New by Paul Draper: God and the Burden of Proof
See the attachment below.“God and the Burden of Proof” by Paul Draper (2014)
Norman Geisler’s Case for the Death of Jesus – Part 2
In When Skeptics Ask, Norman Geisler presents eight reasons in support of the claim that Jesus actually died on the cross. In my previous post on this subject I argued that six of those reasons should be quickly set aside as weak or defective reasons. In my view, only two reasons out of the eight … Norman Geisler’s Case for the Death of Jesus – Part 2
The Case for the Death of Jesus – Part 2
A challenge (or two) to my previous post “The Case for the Death of Jesus” came from a reader “hardindr”. Another reader, Tom Hanson, commented “Personally I’m with hardindr.” So in this post I will respond to comments from hardindr, with the intention of also responding to Tom Hanson’s concerns. Here is the first comment … The Case for the Death of Jesus – Part 2
I Post a Reply to Jerry Coyne and Now I Am Blocked from Commenting on His Blog
I am used to this kind of behavior from some Christiana apologists, but not from fellow atheists. When I attempted to post the following comment on his blog post, alerting his readers to the fact that Coyne had unintentionally misrepresented my argument, I learned that I have been blocked from commenting on his blog. Dr. … I Post a Reply to Jerry Coyne and Now I Am Blocked from Commenting on His Blog
Norman Geisler’s Case for the Death of Jesus
Let me cut to the chase: Geisler’s case for the claim that “Jesus actually died on the cross” is crap. It might be marginally better than William Craig’s case, but it is most definitely a hot steaming pile of crap. As with Craig’s case, part of the reason Geisler’s case fails is that he tries … Norman Geisler’s Case for the Death of Jesus
What Happened to Philo?
Is it just me or has it been a while since a new issue of Philo was published? (For those who didn’t know: Philo used to be subtitled, “The Journal of the Society of Humanist Philosophers.” It was subsequently re-subtitled as “A Journal of Philosophy.”) Also, I see that its website is now significantly different than … What Happened to <I>Philo?</I>
An Invitation to William Lane Craig
An Invitation to William Lane Craig On May 23 and June 9, respectively, the Secular Web published revised versions of two of my three essays on the kalam cosmological argument that had previously been published on that website. Today, I have sent an e-mail letter to Dr. William Lane Craig requesting that he publicly respond … An Invitation to William Lane Craig
The Case for the Death of Jesus
I have written several posts about William Craig’s “case” for the death of Jesus in his book The Son Rises. In those posts I showed that Craig made about 81 historical claims, but failed to provide any historical evidence for 85% of those claims, and provided only weak and dubious historical evidence for the other … The Case for the Death of Jesus
Craig’s “Historical Evidence” for the Death of Jesus – Part 8
In the first three paragraphs of William Craig’s “case” for the claim that Jesus died on the cross, Craig makes 60 different historical claims, but provides only ONE piece of actual historical evidence for just ONE of the 60 historical claims. Furthermore, the one piece of historical evidence provided by Craig is irrelevant to the … Craig’s “Historical Evidence” for the Death of Jesus – Part 8
Craig’s “Historical Evidence” for the Death of Jesus – Part 7
In the first three paragraphs of William Craig’s “case” for the claim that Jesus died on the cross, Craig makes 60 different historical claims, but provides only ONE piece of actual historical evidence for just ONE of the 60 historical claims. Furthermore, in part 6 of this series we saw that the one piece of … Craig’s “Historical Evidence” for the Death of Jesus – Part 7