Mike posted it on his YouTube channel here. The recording is incomplete. It stops partway through the question-and-answer segment. I don't know if there's a longer recording available anywhere. For now, I'll respond to the incomplete one linked above.
They discussed the occasions when Jesus isn't recognized after his resurrection. I think all of those can easily be explained under a scenario in which the accounts are historical (Divine intervention in Luke 24:16 and 24:31; distance and expecting Jesus to not be there in John 21:4; etc.). Fabricated accounts would be unlikely to have Jesus unrecognized like that, so these passages support historicity more than they undermine it.
They also discussed the historicity of Matthew 27:52-53. We've written about the passage many times over the years, like here. On early Christian interpretations of the passage and the surrounding context that take them as historical, see here. Anybody who's interested in reading more than the posts I just linked can search our archives. I agree with Dale that the author intended the Matthew 27 passage to be taken as a historical account. But, unlike Dale, I also think the passage is historically accurate.
They discussed some other issues as well, like their personal backgrounds related to studying the resurrection and what approach they take toward researching the subject. The main thing I want to discuss in this post, however, is what seems to commonly be regarded as Dale's best objection to the resurrection, non-Christian miracles.
The rainbow body phenomenon came up again. I've linked Lydia McGrew's material on the subject before. Marian apparitions came up as well. We've written a lot on that topic over the years. See the posts here on the Zeitoun apparitions, for example. As I've discussed in previous responses to Dale and others, Jesus' resurrection is connected to a lot of other miracles, including some done in the name of Jesus or specifically in association with his resurrection. See my post here on how the evidence for Jesus' resurrection compares to the evidence for the Zeitoun Marian apparitions, for example. In addition to the greater evidence for Jesus' resurrection, there's often more evidence against non-Christian miracles than there is against the resurrection. See my post here on the weaknesses of the Zeitoun apparitions, for instance.
One of the points I've often made about miracles, whether non-Christian or Christian ones, is that we should consider what's at stake. If a neighbor tells you he saw a book levitate in his house a couple of decades ago, so what? Not much is at stake. Is it worth taking the time, attention, etc. to investigate his claim when you already have sufficient evidence for the existence of miracles, the implications of a book levitating in your neighbor's house two decades ago aren't of much significance, etc.? Since Christianity's network of miracles far surpasses Buddhism or whatever other system the rainbow body phenomenon may be associated with, there's no reason to think something as important as the truthfulness of Christianity is at stake in whether the rainbow body phenomenon is genuine. My posts on Zeitoun linked above go through similar considerations with regard to the Zeitoun apparitions and other Marian apparitions. The same kind of reasoning can be applied more broadly to other non-Christian and allegedly Christian miracles.
Much more could be said. Anybody who's interested can read the posts linked above and other relevant ones in our archives.
The video of the discussion between Mike and Dale ended with a question from the audience about deathbed visions (what I'll refer to as deathbed experiences or DBEs). I haven't studied those as much as I've studied the somewhat related phenomenon of near-death experiences (NDEs). But I think it's likely that DBEs are a variation of NDEs and that both are genuinely paranormal phenomena of a highly subjective nature. You can access some of my posts on NDEs, including arguments for why I view them the way I just described, here. The ones here and here, for example, outline my dream model of NDEs, meaning that they involve paranormal dreamlike experiences, and discuss some of the reasons why I hold that view. Christians often respond to something like NDEs or DBEs either by taking the position that they're highly veridical and can be reconciled with Christianity or by taking the position that they're demonic. I've argued for a third option, that they're authentic paranormal phenomena, but of a highly subjective, nonveridical nature.
Whatever view somebody takes of something like DBEs or NDEs, that view has to be reconciled with the evidence for Christianity. This is a two-way street. You can't just object to alleged inconsistencies between phenomena like DBEs and Christianity and suggest that the inconsistencies are a problem for Christianity. If you hold a view of the afterlife and related subjects that's largely shaped by things like DBEs, then you have to address the evidence for Christianity and reconcile it with your position. I've argued for why I think traditional Christianity is true and can adequately explain phenomena like NDEs and DBEs, such as on my page on NDEs linked earlier. People who cite something like NDEs or DBEs against Christianity should be expected to likewise argue for their position and explain how they reconcile it with opposing arguments, like the evidence for Christianity. This isn't a one-way street.
No comments:
Post a Comment