RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 17, 2015 at 7:10 am
(This post was last modified: July 17, 2015 at 7:13 am by robvalue.)
Here's a thought.
Is the magical parts of the NT supposed to be:
(A) A historical account by people
or
(B) Revelation from god to people
In case A, it is subject to normal human historical criteria. Extraordinary claim, pitiful evidence, fail.
In case B, we're relying on God telling the truth. How can we possibly know God would tell us the truth? We can't. Because God says so about himself? This is circular reasoning. We can't know it's true unless we investigate it ourselves, putting us back to (A).
Is the magical parts of the NT supposed to be:
(A) A historical account by people
or
(B) Revelation from god to people
In case A, it is subject to normal human historical criteria. Extraordinary claim, pitiful evidence, fail.
In case B, we're relying on God telling the truth. How can we possibly know God would tell us the truth? We can't. Because God says so about himself? This is circular reasoning. We can't know it's true unless we investigate it ourselves, putting us back to (A).
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum