The Case for the Death of Jesus – Part 2

John Probability Tree

A challenge (or two) to my previous post "The Case for the Death of Jesus" came from a reader "hardindr". Another reader, Tom Hanson, commented "Personally I'm with hardindr." So in this post I will respond to comments from hardindr, with the intention of also responding to Tom Hanson's concerns.Here is the first comment by hardindr:All of these lengthy blog entries on this subject have confused me. Does the author of them seriously believe that it isn't a historical fact that Jesus of … [Read more...]

What Happened to Quentin Smith?

Quentin Smith used to be a prolific philosopher, but, if PhilPapers.org is accurate, it has been many years since he's published anything new. He used to have his own website, which is now gone. His faculty page at WMU, which used to contain his vita and links to papers, is now stripped down to very minimal content. People tell me they've been unable to get ahold of him.I hope he is okay. If anyone has any information (and they are allowed to share it), please post a comment below or send me … [Read more...]

I Post a Reply to Jerry Coyne and Now I Am Blocked from Commenting on His Blog

I am used to this kind of behavior from some Christiana apologists, but not from fellow atheists. When I attempted to post the following comment on his blog post, alerting his readers to the fact that Coyne had unintentionally misrepresented my argument, I learned that I have been blocked from commenting on his blog.Dr. Coyne -- Thanks for your article and your interest in the argument. I don't think you've fairly represented Draper argument, however. I will explain why in detail on my blog … [Read more...]

Norman Geisler’s Case for the Death of Jesus

Let me cut to the chase: Geisler's case for the claim that "Jesus actually died on the cross" is crap. It might be marginally better than William Craig's case, but it is most definitely a hot steaming pile of crap. As with Craig's case, part of the reason Geisler's case fails is that he tries to make his case in just a few pages. (This appears to be a common form of mental illness among Christian apologists.)I'm tempted to work my way slowly through Geisler's case, as I did with Craig's … [Read more...]

What Happened to Philo?

Is it just me or has it been a while since a new issue of Philo was published? (For those who didn't know: Philo  used to be subtitled, "The Journal of the Society of Humanist Philosophers." It was subsequently re-subtitled as "A Journal of Philosophy.") Also, I see that its website is now significantly different than it had been. It now appears to be setup using the "Open Journal System" (OJS) software. … [Read more...]

An Invitation to William Lane Craig

An Invitation to William Lane Craig             On May 23 and June 9, respectively, the Secular Web published revised versions of two of my three essays on the kalam cosmological argument that had previously been published on that website. Today, I have sent an e-mail letter to Dr. William Lane Craig requesting that he publicly respond to these essays for the reasons set forth in that letter. A copy of that letter appears below. The reader will please note that I informed Dr. Craig in my letter … [Read more...]

The Case for the Death of Jesus

I have written several posts about William Craig's "case" for the death of Jesus in his book The Son Rises. In those posts I showed that Craig made about 81 historical claims, but failed to provide any historical evidence for 85% of those claims, and provided only weak and dubious historical evidence for the other 15% of claims. In short, Craig provided solid historical evidence for ZERO of the 81 historical claims he makes in his "case" for the death of Jesus. He completely failed to show … [Read more...]

Craig’s “Historical Evidence” for the Death of Jesus – Part 8

In the first three paragraphs of William Craig's "case" for the claim that Jesus died on the cross, Craig makes 60 different historical claims, but provides only ONE piece of actual historical evidence for just ONE of the 60 historical claims. Furthermore, the one piece of historical evidence provided by Craig is irrelevant to the historical claim it was supposed to support, based on a modern scholarly translation of the Major Declamations.In paragraph four, Craig makes 22 historical … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X