Debate: External Evidence for Jesus – Post on Part #3 Coming Soon
I am working on Part 3 of this series of posts about external evidence for the existence of Jesus. Part 3 will focus on analysis and evaluation of Joe Hinman’s third argument for the existence of Jesus, which is based on historical claims about Polycarp. I have written the opening section of Part 3, and … Debate: External Evidence for Jesus – Post on Part #3 Coming Soon
Debate: External Evidence for Jesus – Part 2
======================== NOTE: This post is now complete, as of 11:25 pm pacific time on Saturday, July 2, 2016. ======================== The first sentence of Joe Hinman’s argument from the external evidence of Papias makes a very dubious claim: Papias was the student of the Apostle John. By this, Hinman means that Papias had personal, face-to-face conversations … Debate: External Evidence for Jesus – Part 2
Debate: The External Evidence for Jesus – Part 1
Joe Hinman’s first argument for the existence of Jesus is based on references to Jesus in the Talmud: We know Jesus was in the Talmud and that is a fact admitted by Rabbis. Some references use his name (Yeshua) some use code words such as “such a one” or “Panthera”. The reason codes are used, … Debate: The External Evidence for Jesus – Part 1
The Debate about Jesus has Begun
The debate between me and Joe Hinman about the existence of Jesus has begun. We are focusing on just the external (non-biblical) evidence. Joe has published his positive case for the claim that: …the external (not in Bible) evidence is strong enough to warrant belief in Jesus’ historicity. Here is a link to Joe’s initial … The Debate about Jesus has Begun
Half of a Debate about the Existence of Jesus
Joe Hinman has requested that I debate him about the existence of Jesus, and I have agreed to do so. We will not, however, attempt to answer the BIG question: Did Jesus exist? But we will be arguing about a significant issue closely related to that question: Does the external evidence warrant the belief that … Half of a Debate about the Existence of Jesus
Debate 101
If your debate opponent defends a position (call it H1), argue against H1. Don’t argue against positions they don’t hold (H2 or H3 or …).
Response to William Lane Craig – Part 15
Here is my main objection to William Craig’s case for the resurrection of Jesus: In order to prove that Jesus rose from the dead, one must first prove that Jesus died on the cross. But in most of William Craig’s various books, articles, and debates, he simply ignores this issue. He makes no serious attempt … Response to William Lane Craig – Part 15
William Lane Craig’s Logic Lesson – Part 4
In the March Reasonable Faith Newsletter William Craig asserted this FALSE principle about valid deductive arguments that have premises that are probable: … in a deductive argument the probability of the premises establishes only a minimum probability of the conclusion: even if the premises are only 51% probable, that doesn’t imply that the conclusion is only … William Lane Craig’s Logic Lesson – Part 4
William Lane Craig’s Logic Lesson – Part 3
I had planned to discuss counterexamples (to Craig’s principle) that were based on dependencies existing between the premises in some valid deductive arguments. But I am putting that off for a later post, in order to present a brief analysis of some key concepts. It seems to me that an important part of understanding the relationship … William Lane Craig’s Logic Lesson – Part 3
William Lane Craig’s Logic Lesson – Part 2
I admit it. I enjoyed pointing out that William Lane Craig had made a major blunder in his recent discussion of the logic of deductive arguments (with premises that are probable rather than certain). However, there are a variety of natural tendencies that people have to reason poorly and illogically when it comes to reasoning about … William Lane Craig’s Logic Lesson – Part 2