The adjudication of miracles: Rethinking the criteria of historicity
This is the second article in a series of two that discusses whether historians are within their professional rights to investigate miracle claims. In the first, I made a positive case that they are and then proceeded to examine two major arguments in support of a negative verdict to the issue: the...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Afrikaans |
| Published: |
AOSIS
2009-07-01
|
| Series: | HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hts.org.za/index.php/hts/article/view/130 |
| Summary: | This is the second article in a series of two that discusses whether historians are within their professional rights to investigate miracle claims. In the first, I made a positive case that they are and then proceeded to examine two major arguments in support of a negative verdict to the issue: the principle of analogy and antecedent probability. I argued that neither should deter historians from issuing a positive verdict on miracle claims when certain criteria are met and the event is the best explanation of the relevant historical bedrock. In this second article, I examine three additional objections commonly appealed to by biblical scholars: the theological objection, lack of consensus and miracle claims in multiple religions. The resurrection of Jesus is occasionally cited as an example. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0259-9422 2072-8050 |