philosophers

Another Reason Why Peter Kreeft’s Case for the Resurrection of Jesus FAILS

In Chapter 8 of their Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), Christian philosophers Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli make a case for the resurrection of Jesus, and they claim to PROVE that Jesus rose from the dead. Here is a summary of their case: 1. IF Kreeft and Tacelli refuted the four alternative (skeptical) theories, THEN Another Reason Why Peter Kreeft’s Case for the Resurrection of Jesus FAILS

One Obvious Reason Why Peter Kreeft’s Case for the Resurrection of Jesus FAILS

In Chapter 8 of their Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), Christian philosophers Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli make a case for the resurrection of Jesus, and they claim to PROVE that Jesus rose from the dead. Here is a summary of their case: 1. IF Kreeft and Tacelli refuted the four alternative (skeptical) theories, THEN One Obvious Reason Why Peter Kreeft’s Case for the Resurrection of Jesus FAILS

Gary Habermas is the Leading Defender of the Resurrection of Jesus

I have long thought that Dr. Gary Habermas was the best defender of the alleged resurrection of Jesus. The recent publication of two large volumes by Habermas on this issue demonstrates that my previous opinion was correct. No 21st-century skeptic can reasonably claim to have cast serious doubt on the resurrection of Jesus without dealing Gary Habermas is the Leading Defender of the Resurrection of Jesus

The Jewish Talmud and the Death of Jesus

In Chapter 7 of the book I’m currently working on (Thinking Critically about the Resurrection of Jesus: The Resuscitation of the Swoon Theory), I critically examine some objections against the Swoon Theory by various Christian apologists. The Swoon Theory claims (roughly) that Jesus survived his crucifixion and this led his disciples to mistakenly conclude that The Jewish Talmud and the Death of Jesus

An Attempt to Repair Gary Habermas’ “Paul’s Conversion” Objection to the Swoon Theory

WHERE WE ARE In Chapter 7 of the book I’m currently working on (Thinking Critically about the Resurrection of Jesus: The Resuscitation of the Swoon Theory), I argue that an objection by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona to the Swoon Theory FAILS. The Swoon Theory is, roughly, the skeptical view that Jesus survived his crucifixion An Attempt to Repair Gary Habermas’ “Paul’s Conversion” Objection to the Swoon Theory

An Attempt to Repair William Craig’s “Jewish Thought” Objection to the Swoon Theory

WHERE WE ARE In Chapter 6 of the book I’m currently working on (Thinking Critically about the Resurrection of Jesus: The Resuscitation of the Swoon Theory), I argue that William Craig’s objections to the Swoon Theory FAIL. One of Craig’s objections asserts that Jewish Thought in the first century would have prevented Jesus’ disciples from An Attempt to Repair William Craig’s “Jewish Thought” Objection to the Swoon Theory

Religion and Dishonesty

In the book I’m currently working on (Thinking Critically about the Resurrection of Jesus: The Resuscitation of the Swoon Theory) I examine several objections to the Swoon Theory (roughly the skeptical view that Jesus was crucified but survived his crucifixion and that this led to the belief that God raised Jesus from the dead). One Religion and Dishonesty

Careful Analysis of More Objections to the Swoon Theory: INDEX

I have previously done a careful analysis of nine objections against the Swoon Theory presented by the Christian apologists Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli in their Handbook of Christian Apologetics (1994; hereafter: HCA): More recently, I have done a careful analysis of six more objections to the Swoon Theory presented by other Christian apologists, objections Careful Analysis of More Objections to the Swoon Theory: INDEX

Careful Analysis of Objections to the Swoon Theory: Objection #15 (Jesus’ Wounds)

WHERE WE ARE The Christian apologists Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli presented nine objections against the Swoon Theory in their Handbook of Christian Apologetics (published in 1994). I have carefully analyzed those nine objections and then carefully evaluated them. I concluded that each of those nine objections against the Swoon Theory FAIL. So, Kreeft and Tacelli FAILED to Careful Analysis of Objections to the Swoon Theory: Objection #15 (Jesus’ Wounds)

Careful Analysis of Objections to the Swoon Theory: Objection #14 (Last Words)

WHERE WE ARE The Christian apologists Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli presented nine objections against the Swoon Theory in their Handbook of Christian Apologetics (published in 1994). I have carefully analyzed those nine objections and then carefully evaluated them. I concluded that each of those nine objections against the Swoon Theory FAIL. So, Kreeft and Tacelli FAILED to Careful Analysis of Objections to the Swoon Theory: Objection #14 (Last Words)