That the apostles would have created such words and ideas out of thin
air seems unlikely, for their story [the resurrection] and their message strained
credulity even then. Paul admitted the difficulty: "... we preach
Christ crucified, a stumbling-block to Jews and folly to Gentiles." A
king who died a criminal's death? An individual's resurrection from the
dead? A human atoning sacrifice? "This is not something that the PR
committee of the disciples would have put out," says Dr. R. Albert
Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in
Louisville, Ky. "The very fact of the salvation message's complexity
and uniqueness, I think, speaks to the credibility of the Gospels and
of the entire New Testament."
in the current issue newsweek appears to confirm the resurrection of jesus . that's an amazing scoop! but the argument is that the disciples' claims that jesus was resurrected is confirmed by the fact that it strains credulity. a remarkable epistemic principle: the more ridiculous a claim is the more plausible it is. applied consistently...oh never mind. but even applied occasionally, this argument will confirm literally hundreds of thousands of miracles of all religions, from the resurrection of dionysus to the transportation of mohammed to the very latest in alien abductions and elvis sightings. you can't drop a pebble into human history without hitting a miracle that strains credulity. why would disciples makes such a claim, or undergo a process of self-delusion by which they came to believe it? let's see: maybe to assert their status as the respresentatives of god's will on earth. in an arsenal of bad arguments, this is the very worst. thanks to eric ratner for drawing my attention to the piece.
Recent Comments