PHIL 240 Quiz 8

PHIL 240 Quiz 8

PHIL 240 Quiz 8 Liberty University

PHIL 240 Quiz Objections to the Resurrection

1. The discrepancies between accounts of the resurrection in the New Testament are irrelevant in refuting the general trustworthiness of the event occurring in history.
2. Historical inquiry alone cannot answer the question of the causeof the resurrection of Jesus. However, the most plausible explanation for this is that God raised Jesus from the dead.
3. When taken as a whole, the nature of the text of the gospels and the book of Acts supports a historical genre rather than a non-historical genre.
4. Using incidental comments by Paul from I Cor 15 and Gal 1, we can set up a time line that defeats which naturalistic explanation:
5. It is just as plausible to think that Elvis was raised from the dead as to believe that Jesus was raised from the dead.
6. The “swoon theory” is among the most historically plausible alternatives to the resurrection of Christ.
7. For scholars, the question regarding embellishment in the New Testament gospels is not whether legend grew after the gospels were written, but rather before they were written.
8. The “swoon theory” is among the most historically plausible alternatives to the resurrection of Christ.
9. Historical inquiry alone cannot answer the question of the causeof the resurrection of Jesus. However, the most plausible explanation for this is that God raised Jesus from the dead.
10. According to Dr. Foreman, the best explanation that accounts for the minimal core facts is that Jesus really rose from the dead.
11. Ad hominem
    argumentation generally can be said to be an attack on the individual rather than on the issues.
12. The naturalistic explanation for the resurrection that is answered by noting that the disciples would have died for something they knew was a lie:
13. The naturalistic explanation that Dr. Foreman called “the biggest blunder in history” is:
14. In crucifixion, the cause of death was typically the inability of the victim to continue to breathe while on the cross.
15. The willingness of the disciples to suffer and die for the cause of Christ provides strong support that they at least believed that Jesus had indeed been raised from the dead.
16. Scientific methodology is not adequate for addressing the probability of the historical resurrection.
17. When critics propose that a combination of theories account for an explanation to the resurrection of Christ, the combination of theories typically leads to a higher degree of improbability rather than a more probable solution.
18. No psychological explanation discounting the resurrection of Christ can adequately explain the five facts built around the “minimal facts” approach.
19. In crucifixion, the cause of death was typically the inability of the victim to continue to breathe while on the cross.
20. John 21:12 indicates that the disciples did not recognize the resurrected Jesus, thus demonstrating that the resurrection body was not a body at all, but rather, a spiritual manifestation.
21. Ad hominem
    argumentation generally can be said to be an attack on the individual rather than on the issues.
22. The 18 ^thcentury historian David Strauss was actually responsible for defeating most of the naturalistic explanations of the resurrection of Jesus.  Therefore he believed it really happened.
23. No psychological explanation discounting the resurrection of Christ can adequately explain the five facts built around the “minimal facts” approach.
24. Scientific methodology is not adequate for addressing the probability of the historical resurrection.
25. The evidence supporting the idea that the empty tomb was actually a matter of the wrong tomb being searched finds strong support among ancient critics of Christianity.