Here's a photo I took waiting for plane at Detroit airport last month. Click to see other photos on my flickr site.
(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen
Comments
1. Philosophers employ great deal of very clever (sometimes endless) logic in their arguments.
2. They seem to pick arbitray an starting point or an isolated observation as a basis for these very clever arguments.
Wouldn't it make more sense to start with the most basic assumptions then build on those assumptions to create a solid philsophy?
Has anyone tried this?
It would seem though that this way of building a solid world view by applying logic to basic assumptions is traditionally more the realm of science then philosophy.