resurrection

God and Massive Deception about the Resurrection

Robert Cavin and Carlos Colombetti have written an article raising some significant objections to Richard Swinburne’s case for the incarnation and resurrection of Jesus: “Swinburne on the Resurrection” (Philosophia Christi, Vol. 15, No. 2; hereafter: SOR). LINK I’m fully on-board with their overall conclusion that “…Swinburne’s argument for the Incarnation and Resurrection…is seriously undermined by God and Massive Deception about the Resurrection

Swinburne on the Resurrection: Negative versus Christian Ramified Natural Theology

ABSTRACT: We consider the impact of negative natural theology on the prospects of Christian ramified natural theology with reference to Richard Swinburne’s argument for the Incarnation and Resurrection. We argue that Swinburne’s pivotal claim—that God would not allow deceptive evidence to exist for the Incarnation and Resurrection—is refuted by key evidence from negative natural theology. We argue, further, Swinburne on the Resurrection: Negative versus Christian Ramified Natural Theology

Cavin and Colombetti on the Resurrection of Jesus Part 3: The Projection and Unknown Removal Theories

What I want to do in this post is to summarize (and offer my own interpretation of) Cavin’s third main contention in his debate with Michael Licona on the Resurrection of Jesus: CC3. There is an alternative theory to the Resurrection that is a far superior explanation. 1. Explanatory Power Revisited Although repetitive, for the Cavin and Colombetti on the Resurrection of Jesus Part 3: The Projection and Unknown Removal Theories

Just In Time for Easter: Notable Secular Outpost Content on the Resurrection

Cavin and Colombetti on the Resurrection 1. MUST READ: Greg Cavin’s Case Against the Resurrection of Jesus 2. Video of Licona-Cavin Debate on the Resurrection of Jesus 3. Cavin and Colombetti on the Resurrection of Jesus Part 1: The Anti-Resurrection Prior Probability Argument 4. Cavin and Colombetti on the Resurrection of Jesus Part 2: The Just In Time for Easter: Notable Secular Outpost Content on the Resurrection

Did Jesus Exit? – Part 22

I have argued that the agreement that exists between the seven gospel sources concerning the Minimal Jesus Hypothesis, could be explained on the basis of the common cultural idea of a ‘Messiah’. I conceded, however, that the crucifixion of the Messiah was not a part of the expectation of first century Palestinian Jews, but pointed Did Jesus Exit? – Part 22

Did Jesus Exit? – Index

Introduction to the issue: Did Jesus exist? Outline of Did Jesus Exist? By Bart Ehrman. Various skeptical points by Ehrman, especially the insignificance of non-Christian historical sources. Keith Parson’s advice and Bart Ehrman on the Minimal Jesus Hypothesis (MJH). Development and clarification of the Minimal Jesus Hypothesis. About 17,000 Jewish males in Palestine were named Did Jesus Exit? – Index

Did Jesus Exit? – Part 21

I have reviewed Q, M, and L passages, looking for crucifixion-related events. The Gospel of Mark includes several crucifixion-related events in Chapters 14 and 15: 1. The Plot to Kill Jesus 2. The Anointing at Bethany 3. Judas Agrees to Betray Jesus 4. The Passover with the Disciples 5. The Institution of the Lord’s Supper Did Jesus Exit? – Part 21

Did Jesus Exit? – Part 20

The Minimal Jesus Hypothesis (MJH) can be stated in terms of a list of a dozen attributes: A1. This person was a flesh-and-blood person. A2. This person was an adherent of Judaism. A3. This person was a male descendant of the Hebrew people. A4. This person lived in Palestine as an adult (in his twenties Did Jesus Exit? – Part 20