Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Various Skeptic Articles Refuted, etc.

OK, so in between writing up the transcript for my interview with Barrie Schwortz (which was awesome!) I am working on a paper concerning the resurrection of Jesus. Specifically, I want to use it as a sort of tract for skeptics, and a general handout paper that can be of use.

It's actually evolving into two essays, one concerning the historical evidence for Christ's resurrection, and one concerning medical testimonies to people who have had near-death experiences, or actually been resurrected from the dead.

Yes, I am completely serious.

There are, in fact, many well-documented cases of what many extremely skeptical scientists, including atheists, admit are not just near-death but post-death experiences. Until my article arrives, see Gary Habermas' videos. There are nine parts, all worth watching.

Anyway, in my research I have encountered many naturalistic pieces arguing against the resurrection. While they hit high on search engine lists, they are often of shoddy quality and are easily refuted, usually by the entertaining J.P. Holding. His counter-articles, on the other hand, rarely overtake the skeptical articles he refutes in terms of search engine placement. As such, I would like to post a list of skeptical articles and their refutations (usually by Holding).

Review of Lee Stobel The Case for Christ by Jeff Lowder (skeptical)
Lowder on the Case for Christ, Refuted by J.P. Holding (rebuttal to above)

The Case Against The Case for Christ by Scott Bidstrup
Scott Bidstrup vs. The Case for Christ by J.P. Holding (rebuttal)

Why I Don't Buy The Resurrection Story by Richard Carrier (skeptical)
Richard Carriers' Why I Don't Buy the Resurrection Story - A Refutation by J.P. Holding

The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond the Grave, book by Richard Carrier (skeptical)
The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond the Grave Refuted by J.P. Holding (rebuttal)

The Historicity of the Empty Tomb Evaluated by Peter Kirby
(skeptical, similar to book chapter refuted below)
Jesus Beyond the Grave Refuted: Peter Kirby's Chapter (rebuttal)

Just a few things... fun stuff, and I'm really starting to like Holding. He also refuted (soundly) Carrier's article, Did No One Trust Women? (Forum discussion here.) Unfortunately, that rebuttal is no longer online, since Holding is hoping to publish such material in book form in his upcoming Defending the Resurrection. However, Holding was kind enough to send me the old page.

Anyway, some cool stuff. Maybe more later.


  1. I've been wanting to read Holding's responses to Carrier's article. He sent you the whole old page? I heard he was only answering questions. Lucky you. :p

  2. Yup, Holding sent it to me. :-D It was an excellent response. I don't feel at liberty to send it around, but you could try asking Holding for the article on TheologyWeb. I might have gotten a special favor since I'm writing a paper, but who knows. Holding says his book should be out in the summer, so maybe you can read it then.

    The main thesis of Holding's response, though, was that the point flew over Carrier's head. If you look at Carrier's article, he basically gives a whole spiel about how women were allowed to testify as trusted witnesses, etc. But Holding points out that they were only allowed to testify within the sphere of influence they were trusted. Matters of religion and supernatural events? No way. He notes an example from Pseudophilemon, where Miriam has a vision of an angel and no one believes her, but a male later has a vision of an angel and no one has the slightest doubt.