Ben Carson is Also a POLITICAL Nutcase – Part 1
It looks like Ben Carson’s popularity is fading away, according recent polls (Thank you baby Jesus!). However, he was clearly the number two choice of Republicans from the end of August until early December, and for the first half of November, Carson was neck-and-neck with Trump, tied for first choice of Republicans. Furthermore, the primary elections/caucuses … Ben Carson is Also a POLITICAL Nutcase – Part 1
Response to William Lane Craig – Part 10
Here is my main objection to William Craig’s case for the resurrection of Jesus: It is not possible for a person to rise from the dead until AFTER that person has actually died. Thus, in order to prove that Jesus rose from the dead, one must first prove that Jesus died on the cross. But … Response to William Lane Craig – Part 10
Response to William Lane Craig – Part 9
I have finished my discussion of Luke Timothy Johnson’s views on the alleged crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, and I will begin my discussion of Robert Funk’s views on the alleged crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus in the next post, after a brief review here of the CONTEXT of this series of posts (i.e. my … Response to William Lane Craig – Part 9
In Defense of Dwindling Probability – Part 4
Here is another objection to dwindling probabilities from Swinburne: “A defender of the argument from dwindling probabilities may…emphasize that all the same the longer the route of the argument (or the more conjuncts involved in the conclusion), the less probable is the conclusion; and so suggest that it is not plausible to suppose that an argument … In Defense of Dwindling Probability – Part 4
Response to William Lane Craig – Part 8
I have one final objection to raise against Luke Johnson’s use of the “method of convergence”. I have been using the phrase “the devil is in the details” to summarize a number of problems with, or objections to, Johnson’s use of the “method of convergence” to establish some key claims about Jesus. But there are some … Response to William Lane Craig – Part 8
In Defense of Dwindling Probability – Part 3
When drinking alcoholic beverages it is good to know how much alcohol one is consuming, especially if one needs to drive home after having such beverages. Beer has less alcohol than wine, and wine has less alcohol than liquor. Beer commonly ranges from 4% to 6% alcohol by volume (ABV). Wine commonly ranges from 8% … In Defense of Dwindling Probability – Part 3
In Defense of Dwindling Probability – Part 2
I see that Plantinga’s skeptical argument refers to “Dwindling Probabilities” rather than “Dwindling Probability”. Sorry about my failure to get the name of this topic quite right. I should mention that I did not learn about this sort of skeptical argument from the Christian philosopher Alvin Plantinga. I learned about the Multiplication Rule of probablity … In Defense of Dwindling Probability – Part 2
In Defense of Dwindling Probability
One claim involved in the case for the resurrection of Jesus is this: D. Jesus died on the same day he was crucified. The truth of this claim depends on the truth of some prior claims: E. Jesus existed. C. Jesus was crucified. A probability tree diagram can illustrate how claim (D) involves dwindling probability … In Defense of Dwindling Probability
Response to William Lane Craig – Part 7
I have another objection to raise against Luke Johnson’s use of the “method of convergence” to support the reliability of the Gospels or the “historical framework” of the Gospels (emphasis added by me): As I have tried to show, the character of the Gospel narratives does not allow a fully satisfying historical reconstruction of Jesus’ ministry. … Response to William Lane Craig – Part 7
Response to William Lane Craig – Part 6
In Part 4 of this series, we saw that in a table (presented by Johnson in The Real Jesus) listing seventeen different claims about Jesus that are based on the Gospel accounts (and allegedly supported by various other “outsider” and “insider” writings), that about half of those claims were trivial, vacuous, or very vague, so … Response to William Lane Craig – Part 6