RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 13, 2015 at 8:43 pm
(This post was last modified: July 13, 2015 at 8:46 pm by Randy Carson.)
(July 13, 2015 at 8:00 pm)Neimenovic Wrote:(July 13, 2015 at 7:53 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: It is true that I did not find MY way to God by means of these arguments. My faith journey has been very different.
That does not mean, however, that no one comes to God by them.
I could give examples that I have seen in real life, or you could read the stories of Jews, agnostics and atheists who came to believe that Jesus is God by means of considering presentations like the one I have made in this thread.
Not everyone will. Maybe no one here will.
But apologetics - the why of our faith - is just as important as evangelism - the what of our faith, and I am confident that if you decide to objectively examine the evidence, you can come to a faith position.
Alternatively, you can continue as you are. Inertia is a powerful force.
It doesn't matter even if some are convinced, though I doubt there are many.
What I'm pointing out is not that your arguments are not convincing, but that they have a fundamental flaw: they were all formed with the presupposition that god exists and that the conclusion they reach is true. They are made through working your way back from the conclusion, which was never reached by critical thinking. To the contrary, if critical thinking is applied the conclusion cannot be reached.
These arguments were all invented much, much after faith came to exist. They are not the main reason people believe. They're the excuse made for believing. The presupposition they were formed with makes them invalid.
Do you have any counter-arguments to show that the evidence I have presented - the evidence accepted as true by the vast majority of scholars teaching at major universities throughout the Western world - is false?
