Switch to: References

Citations of:

Reply to Davis

Philo 2 (1):62-76 (1999)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Supernatural Resurrection and its Incompatibility with the Standard Model of Particle Physics: Second Rejoinder to Stephen T. Davis.Robert Greg Cavin & Carlos A. Colombetti - 2021 - Socio-Historical Examination of Religion and Ministry 3 (2):253-277.
    In response to Stephen Davis’s criticism of our previous essay, we revisit and defend our arguments that the Resurrection hypothesis is logically incompatible with the Standard Model of particle physics—and thus is maximally implausible—and that it cannot explain the sensory experiences of the Risen Jesus attributed to various witnesses in the New Testament—and thus has low explanatory power. We also review Davis’s reply, noting that he evades our arguments, misstates their conclusions, and distracts the reader with irrelevancies regarding, e.g., what (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Christianity and the Rationality of the Resurrection.Michael Martin - 2000 - Philo 3 (1):52-62.
    In 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 (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation