The level of philosophical sophistication available for defending the resurrection surprises many skeptics and Christians alike
Mike and Cameron reflect on accessibility and depth of resurrection arguments
Cameron notes that despite being a photographer (not a professional philosopher), the depth of argument for the resurrection surprised him. Mike emphasizes that skeptics often dismiss the resurrection without engaging the sophisticated argumentation available. Mike's own content simplifies this material to make it more accessible.
← Previous
Tim McGrew and Lydia McGrew's paper on miracles and the resu
Next →Problem of evil as the strongest argument for atheism: suffe
Responses
Scripture Commentary
article
What Winger Presently Gets Wrong: Women Apostles
Response to Mike Winger's Women in Ministry Part 5 on whether women were apostles in the New Testament
Scripture Commentary
article
What Winger Presently Gets Wrong With Genesis 1–3: ‘Was Women’s Submission Just A Curse To Be Overturned?’
Response to Mike Winger's Women in Ministry Part 2 on Genesis 1-3 and whether women's submission was just a curse to be overturned
Scripture Commentary
article
The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus
Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona — Kindle highlights from 'The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus'. 110 highlights.
Your Tags
Personal labels you apply to any item — separate from system topics. Tags are shared across all databases. Visit /tags to browse all your tags.
...more
Personal labels you apply to any item — separate from system topics. Tags are shared across all databases. Visit /tags to browse all your tags.
...more