What IS good, and how do we determine it?

[Chas]

The approach doesn't matter, if you where a true evidential apologist you would be arguing gods existence based on evidence that a believer and a non believer both agree on, so all presupposition is removed. What your doing is presenting stuff that you think is "evidence" for a god you already presuppose exists.

.....and giving ZERO evidence.

Incorrectomundo, gentlemen.

In the "Minimal Fact Approach" thread, I am arguing for the resurrection of Jesus on the basis of four facts which the overwhelming majority of ALL NT scholars (believers and skeptics alike) accept as highly probable. The fifth fact is accepted by a simple majority.

That's kinda the whole point. These are not facts with which you may take issue easily as they are most generally conceded as undisputed.

See ya there.

Popular opinion does not a fact make; that requires evidence.

And no one has slandered your church.  Truth is not slander.