The Naturalist’s dilemma

The inherent problem a Naturalist has is that they cannot escape their own paradigm—the closed universe of natural laws and scientific method. This is the legacy of Western Enlightenment thinking, which is technically called Metaphysical Naturalism.

An Enlightenment philosopher who held this worldview, David Hume, argued that

True worship is a response to God

True worship is a response to God. It’s never coerced or required or any other such silly thing that some suppose. As Jesus told the Pharisees, if we didn’t praise Him the very rocks would cry out. Dutiful service is never true worship. God does not need our worship, but we need to worship God, for from it comes a life filled with ever-increasing joy. 

The resurrection of Jesus Christ – Part Five

I would like to finish this series on the Christian case for the resurrection of Jesus Christ by summarizing what we covered and adding some final thoughts.

To summarize, at the heart of Christianity is the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Without the resurrection, you have no Christianity. But if the resurrection is true, then Christianity automatically follows. 

The resurrection of Jesus Christ – Part Four

Are naturalists right in saying that miracles are “improbable” (Ehrman) if not “impossible” (David Hume)?

The famous 18th century philosopher, David Hume, stated that miracles are a violation of natural laws. Our unalterable experience has established these laws. Therefore because miracles are outside our experience they are impossible. But is that actually true? 

The resurrection of Jesus Christ – Part Three

One of the arguments laymen skeptics and atheists like to make against Jesus’ resurrection is that the early Christians borrowed this idea from supposed pagan resurrection stories. While most scholars don’t accept this, it will be good to know what it is when you hear it brought up.

We will see in the two short videos that these pagan myths are nothing at all like the

Revisiting the Minimal Facts Argument: A Hypothetical Discussion Between a Skeptic and a Christian

Here’s a thorough and well-referenced post that’s following the same lines I’ve been taking in my series. It well worth the read if you want to understand the Minimal Facts Approach to the resurrection.

THINKAPOLOGETICS.COM

This is a hypothetical discussion based on a discussion of the Minimal Facts argument that has been put forward in the book The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Michael Licona and Gary Habermas.

Please note I have already discussed this topic a bit in a post called The Metaphysical Hurdle and The Minimal Facts Argument.

A Hypothetical Discussion:

Professing Christian: “Do you agree that if God wants humanity to know his plans and purposes for them, it makes sense He would communicate to us somewhere within the context human history?”

Skeptic: “Yes, I think that does make sense. But where in history has he done this?”

Professing Christian:  “He has communicated to us through the work of Jesus of Nazareth. Our central claim is that he rose from the dead to confirm He is the full revelation of God to humanity.”

Skeptic: “What’s your evidence Jesus rose from the…

View original post 3,760 more words

The resurrection of Jesus Christ – Part Two

In part one, we looked at the historical data for Jesus’ resurrection from the dead that most scholars agree on. I did not treat the Bible as inspired (even though I believe it is) but as a history book, to see if the resurrection theory is the best explanation that provides explanatory scope and power for the evidence. I used articles and a video from experts in the field to show this.