Search — Theology Explorer

argument from silence Plutarch Papias

Much ancient literature is lost: two-thirds of Tacitus's Histories, 12 of Plutarch's 60 biographies — including his life of Caesar Augustus

Contextualizing the argument from silence by noting the loss of ancient literature

argument from silence Josephus Philo

Roman historians didn't mention Jesus more because he wasn't significant to Roman history — they didn't even mention Pontius Pilate, known only from Philo, Josephus, and NT sources

Explaining the relative silence of Roman sources about Jesus

argument from silence Josephus historicity of Jesus

Argument from silence illustrated: Josephus omits his own capture by Romans from his autobiography; Grant's memoirs never mention the Emancipation Proclamation

Further examples showing argument from silence is a weak form of evidence

James Crossley John Dominic Crossan scholarly consensus Bart Ehrman historicity of Jesus

Objection that scholars affirm historicity only because they signed faith statements is refuted by citing atheist/agnostic scholars who agree

Responding to the claim that Christian bias explains scholarly consensus on historicity

scholarly consensus historicity of Jesus Society of Biblical Literature

Suggestion to mythicists: attend the Society of Biblical Literature annual meeting and ask scholars directly whether Jesus existed

Practical advice for those skeptical of scholarly consensus

scholarly consensus resurrection crucifixion of Jesus

Virtual scholarly consensus on historical facts about Jesus: lived in Palestine, believed special relationship with God, performed astonishing deeds, taught in parables, criticized Jewish leaders, crucified under Pilate

Summarizing the bedrock facts about Jesus accepted by virtually all historians including non-Christians

scholarly consensus historicity of Jesus

The consensus extends well beyond a minimal "one man named Jesus died by crucifixion" — substantial historical data about Jesus is agreed upon

Qualifying the extent of the historical consensus on Jesus

scholarly consensus Bart Ehrman historicity of Jesus

Bart Ehrman is in a small minority who deny Jesus was known as a miracle worker during his lifetime; most scholars disagree

Noting limits and minority positions within the broader consensus

miracles epistemology naturalism

Methodological principle: dismissing miracle claims in historical sources reflects worldview bias, not following the evidence

Responding to the claim that miracle claims in historical sources can be safely dismissed

scholarly consensus historicity of Jesus Jesus's miracles

Audience question: "Consensus holds Jesus existed but was not the Christ of the Gospels" — Licona: that is not a consensus position

Audience Q&A — addressing the claimed scholarly consensus against Gospel accounts

Acts Hebrews Paul Peter Acts

Audience Q: Why doesn't anyone reference Tacitus on Christian persecution until the 4th century? — Multiple 1st-century sources confirm early persecution of Christians

Audience question from "Godless Engineer" about Christian persecution attestation

historicity of Jesus extra-biblical sources Suetonius

Suetonius's reference to "Chrestus" in Life of Claudius possibly refers to Jesus — but Suetonius is chronologically challenged if it does

Discussing Suetonius as a possible extra-biblical source for Jesus

Acts 18 argument from silence Josephus extra-biblical sources

Suetonius's report of Claudius expelling Jews from Rome matches Acts 18 — illustrating how omissions in one source don't prove falsehood; Josephus doesn't mention this expulsion

Cross-referencing Suetonius and Acts; illustrating argument from silence

Acts 9 Paul resurrection appearances hallucination hypothesis

Did Paul hallucinate seeing Jesus? Hallucinations are private, not group experiences — Paul's companions also saw the light and heard the voice (Acts 9)

Audience Q about whether Paul hallucinated his encounter with the risen Jesus

Acts 13 Psalm 16:10 David Paul resurrection

Paul quotes Psalm 16:10 in Acts 13, arguing Jesus's body did not decay — therefore the resurrection was physical and bodily, not merely visionary

Paul's bodily resurrection theology inferred from Acts 13

1 Corinthians 15:20 1 Corinthians 15:23 Paul resurrection bodily resurrection

Paul's resurrection theology reconstructed from 1 Corinthians 15: Christ is firstfruits; believers will be raised at Christ's coming in the same manner

