skepticism

Kreeft’s Case Against the Swoon Theory – Part 3: Evaluation of Premises (C) & (D)

|

WHERE WE ARE In Chapter 8 of the Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA) Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli attempt to prove that God raised Jesus from the dead. A key premise in their case for the resurrection is their claim to have refuted the Swoon Theory. However, Kreeft and Tacelli have FAILED to refute … Kreeft’s Case Against the Swoon Theory – Part 3: Evaluation of Premises (C) & (D)

Kreeft’s Case for the Divinity of Jesus – Part 20: Mark Chapter 10 and the Feeling-Superior Argument

|

WHERE WE ARE For a brief summary of what has been covered in Part 3 through Part 15 of this series, see the “WHERE WE ARE” section at the beginning of Part 16 of this series. For a brief summary of what has been covered in Part 16, Part 17, and Part 18, see the “WHERE … Kreeft’s Case for the Divinity of Jesus – Part 20: Mark Chapter 10 and the Feeling-Superior Argument

Kreeft’s Case Against the Swoon Theory – Part 2: Analysis of Objection #2

|

In Chapter 8 of the Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA) Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli attempt to prove that God raised Jesus from the dead. They claim that there are only four skeptical theories that are alternatives to the Christian view: Based on that assumption they attempt to refute each of these skeptical theories … Kreeft’s Case Against the Swoon Theory – Part 2: Analysis of Objection #2

Kreeft’s Case Against the Swoon Theory – Part 1: Introduction

|

I have previously analyzed and evaluated the case against the Swoon Theory presented by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli in Chapter 8 of their Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA): My conclusion was that all nine of their objections against the Swoon Theory FAIL, and that their attempt to refute the Swoon Theory FAILED. If … Kreeft’s Case Against the Swoon Theory – Part 1: Introduction

The Complete FAILURE of Peter Kreeft’s Case for the Resurrection – LINKS

|

I also wrote a series of posts defending the Hallucination Theory against the objections raised by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli (in Chapter 8 of their Handbook of Christian Apologetics) over on my own blog (because The Secular Outpost was shut down and The Secular Frontier had not yet been set up): Defending the Hallucination … The Complete FAILURE of Peter Kreeft’s Case for the Resurrection – LINKS

Careful Argument Analysis of Objections to the Hallucination Theory.

|

In Chapter 8 of the Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli attempt to prove that God raised Jesus from the dead. They claim that there are only four skeptical theories that are alternatives to the Christian view: Based on that assumption they attempt to refute each of these skeptical theories … Careful Argument Analysis of Objections to the Hallucination Theory.