(January 11, 2014 at 5:15 pm)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: The popular "Minimal Facts" approach to proving the resurrection of Jesus rests on outlining certain facts that the majority of scholars agree upon about the events surrounding Jesus' death. We should supposedly accept these facts because the majority of scholars agree on them. Then they say that if we accept these facts, we should therefore conclude that Jesus was resurrected.
But I doubt that Jesus' resurrection is something that the consensus of these same scholars would agree is fact. Therefore, if we should only accept what the consensus says, we should believe that Jesus didn't rise from the dead.
My only problem with this approach is what people like Habermas consider facts.

Stories that appear only in the Bible are hard to accept as facts as they are uncorroborated.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Science is not a subject, but a method.