RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 3, 2015 at 6:44 pm
(This post was last modified: July 3, 2015 at 6:46 pm by Randy Carson.)
(July 3, 2015 at 4:03 pm)Esquilax Wrote:(July 3, 2015 at 2:08 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Given your intellect, I would recommend reading William Lane Craig's Reasonable Faith if you have not already done so. He gets a bad rap from folks in this forum, but I don't really think the negativity is deserved. The man is well-educated, highly intelligent and articulate. Even if you don't agree with him, you will undoubtedly enjoy being challenged by him.
So, I just wanna be real clear here: you bitch us all out on a routine basis (based on nothing, but that's a conversation you're avoiding in another thread) for having presuppositions against your position... and yet you'll recommend the work of a man who is on record, in writing and on film, numerous times, confirming his own presuppositions in this area, something that you would and have dismissed the words of others here for.
So, I mean... fuck, right? If you were being consistent to your own positions you'd have to dismiss everything WLC says out of hand, right? It's what you did to Cato on the basis of presuppositions you merely assert to exist, and here you have a set of presuppositions I can confirm to you in writing and video in a matter of minutes; why the hypocrisy?
I'm waffling on whether you are on my ignore list, Esq, but you've asked a fair question which deserves an answer.
In another thread, I pointed out that Cato was arguing based upon his presuppositions. Oddly, since Cato cannot be an evidentialist, folks have taken issue with that. So, now you think I'm being hypocritical for recommending William Lane Craig. I'm not.
Is Craig a presuppositionalist or an evidentialist? He has said:
Quote:"Presuppositionalism commits the informal fallacy of begging the question, for it advocates presupposing the truth of Christian theism in order to prove Christian theism. It is difficult to imagine how anyone could with a straight face think to show theism to be true by reasoning, 'God exists, therefore God exists.' A Christian theist himself will deny that question-begging arguments prove anything."(Five Views on Apologetics, 233.)
Have you ever read Reasonable Faith? How many of Craig's debates have you watched on YouTube? Have you studied the transcripts? Craig argues as an evidentialist, Esq...not as a presuppositionalist.
Does that mean that he (and I) don't have presuppositions? Probably not. But in the course of his apologetics work, it is clear that he is focused on providing evidence from which it may be deduced that the resurrection of Jesus is the MOST REASONABLE conclusion in terms of explanatory scope and power, etc. of all the facts that is available.
And, of course, this has nothing to do with whether someone would enjoy reading Craig's book.
