Bible

Kreeft’s Case for the Divinity of Jesus – Part 5: Did Jesus Mean his Claim to be God Literally?

|

WHERE WE ARE In Chapter 7 of their book Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), Christian philosophers Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli make a case for the divinity of Jesus. Here is the main argument they present in Chapter 7: 1A. Jesus was either God, liar, lunatic, guru, or myth. 2A. Jesus could not possibly … Kreeft’s Case for the Divinity of Jesus – Part 5: Did Jesus Mean his Claim to be God Literally?

Kreeft’s Case for the Divinity of Jesus – Part 4: Did Jesus Claim to be God?

|

WHERE WE ARE In Chapter 7 of their book Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), Christian philosophers Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli make a case for the divinity of Jesus. Here is the main argument they present in Chapter 7: 1A. Jesus was either God, liar, lunatic, guru, or myth. 2A. Jesus could not possibly … Kreeft’s Case for the Divinity of Jesus – Part 4: Did Jesus Claim to be God?

Defending the Myth Theory: COMPLETED

|

After my series of posts on the Hallucination Theory, where I showed that every one of Peter Kreeft’s objections against that theory FAILS, I started another series where I examined each of Kreeft’s objections against the Myth Theory. I also showed that every one of Kreeft’s objections against the Myth Theory FAILS: Because The Secular … Defending the Myth Theory: COMPLETED

The Complete FAILURE of Peter Kreeft’s Case for the Resurrection of Jesus

|

In Chapter 8 of their Handbook of Christian Apologetics (1994, InterVarsity Press, hereafter: HCA), philosophers Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli attempt to prove that Jesus really physically rose from the dead. The idea of trying to prove the resurrection of Jesus in just twenty-two pages (without a single footnote or endnote) is ridiculous, but most … The Complete FAILURE of Peter Kreeft’s Case for the Resurrection of Jesus

Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 17: Follow Up Investigation

|

WHERE WE AREIn his Handbook of Christian Apologetics Peter Kreeft raises 14 objections against the Hallucination Theory in an attempt to DISPROVE or REFUTE that skeptical theory.  Kreeft thinks he can prove the resurrection of Jesus by disproving a few skeptical theories about the resurrection of Jesus, such as the Hallucination Theory.Kreeft’s first three objections … Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 17: Follow Up Investigation

Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 16: Adults are Liars and Cheaters

|

ADULTS ARE DISHONEST In general, studies of lying behavior indicate that college students lie more frequently on average, than the general adult population.  However, based on recent studies with larger sample sizes, the difference in average number of lies per day is fairly small between college students and the general adult population: College students and … Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 16: Adults are Liars and Cheaters

Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 15: Young Adults are Dishonest

|

WHERE WE ARE As part of my response to Peter Kreeft’s first three objections against the Hallucination Theory,  I want to point out two major problems with EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: In Part 13 of this series, I summarized key points from an excellent article on problems with eyewitness memory and identifications made by eyewitnesses.  The main … Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 15: Young Adults are Dishonest

Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 14: Humans are Dishonest

|

WHERE WE ARE I am currently examining Peter Kreeft’s third objection against the Hallucination Theory.  His first three objections are all concerned with the TESTIMONY of WITNESSES, namely EYEWITNESSES.  The first three objections by Kreeft thus evoke the centuries-old idea of proving the resurrection of Jesus in a court trial.  If we take that idea … Defending the Hallucination Theory – Part 14: Humans are Dishonest