROBLEM 3: The Key Historical Claims Made by Kreeft are … Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 9: More Problems with Objection #2
The Swoon Theory is a THEORY (duh!) not an ARGUMENT
WHAT IS THE SWOON THEORY? Here are some things that The Swoon Theory is NOT: Obviously, there a millions of different kinds of things that are NOT The Swoon Theory. Obviously, The Swoon Theory is some sort of intellectual thing, an IDEA of some kind. Even the very muddled and confused Joe Hinman understands that … The Swoon Theory is a THEORY (duh!) not an ARGUMENT
Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 8: Problems with the “Break their Legs” Objection
WHERE WE ARE AT In Part 7 of this series, I presented Peter Kreeft’s “Break their Legs” Objection (i.e., Objection #2) against the swoon theory, and, more properly, against The Survival Theory (hereafter: TST). I pointed out three significant problems with Objection #2: PROBLEM 1: Roman Soldiers were NOT Medical Doctors PROBLEM 2: The Same … Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 8: Problems with the “Break their Legs” Objection