Paul's own teaching on the nature of resurrection

2 Corinthians 5:8 Philippians 1:20-22 Paul eschatology intermediate state

Paul's eschatology: 2 Corinthians 5:8 and Philippians 1:20-22 show an intermediate disembodied state after death, before the final bodily resurrection

Paul's two-stage eschatological framework

1 Thessalonians 4 Paul eschatology intermediate state

1 Thessalonians 4: Jesus will "bring with him" the dead in Christ, whose spirits are reunited with raised bodies — a transformer/transformative resurrection

Paul's 1 Thessalonians 4 passage on resurrection and the coming of Christ

Paul bodily resurrection resurrection appearances

Summary: Paul taught physical/bodily resurrection; hallucination theory fails; Paul was not grieving Jesus's death — he was glad Jesus was dead before his conversion

Concluding the section on Paul's resurrection belief

historicity of Jesus dying and rising gods pagan mythology

Audience Q on mimesis: pagan parallels fail for the same reasons, plus early Christians were Torah-observant Jews who would not borrow from pagan myths

Audience question about mimesis / pagan parallel arguments

Richard Carrier criteria of authenticity historical methodology

Richard Carrier's claim that all historians have concluded the criteria of authenticity are invalid is false — most historians still embrace the criteria

Audience Q about the methodology of validating historicity of Christ

Mike Licona criteria of authenticity historical methodology

Licona published a critique of the Keith/Le Donne volume in the Bulletin for Biblical Research, arguing scholars are too pessimistic about the criteria

Licona's scholarly engagement with the debate over historical criteria

John Dominic Crossan Mike Licona criteria of authenticity John Dominic Crossan

John Dominic Crossan in debate with Licona affirmed the use of criteria — demonstrating that most historians still rely on them

Licona's debate with Crossan as evidence of continuing scholarly use of criteria

multiple attestation eyewitness testimony criteria of authenticity

The criteria of authenticity are not magical — they are common-sense principles: prioritize early sources, eyewitness reports, unsympathetic sources, multiple independent attestation

Explaining what the criteria of authenticity actually are

Richard Carrier Bart Ehrman Jesus mythicism

Advice to those influenced by Richard Carrier: read other skeptical scholars — Ehrman, Lüdemann, Casey — who have proper training in historical Jesus scholarship

Practical guidance for those following Carrier's mythicist arguments

Plutarch Mike Licona historical methodology

Licona's book Why Are There Differences in the Gospels? required classicist review to avoid errors in Plutarch material — illustrating disciplinary boundaries

Personal example of the importance of disciplinary specialization

scholarly consensus Richard Carrier Jesus mythicism

Only a handful of bona fide scholars deny Jesus's existence — Carrier said there were seven including himself, none widely respected in their disciplines

Quantifying the scholarly minority who deny Jesus's historical existence

epistemology Jesus mythicism historicity of Jesus

Red flags for mythicists: fringe scholarly support + primarily internet bloggers = gullibility warning; comparable to moon landing denialism and Holocaust denial

Warning signs that a position may be a conspiracy theory

apologetics atheism Jesus mythicism

Pastoral observation: many Jesus mythicists are atheists/agnostics who find it convenient to deny Jesus existed rather than grapple with who he claimed to be

Winger's pastoral/spiritual observation about mythicists' motivations

Mike Winger idea 2019-06-26

The Masters Seminary article: verse 12 is acknowledged to be about seeing Christ face-to-face, but a 1,000-year time gap is inserted between vv. 11 and 12 to salvage the cessationist reading.

Winger quotes the article directly to show how the author handles the face-to-face language.

1 Corinthians 13:12 cessationism face to face with God 1 Corinthians 13:12

biblical teaching verse-by-verse teaching ministry strategy

2015 turning point: Sunday evening service and weekly video strategy

In June 2015, Winger's senior pastor offered him the freedom to teach an adult Sunday evening service, which catalyzed a new approach to his YouTube ministry.

