RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 6, 2015 at 12:34 am
(This post was last modified: July 6, 2015 at 12:36 am by Pizza.)
"How do you propose that biologists study something that happened 2,000 years ago?"
Evidence of analogous cases of corpses resurrecting in the modern day.
"Detectives would examine all the evidence to determine my whereabouts at the time of the murder.
Regarding the claims of Christianity, what is sufficient is probably subjective; what convinces one person to become a Christian may not convince another. That said, I think there is sufficient evidence for the resurrection of Jesus to conclude that He is God. Unless, of course, your presuppositions prevent this."
If your going with a subjectivist view of evidence and probability it really doesn't help since we are not starting with the same premises here obviously. Arguments are useless if the people you're talking too don't believe the premises are true.
I don't think god is a well-defined idea, I believe the first cause of the universe isn't a human or even human-like in any meaningful way because of the arguments in Hume's Dialogues, and I don't think dead people resurrect given what we know about dead bodies.
Again I ask: How about if you accused of raping and murdering people you never met in another state or country with astral projection powers? Is mere testimony enough? I'm not joking.
"So, from this and what you wrote above, it sounds like your real issue is that you do not view the study of history as being terribly rigorous."
Not really. I just know it has limitations like all areas of study. Because like I said this isn't a mere historical claim, it's a claim about the biology of a dead bodies.
"Because after considering ALL of these theories and determining whether they have problems that prevent them from being likely, it can be determined that the supernatural resurrection of Jesus is the most probable (I did not say certain!) explanation of ALL the facts."
That's the claim I'm asking you to defend: These other explanations (naturalistic resurrection, aliens, ghost Jesus, demonic resurrection, resurrection by other gods, or there was no resurrection-, swoon theory, etc) as more improbable than, "Yahweh cause Jesus to resurrect." That's what I'm asking you to defend.
Evidence of analogous cases of corpses resurrecting in the modern day.
"Detectives would examine all the evidence to determine my whereabouts at the time of the murder.
Regarding the claims of Christianity, what is sufficient is probably subjective; what convinces one person to become a Christian may not convince another. That said, I think there is sufficient evidence for the resurrection of Jesus to conclude that He is God. Unless, of course, your presuppositions prevent this."
If your going with a subjectivist view of evidence and probability it really doesn't help since we are not starting with the same premises here obviously. Arguments are useless if the people you're talking too don't believe the premises are true.
I don't think god is a well-defined idea, I believe the first cause of the universe isn't a human or even human-like in any meaningful way because of the arguments in Hume's Dialogues, and I don't think dead people resurrect given what we know about dead bodies.
Again I ask: How about if you accused of raping and murdering people you never met in another state or country with astral projection powers? Is mere testimony enough? I'm not joking.
"So, from this and what you wrote above, it sounds like your real issue is that you do not view the study of history as being terribly rigorous."
Not really. I just know it has limitations like all areas of study. Because like I said this isn't a mere historical claim, it's a claim about the biology of a dead bodies.
"Because after considering ALL of these theories and determining whether they have problems that prevent them from being likely, it can be determined that the supernatural resurrection of Jesus is the most probable (I did not say certain!) explanation of ALL the facts."
That's the claim I'm asking you to defend: These other explanations (naturalistic resurrection, aliens, ghost Jesus, demonic resurrection, resurrection by other gods, or there was no resurrection-, swoon theory, etc) as more improbable than, "Yahweh cause Jesus to resurrect." That's what I'm asking you to defend.
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all. - Denis Diderot
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
