RE: MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)
December 21, 2014 at 5:00 pm
It's clear what he intended. He wanted to establish a historical Jesus in part one, which he failed to do. He then wanted to establish that the gospels were reliable sources in part two, which he failed to do, especially since this is impossible to do. Part three would have built on that to say that since the gospels are reliable accounts we should trust them when they talk of the resurrection.
As he has failed to provide compelling evidence of part one, and made no attempt at part two, I think that the matter should be closed out and this thread devoted to pictures of kittens.
As he has failed to provide compelling evidence of part one, and made no attempt at part two, I think that the matter should be closed out and this thread devoted to pictures of kittens.