Isaiah 14:12 Revelation 22:16 NIV translation Satan Isaiah 14:12

Q&A: NIV Morningstar — does the NIV call Jesus Satan?

Question about why the NIV uses "Morningstar" for both Isaiah 14:12 (apparently referring to Satan) and Revelation 22:16 (Jesus).

Psalm 22 Luke 21 eschatology preterism Psalm 22

Q&A: Luke 21 and preterism — is it fulfilled prophecy?

Question from a self-identified preterist asking why Winger does not see Luke 21 as fulfilled prophecy.

miracles cessationism continuationism

Q&A: Why did God stop doing big signs and miracles (burning bush, parting the sea)?

Question from a listener puzzled by the apparent cessation of large-scale miracles after the Old Testament.

Scripture authority unlimited atonement universal atonement

Mike's overall conviction: Scripture clearly teaches Jesus died for everyone

Before diving into objections, Mike states his position and epistemic posture.

Trinity election limited atonement

Objection 1 stated: Trinitarian harmony in the atonement

Mike explains the Calvinist argument that Trinitarian harmony requires limited atonement.

atonement limited atonement failure of the Son

Objection 2 stated: the failure of the Son

If Jesus died for all people and some go to hell, then Jesus failed at his task.

Hebrews 7:25 limited atonement intercession Hebrews 7:25

Objection 3 stated: intercession linked to atonement

Jesus intercedes for those he died for, and all he intercedes for are saved. Therefore he did not die for all.

hell divine justice limited atonement

Objection 5 stated: double jeopardy / double payment

If Christ paid for everyone's sins, it is unjust to punish anyone further.

1 John 2:2 limited atonement kosmos 1 John 2:2

Sixth item: clear Scripture texts refuting limited atonement — especially 1 John 2:2

Mike previews the scriptural section at the end of the video, noting White directly responded to this verse.

1 John 2:2 kosmos 1 John 2:2 propitiation

1 John 2:2 refutes Trinitarian harmony: Jesus is propitiation for the whole world, not just believers

Mike applies 1 John 2:2 directly against the Trinitarian harmony argument.

Trinity faith unlimited atonement

Response to Trinitarian harmony #2: the Father can have complexity in his desires — saving all who believe

Mike offers a positive alternative to the Calvinist Trinitarian harmony construct.

1 Timothy 2:1-6 unlimited atonement universal salvific will 1 Timothy 2:1-6

1 Timothy 2:1-6 — God desires all people to be saved; Christ gave himself as ransom for all

Mike's central proof-text for the Father's universal salvific intention.

election limited atonement Trinitarian harmony in the atonement

Trinitarian harmony assumes unnecessary correlation: individual election does not logically require limited atonement

A second structural objection to the Trinitarian harmony argument.

Romans 8:29-32 hermeneutics limited atonement negative inference fallacy

Negative inference fallacy: Romans 8 makes inclusive statements, not exclusive ones about the atonement's extent

Mike's main exegetical response to the Calvinist use of Romans 8.

Romans 8:29-32 Romans (book) hermeneutics union with Christ Romans 8:29-32

Romans 8 is about benefits to those in Christ, not an exclusive statement limiting the atonement's extent

Contextual argument about what Romans 8 is actually teaching.

Matthew 22:14 Mark 16:15 Great Commission gospel proclamation limited atonement

Many are called but few are chosen; preaching the gospel to all implies a genuine offer for all

Mike uses the Great Commission and related teaching to argue against limited atonement's pastoral coherence.

1 John 2:2 David Allen 1 John 2:2 unlimited atonement

Trinitarian harmony argument can be reversed: if Scripture says Christ died for all, the Father must have intended it

Mike turns the Trinitarian harmony argument back on the Calvinist position.

John 3:16 unlimited atonement failure of the Son extent vs. application

Objection 2 answered: Jesus did not fail — his goal was to die for all so that whoever believes is saved

Mike rebuts the "failure of the Son" argument.