Negative Natural Theology and the Sinlessness, Incarnation, and Resurrection of Jesus

Philosophia Christi 16 (2):409-418 (2014)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
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 was not sinless, incarnate, or resurrected and that God has permitted massive deception regarding these defining Christian dogmas.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2020-01-23
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
210 ( #35,841 of 72,536 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
34 ( #25,368 of 72,536 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.