Philo 3 (1):52-62 (2000)
AbstractIn my “Reply to Davis” (Philo vol. 2, no. 1) I defended two theses: First, even for Christians the initial probability of the Resurrection is very low. Second, the historical evidence for the Resurrection is not strong enough to overcome this initial improbability. Consequently, I maintained that belief in the Resurrection is not rational even for Christians. In his latest reply, “The Rationality of Resurrection for Christians: A Rejoinder” (present issue), Stephen T. Davis emphasizes that he is only defending the rationality of belief in the Resurrection for Christians, not for non-Christian supernaturalists. Presumably this point is emphasized by Davis because he supposes that I have at best shown that belief in the Resurrection is not rational for non-Christian supernaturalists. However, this is not so. In this reply I will defend the two theses stated above
Similar books and articles
Comtemporary Christian Doubts About the Resurrection.James A. Keller - 1988 - Faith and Philosophy 5 (1):40-60.
The Rationality of Christian Belief in Resurrection: A Reply to Michael Martin.Stephen T. Davis - 2003 - Philosophia Christi 5 (2):501 - 517.
Wittgenstein on the Resurrection.Hugh Chandler - 2010 - Philosophical Investigations 33 (4):321-338.
Physicalism and Resurrection.Stephen T. Davis - 2001 - In Kevin J. Corcoran (ed.), Soul, Body, and Survival. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Is There Sufficient Historical Evidence to Establish the Resurrection of Jesus?Robert Greg Cavin - 1995 - Faith and Philosophy 12 (3):361-379.
Together with the Body I Love.James F. Ross - 2001 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 75:1-18.
Traditional Christian Belief in the Resurrection of the Body.Stephen T. Davis - 1988 - New Scholasticism 62 (1):72-97.
Does Process Thought Allow Personal Immortality?Granville C. Henry - 1995 - Religious Studies 31 (3):311 - 321.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
No citations found.