Arguments For God that are Arguments Against God
GOD AND CONFIRMATION BIAS There is a theme in Jeff Lowder’s case for Naturalism: the thinking of religious believers is often distorted by confirmation bias. They look for evidence that supports their belief in God, but ignore, or forget, or fail to notice, evidence that goes against their belief in God. When believers offer some reason or … Arguments For God that are Arguments Against God
The Complete FAILURE of Peter Kreeft’s Case for the Resurrection – Part 2: MANY Skeptical Theories
WHERE WE ARE In Chapter 8 of Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), Peter Kreeft identifies FIVE Theories concerned about “what really happened in Jerusalem on that first Easter Sunday…” : 1. Christianity: “the resurrection really happened” 2. Hallucination: “the apostles were deceived by a hallucination” 3. Myth: “the apostles created a myth, not meaning … The Complete FAILURE of Peter Kreeft’s Case for the Resurrection – Part 2: MANY Skeptical Theories
The Complete FAILURE of Peter Kreeft’s Case for the Resurrection – Part 1: Three Serious Problems
FIVE THEORIES ABOUT JESUS’ ALLEGED RESURRECTION In Chapter 8 of Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), Peter Kreeft identifies Five Theories concerned about “what really happened in Jerusalem on that first Easter Sunday…” : 1. Christianity: “the resurrection really happened” 2. Hallucination: “the apostles were deceived by a hallucination” 3. Myth: “the apostles created a … The Complete FAILURE of Peter Kreeft’s Case for the Resurrection – Part 1: Three Serious Problems
Defending the Swoon Theory – INDEX
OVERVIEW In Chapter 8 of his book Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), Peter Kreeft (and his co-author Ronald Tacelli), makes a case for the resurrection of Jesus. He does so by attempting to “refute” or “disprove” four skeptical theories that are alternatives to the Christian view that God raised Jesus from the dead: Hallucination: … Defending the Swoon Theory – INDEX
Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 22: Swoon Theory Implies Other False Theories
WHERE WE ARE Kreeft provides six sub-arguments in Objection #7. Three sub-arguments are given to support the key premises (B), (C), and (D), and in Part 20 I showed that those three sub-arguments FAIL to establish either (B) or (C) or (D), giving us three good and sufficient reasons to conclude that Objection #7 FAILS. … Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 22: Swoon Theory Implies Other False Theories
Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 21: More Evaluation of Objection #7
WHERE WE ARE In Part 20 of this series of posts I showed that Kreeft’s three sub-arguments supporting key premises (B), (C), and (D) of his core argument constituting Objection #7 (against the Swoon Theory) all FAIL, and that the failure of just one of those three sub-arguments is sufficient reason to conclude that Objection #7 … Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 21: More Evaluation of Objection #7
Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 20: Evaluation of Objection #7
WHERE WE ARE In Chapter 8 of his Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), Peter Kreeft has raised nine objections against The Swoon Theory, as part of his case attempting to prove that Jesus rose from the dead. In previous posts I have argued that his Objection #1, Objection #2, Objection #3, Objection #4, Objection #5, Objection #6, and Objection #8 all FAIL as objections against The Swoon … Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 20: Evaluation of Objection #7
Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 18: Premise (1) of Objection #6
WHERE WE ARE Here, once more, is Peter Kreeft’s Objection #6 against the Swoon Theory, from Chapter 8 of his Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA): How were the Roman guards at the tomb overpowered by a swooning corpse? Or by unarmed disciples? And if the disciples did it, they knowingly lied when they wrote … Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 18: Premise (1) of Objection #6
Hinman’s Defense of his Sad Little Argument: Wishful Thinking by Kermit Zarley
WHERE WE ARE The main question at issue between me and Joe Hinman is this: In recent decades has a significant portion of NT scholars shifted from the previously dominant view that the Fourth Gospel is historically UNRELIABLE to the previously minority view that the Fourth Gospel is historically RELIABLE? My answer to this question … Hinman’s Defense of his Sad Little Argument: Wishful Thinking by Kermit Zarley
Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 16: The Roman Guards are Probably Fictional
OBJECTION #6: THE GUARDS AT THE TOMB In Chapter 8 of his Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), Peter Kreeft has raised nine objections against The Swoon Theory, as part of his case attempting to prove that Jesus rose from the dead. In previous posts I have argued that his Objection #1, Objection #2, Objection … Defending the Swoon Theory – Part 16: The Roman Guards are Probably Fictional