Defending the Conspiracy Theory – Part 5: Our Ignorance of The Twelve
There are five different possible theories about the alleged resurrection of Jesus, according to Peter Kreeft: The Conspiracy Theory is one of the skeptical theories about the resurrection. See Part 3 of this series for my clarification of the content of TCT. THE ABSENCE OF HISTORICAL EVIDENCE In Part 4 of this series I replied … Defending the Conspiracy Theory – Part 5: Our Ignorance of The Twelve
Defending the Conspiracy Theory – Part 4: Objection #1
There are five different possible theories, according to Peter Kreeft, about the alleged resurrection of Jesus: Peter Kreeft raises seven objections against The Conspiracy Theory (hereafter: TCT). See Part 3 of this series for my clarification of the content of TCT. In today’s post, I will consider Kreeft’s first objection to TCT. OBJECTION #1 AGAINST … Defending the Conspiracy Theory – Part 4: Objection #1
Defending the Conspiracy Theory – Part 3: Improved Definition
In Part 2 of this series, I argued that Peter Kreeft suggested at least seven different definitions of “The Conspiracy Theory” (herafter: TCT), each of which was WRONG. In order to refute TCT, Kreeft must clearly characterize or define TCT, so his refutation FAILS right out of the starting gate. But in order to evaluate … Defending the Conspiracy Theory – Part 3: Improved Definition
Defending the Conspiracy Theory – Part 2: Defining the Theory
Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA) was co-authored by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli. In HCA, Kreeft attempts to prove that Jesus rose from the dead by disproving four skeptical theories related to the alleged resurrection of Jesus. One of the skeptical theories that Kreeft attempts to disprove is called “The Conspiracy Theory” (which I will refer … Defending the Conspiracy Theory – Part 2: Defining the Theory
Belief in Miracles – Part 1: Summary
I was invited to be a speaker at the NW Miracles Conference, thanks to Bob Seidensticker who suggested to the conference organizer that I could represent a skeptical viewpoint on the question “Is it ever reasonable to believe miracle claims?” I came prepared with a PowerPoint presentation called “Belief in Miracles”, but because of time constraints … Belief in Miracles – Part 1: Summary
When Are Appeals to Human Ignorance a Legitimate Defeater of an Evidential Argument?
(A1) Evidential arguments from ‘evil’ say: known facts about the types, quantity, and distribution of good and evil are much more probable on naturalism than on theism. (O1) Critics of evidential arguments from evil say: we don’t know that. We have far too limited an understanding of the interconnectedness of things to make such a … When Are Appeals to Human Ignorance a Legitimate Defeater of an Evidential Argument?
Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 3: Clarification of My Reasoning
WHERE WE ARE AT In Part 1 and Part 2 of this series, I have shown that Dr. Erasmus’ objection to my skeptical reasoning (a) attacks a STRAW MAN, and (b) is based on an INVALID INFERENCE. In doing so, I also argued that Dr. Erasmus does not have a good understanding of probability calculations, especially … Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 3: Clarification of My Reasoning
Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 2: Straw Man and Invalid Inference
In this post I will reply to an objection that was raised by Dr. Jacobus Erasmus against my reasoning in one of my skeptical posts about the resurrection of Jesus. DR. ERASMUS COMMITS THE STRAW MAN FALLACY The most basic problem with the objection raised by Dr. Erasmus is that he commits the all-too-common STRAW … Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 2: Straw Man and Invalid Inference
Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 1: Untrained in Probabilistic Logic?
MY UNDERSTANDING OF PROBABILITY Dr. Jacobus Erasmus has raised an objection to one of my posts on the resurrection. Before presenting his objection he takes a swipe at my credibility: …Bowen’s argument is an example of what happens when a blogger who is untrained in probabilistic logic tries their hand at probability. …Bowen does not … Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 1: Untrained in Probabilistic Logic?
The Logic of Miracles – Part 6: The Problem of Evil
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL The problem of evil is concerned with whether the existence of evil (or of particular kinds or amounts of evil) is logically incompatible with the existence of God or provides significant evidence against the existence of God. The “logical” problem of evil focuses on whether evil (or particular kinds or amounts … The Logic of Miracles – Part 6: The Problem of Evil