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...]

Craig’s “Historical Evidence” for the Death of Jesus – Part 7

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, in part 6 of this series we saw that the one piece of historical evidence provided by Craig was CRAP. Based on a modern scholarly translation of the passage in question, the evidence is simply irrelevant to the historical claim it was … [Read more...]

Boghossian: Publishing in Phil of Religion = Childish

I confess I had to do a double-take when I read the following tweet from Peter Boghossian. Being published in the philosophy of religion should disqualify one from sitting at the adult table.— Peter Boghossian (@peterboghossian) June 15, 2014 Notice what Boghossian is claiming. Boghossian is not just claiming that theists who have had books or articles published in the philosophy of religion should be disqualified from sitting at the adult table. His claim applies equally to nontheists who … [Read more...]

Craig’s “Historical Evidence” for the Death of Jesus – Part 6

William Craig claims that Jesus rose from the dead. In making this claim, Craig takes on a heavy burden of proof, including the burden to prove that Jesus actually died on the cross on Good Friday. However, in most of his books, articles, and debates, Craig simply ignores the question of whether Jesus actually died on the cross. So, it appears to me that Craig's case for the resurrection is a complete failure.However, in The Son Rises (hereafter TSR), Craig does make a brief attempt, in … [Read more...]

Some Logic in Swinburne’s Cosmological Argument

I have been struggling for the past week or two to make clear the logic behind one premise of Swinburne's cosmological argument. Perhaps those readers of The Secular Outpost who have an interest in logic or in Swinburne's arguments will be able to help me with this task.Actually, his inductive cosmological argument is very simple:1. A complex physical universe exists. Therefore: 2. God exists.It is not this argument that I am struggling to understand and clarify, but rather … [Read more...]

Craig’s “Historical Evidence” for the Death of Jesus – Part 5

William Craig's case for the resurrection is a failure because he does not make a solid case for the claim that "Jesus actually died on the cross on Good Friday". In most of his books, articles and debates, Craig usually just ignores the question of whether Jesus actually died on the cross, but in The Son Rises (TSR), he does make a brief attempt to prove this claim in just five paragraphs, consisting of 35 sentences.In the first three paragraphs of this "case", Craig makes dozens of … [Read more...]

Craig’s “Historical Evidence” for the Death of Jesus – Part 4

Logic at end of Paragraph 3

William Craig asserts that "Jesus rose from the dead". In making this claim, Craig takes on a burden of proof. A crucial part of this burden is to prove that Jesus actually died on the cross, since a person can rise from the dead ONLY IF they have previously died. Unfortunately, in most of his books, articles, and debates, Craig simply ignores this issue.However in The Son Rises: The Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus (hereafter: TSR), Craig does make a brief attempt to … [Read more...]

Why William Lane Craig Has Not Seriously Argued for Jesus’ Death

It is difficult, of course, to get into someone else's mind and to figure out why that person thinks the way they think. But I can make some educated guesses as to why William Lane Craig rarely argues in support of the death of Jesus on the cross, and why when he does so (e.g. in The Son Rises, hereafter: TSR), he does not make a serious intellectual effort (i.e. he rattles off dozens of historical claims without providing actual historical evidence to support those claims).I think there … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X