When someone makes a claim about us, it’s either true or false. If it’s false, we shouldn’t be offended since it’s just an erroneous statement. If it’s true, then we should decide whether or not we need to act on it or not. But we should be offended. As Christians, we ought to love the truth.
Show Outline
Preliminary points
Dr. Craig’s approach is not the same as Gary Habermas’ minimal facts approach to the Resurrection.
The Case for the Resurrection does not rely on the inspiration or even strongly reliability of the New Testament as a whole (as Catholic Christians, we believe the New Testament is inspired, we just don’t need that premise for our argument).
Miracles cannot be ruled out ahead of time in historical investigations unless one has an independent argument that God doesn’t exist. Dr. Feser explains that point here in more detail.
Three Big Facts
The empty tomb
The post-mortem appearances
The origin of Christianity
Historical Criteria for Assessing Explanations
Explanatory scope
Explanatory power
Plausibility
Ad hoc or Contrived
Four Explanations of the 3 Facts
The Swoon Theory (Apparent Death)
The Hallucination Theory
The Conspiracy Theory
The Resurrection Theory
How to Discuss in Conversation
Stay focused on the three facts (no other details or objections).
Ask the person, “Which theory do you think is the best and why?”
Evidence That Demands a Verdict (McDowell defends the Martyrdom of the Apostles in a chapter). Sean McDowell’s doctoral dissertation can be found here.
){kind=link}