6 found
Order:
Disambiguations
Robert Greg Cavin [6]Robert Gregory Cavin [1]
  1. The Implausibility and Low Explanatory Power of the Resurrection Hypothesis—With a Rejoinder to Stephen T. Davis.Robert Greg Cavin & Carlos A. Colombetti - 2020 - Socio-Historical Examination of Religion and Ministry 2 (1):37-94.
    We respond to Stephen T. Davis’ criticism of our earlier essay, “Assessing the Resurrection Hypothesis.” We argue that the Standard Model of physics is relevant and decisive in establishing the implausibility and low explanatory power of the Resurrection hypothesis. We also argue that the laws of physics have entailments regarding God and the supernatural and, against Alvin Plantinga, that these same laws lack the proviso “no agent supernaturally interferes.” Finally, we offer Bayesian arguments for the Legend hypothesis and against the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  2. Assessing the Resurrection Hypothesis: Problems with Craig's Inference to the Best Explanation.Robert Greg Cavin & Carlos A. Colombetti - 2019 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 11 (2):205-228.
    The hypothesis that God supernaturally raised Jesus from the dead is argued by William Lane Craig to be the best explanation for the empty tomb and postmortem appearances of Jesus because it satisfies seven criteria of adequacy better than rival naturalistic hypotheses. We identify problems with Craig’s criteria-based approach and show, most significantly, that the Resurrection hypothesis fails to fulfill any but the first of his criteria—especially explanatory scope and plausibility.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  3.  77
    Negative Natural Theology and the Sinlessness, Incarnation, and Resurrection of Jesus.Robert Greg Cavin & Carlos A. Colombetti - 2014 - Philosophia Christi 16 (2):409-418.
    We respond to Swinburne’s reply to our critique of his argument for the Resurrection by defending the relevance of our counterexamples to his claim that God does not permit grand deception. We reaffirm and clarify our charge that Swinburne ignores two crucial items of Negative Natural Theology (NNT)—that God has an exceptionally weak tendency to raise the dead and that even people with exemplary public records sometimes sin. We show, accordingly, that our total evidence makes it highly probable that Jesus (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  4. Evidence, Miracles, and the Existence of Jesus: Comments on Stephen Law.Robert Greg Cavin & Carlos A. Colombetti - 2014 - Faith and Philosophy 31 (2):204-216.
    We use Bayesian tools to assess Law’s skeptical argument against the historicity of Jesus. We clarify and endorse his sub-argument for the conclusion that there is good reason to be skeptical about the miracle claims of the New Testament. However, we dispute Law’s contamination principle that he claims entails that we should be skeptical about the existence of Jesus. There are problems with Law’s defense of his principle, and we show, more importantly, that it is not supported by Bayesian considerations. (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5.  24
    Swinburne on the Resurrection: Negative Versus Christian Ramified Natural Theology.Robert Greg Cavin & Carlos A. Colombetti - 2013 - Philosophia Christi 15 (2):253-263.
    We consider the impact of negative natural theology on the prospects of Christian ramified natural theology with reference to Richard Swinburne’s argument for the Incarnation and Resurrection. We argue that Swinburne’s pivotal claim—that God would not allow deceptive evidence to exist for the Incarnation and Resurrection—is refuted by key evidence from negative natural theology. We argue, further, that Swinburne’s argument omits dominating items of evidence of negative natural theology which seem to critically weaken the probability of the Incarnation and Resurrection. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6. Is There Sufficient Historical Evidence to Establish the Resurrection of Jesus?Robert Greg Cavin - 1995 - Faith and Philosophy 12 (3):361-379.
    A number of Christian philosophers, most recently Gary R. Habermas and William Lane Craig, have claimed that there is sufficient historical evidence to establish the resurrection of Jesus conceived as the transformation of Jesus’ corpse into a living supernatural body that possesses such extraordinary dispositional properties as the inability to ever die again. I argue that, given this conception of resurrection, our only source of potential evidence, the New Testament Easter traditions, cannot provide adequate information to enable us to establish (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation