Jesus: True Prophet or False Prophet? – Part 2
There are three main areas of evidence required to build a rational case for the resurrection of Jesus, for the claim that God raised Jesus from the dead (GRJ): I. General Background Evidence II. Prior Historical Evidence III. Posterior Historical Evidence A key claim that Christian apologists need to support in relation to Prior … Jesus: True Prophet or False Prophet? – Part 2
Jesus: True Prophet or False Prophet? – Part 1
In his book The Resurrection of God Incarnate, Richard Swinburne argues that the case for the resurrection of Jesus must include three major components: I. General Background Evidence – evidence for and against the existence of God, and evidence about whether and why God would be likely to perform a miracle, especially raising someone from the … Jesus: True Prophet or False Prophet? – Part 1
Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 5
Here is a brief plot summary of the movie Harvey: Due to his insistence that he has an invisible six-foot rabbit for a best friend, a whimsical middle-aged man is thought by his family to be insane – but he may be wiser than anyone knows. James Stewart played Elwood P. Dowd, the “whimsical middle-aged man” … Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 5
Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 4
Although I have been considering the implications of the idea that the veridicality of a Theistic Religious Experience (TRE) is independent of the veridicality of other TREs, this is NOT the view of Swinburne. In fact, Swinburne clearly holds the opposite view, the view that the veridicality of a TRE is dependent on the veridicality … Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 4
Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 3
Previously, I have only considered the very simple case where one person has a memory of having previously had a theistic religious experience (hereafter: TRE) of a generic sort–an experience in which it seemed (epistemically) to him/her that God was present. There were a couple of basic points made about probable inferences in contrast to … Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 3
Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 2
Richard Swinburne’s argument from religious experience (AFR) as given in The Existence of God (2nd ed.- hereafter: EOG) is based on three key epistemological principles: EXPERIENCE …(in the absence of special considerations), if it seems (epistemically) to a subject that x is present (and has some characteristic), then probably x is present (and has that characteristic)… (EOG, p. 303) … Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 2
Matthew Ferguson: History, Probability, and Miracles (2013)
Historian Matthew Ferguson uses Bayes’ Theorem to analyze the historicity of miracle claims. Among other things, Ferguson compares the historical evidence for a purported miracle by Vespasian to the historical evidence for the purported resurrection of Jesus. LINK Note: as always, links do not constitute endorsement. Your name Your email Subject Your message (optional)
Repost: Brittany Maynard and the Problem of Evil
In case you’ve been under a rock (or you’re reading this in the future when it is an old, archived post), Brittany Maynard, a women with terminal brain cancer, died by assisted suicide last weekend in the U.S. state of Oregon, where it is legal. Brittany’s life and death are an especially tragic combination of two … Repost: Brittany Maynard and the Problem of Evil
The Carrier-Barnes Exchange on Fine-Tuning
Reader GGDFan77 asked me for my thoughts on the exchange between Dr. Richard Carrier, who I respect and consider a friend, and Dr. Luke Barnes regarding fine-tuning arguments. I initially responded in a series of comments in the combox for my post about Hugh Ross’s estimates for the probability of life-permitting prebiotic conditions. But those … The Carrier-Barnes Exchange on Fine-Tuning
How Hugh Ross Calculates the Improbability of Life on Earth due to Chance Alone
As someone who knows a thing or two about probability, I’ve always wanted to dive into the technical details for how proponents of cosmic fine-tuning arguments justify the probability estimates associated with such arguments. Along those lines, I just found this page on Hugh Ross’s Reasons to Believe website: Probability for Life on Earth (APR 2004) Ross … How Hugh Ross Calculates the Improbability of Life on Earth due to Chance Alone