McClellan’s tone may suggest confidence, but his failure to engage seriously with the subject leaves the impression of bluster rather than substance.
Responding to Dan McClellan on the Resurrection Accounts Read More »
Any discussion of the evidence for the resurrection must first ascertain what the original apostolic witnesses claimed and whether those claims are best explained by the resurrection, or by some alternative hypothesis.
The Resurrection of Jesus: The Evidential Contribution of Luke-Acts Read More »
McClellan recently published a 17-minute video responding to a TikTok video by my colleague, Dr. Sean McDowell, on discrepancies in the resurrection narratives. In this article, I will address points raised in this video.
Do the Resurrection Narratives Contradict? A Reply to Dan McClellan Read More »
There is satisfactory evidence that many professing to be original witnesses of the Christian miracles, passed their lives in labours, dangers, and sufferings, voluntarily undergone in attestation of the accounts which they delivered, and solely in consequence of their belief of those accounts; and that they also submitted, from the same motives, to new rules of conduct.
Early Church Persecution, and its Evidential Value Read More »
Given that Jesus was alleged, from the beginning, to have been raised on the Sunday following Passover, during the feast of firstfruits, this suggests that the choice of the Sunday as the day of the resurrection resulted from rational deliberation, or conscious design, whether on the part of human schemers or divine agency. It seems to militate fairly heavily against the hypothesis that the original apostles were honestly mistaken about Christ’s resurrection.
The Firstfruits Feast and the Case for the Resurrection Read More »
In a video published this week, provocatively titled “Why Would Paul Willingly Die for His Belief? Another Church Lie!”, Rabbi Singer makes a number of bizarre claims. One such statement is that “the notion that Paul was beheaded by Rome is complete nonsense. It’s an invention of the church, and it’s mentioned nowhere in the Christian Bible.”
The Argument from Martyrdom: A Response to Rabbi Tovia Singer Read More »
This week, a two part series of essays was published by atheist physicist Dr. Brian Blais. These essays challenged some of my key contentions from the debate, particularly my employment of Bayesian epistemology. In this essay, I reply to Dr. Blais’ remarks.
Bayesian Probability and the Resurrection: A Reply to Brian Blais Read More »
Since the resurrection is intended, in Christian theology, to function as an authenticating sign, it is highly predicted that Jesus’ resurrection will deviate from the normal course of nature. That the resurrection does, in fact, deviate from the normal course of nature should not be taken as a cause for concern.
John Walvoord (1910-2002) was a past president of Dallas Theological Seminary (1952-1986) and a prolific author. He was probably best known for his advocacy of dispensational theology and of pre-tribulation ‘rapture’ theology with respect to eschatology. In his book, Jesus Christ Our Lord, Walvoord offers a systematic presentation of the person and work of Jesus Christ.
Book Review: Jesus Christ Our Lord, by John Walvoord Read More »
Matthew L. Hartke is a former Christian who hosts the blog “Resurrection Review,” on which he analyzes and discusses the origins of Christianity. A correspondent recently brought to my attention an article posted on Hartke’s site, provocatively titled “Five Reasons to Doubt the Resurrection” and asked me if I could respond to it.
On Matthew Hartke’s Five Reasons to Doubt the Resurrection Read More »