A common criticism of the Gospel accounts is that they are of low historical value because they are anonymous. This is based on the observation that the authorship is never explicitly mentioned in the main body of the texts of … Continue reading
A lot of people think that the New Testament documents must be unreliable because (like all published texts from the ancient world) they are based on translations of copies of copies. So how can we know whether the original version … Continue reading
Last time I wrote a long discussion of what I think is the best evidence for and against Christianity. When it comes to the historical testimony to the Resurrection, I analyzed the data in terms of a set of minimal … Continue reading
In this post I am going to outline what I consider the most relevant evidence for and against Christianity, in the form of a Bayesian probability analysis. Now, just to be clear in advance, I'm not even going to take … Continue reading
My first pillar of Science is that it is based on repeatable observations. In order to see how Christianity measures up, we need to examine whether it is based on observations, and whether it is repeatable. Observations ultimately boil down … Continue reading
