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.
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