Comments on: The Sufficiency of Probability in the Christian Belief http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2009/10/the-sufficiency-of-probability-in-the-christian-belief/ Making Theology Accessible Mon, 22 Mar 2010 15:06:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Renton http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2009/10/the-sufficiency-of-probability-in-the-christian-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-19999 Renton Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:41:22 +0000 http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/?p=3223#comment-19999 Probability is probably good enough. But how probable is it, normally, that a body that died, disappeared by floating up into the clouds? How often does that happen in normal life? And therefore, how probable is this, versus other explanations? Probability is probably good enough.

But how probable is it, normally, that a body that died, disappeared by floating up into the clouds?

How often does that happen in normal life?

And therefore, how probable is this, versus other explanations?

]]> By: Tyler http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2009/10/the-sufficiency-of-probability-in-the-christian-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-19998 Tyler Tue, 27 Oct 2009 05:37:24 +0000 http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/?p=3223#comment-19998 As far as circularity goes in our worldviews, it's kind of inevitable in our ultimate criteria if we're consistent. We can try and go by 'autonomous' human reasoning, and justify it with more 'autonomous reason' or we can start with Scripture and end with Scripture. If Scripture is our ultimate authority, it should justify itself--otherwise we have appealed to something else as our ultimate authority. As long as the argument is BROADLY circular--some would argue--and as long as it corresponds to our experience of life and the world, it is persuasive. Evidences, while some would argue that they shouldn't be our primary place of discussion, can still add persuasive power to a 'broadly circular' argument...so they should be studied and used--they just shouldn't be ultimate. As far as circularity goes in our worldviews, it’s kind of inevitable in our ultimate criteria if we’re consistent. We can try and go by ‘autonomous’ human reasoning, and justify it with more ‘autonomous reason’ or we can start with Scripture and end with Scripture. If Scripture is our ultimate authority, it should justify itself–otherwise we have appealed to something else as our ultimate authority. As long as the argument is BROADLY circular–some would argue–and as long as it corresponds to our experience of life and the world, it is persuasive. Evidences, while some would argue that they shouldn’t be our primary place of discussion, can still add persuasive power to a ‘broadly circular’ argument…so they should be studied and used–they just shouldn’t be ultimate.

]]> By: Bryan L http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2009/10/the-sufficiency-of-probability-in-the-christian-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-19997 Bryan L Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:30:34 +0000 http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/?p=3223#comment-19997 Sorry to nitpick Micheal, but I found your #16 comment to be a bit confusing as to what you were hoping to show. Maybe you can elaborate on it some. And I don't think you can make the easy jump that the implication of the resurrection is that Jesus is God. Do you have anyplace for the experience and power of the Holy Spirit in your arguments for the truth of Christianity (or the Christian Worldview) It seemed like a big proof in the early church. I wonder if you've ever tried to incorporate it in your arguments? Bryan L Sorry to nitpick Micheal, but I found your #16 comment to be a bit confusing as to what you were hoping to show. Maybe you can elaborate on it some.

And I don’t think you can make the easy jump that the implication of the resurrection is that Jesus is God.

Do you have anyplace for the experience and power of the Holy Spirit in your arguments for the truth of Christianity (or the Christian Worldview) It seemed like a big proof in the early church. I wonder if you’ve ever tried to incorporate it in your arguments?

Bryan L

]]> By: Scott F http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2009/10/the-sufficiency-of-probability-in-the-christian-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-19996 Scott F Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:09:43 +0000 http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/?p=3223#comment-19996 "Upon testing the resurrection, it proves to be the most probable explanation for the claims" Ah yes, much heat on this one but little light. There's a lot of water being carried by those 15 words. Skeptics are going to play their Extraordinary Evidence card (I keep mine in my wallet). Agnostics are going to shrug their shoulders. Professors are going to earn tenure. Christians will say , "Amen." “Upon testing the resurrection, it proves to be the most probable explanation for the claims”

Ah yes, much heat on this one but little light. There’s a lot of water being carried by those 15 words. Skeptics are going to play their Extraordinary Evidence card (I keep mine in my wallet). Agnostics are going to shrug their shoulders. Professors are going to earn tenure. Christians will say , “Amen.”

]]> By: Truth Unites... and Divides http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2009/10/the-sufficiency-of-probability-in-the-christian-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-19995 Truth Unites... and Divides Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:56:17 +0000 http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/?p=3223#comment-19995 Great post CMP! Great post. Great post CMP! Great post.

]]> By: C Michael Patton http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2009/10/the-sufficiency-of-probability-in-the-christian-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-19994 C Michael Patton Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:16:03 +0000 http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/?p=3223#comment-19994 Joe, if were starting on neutral ground, we would start with the claims, implications, and historicity of the events of each religion. All three are needed. In the case of Christianity, the claim it that Jesus rose from the grave. The implication is that he is God. The resurrection is a historical account which causes belief in it to have historical testability (which, I believe is a necessity for any claim---it has to go beyond sujective account of any individual). Upont testing the resurrection, it proves to be the most probable explaination for the claims. Therefore the resurrection along with its implications demand our comittment. Therefore, Jesus is Lord. Joe, if were starting on neutral ground, we would start with the claims, implications, and historicity of the events of each religion.

All three are needed.

In the case of Christianity, the claim it that Jesus rose from the grave. The implication is that he is God. The resurrection is a historical account which causes belief in it to have historical testability (which, I believe is a necessity for any claim—it has to go beyond sujective account of any individual). Upont testing the resurrection, it proves to be the most probable explaination for the claims. Therefore the resurrection along with its implications demand our comittment. Therefore, Jesus is Lord.

]]> By: Joshua http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2009/10/the-sufficiency-of-probability-in-the-christian-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-19993 Joshua Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:16:04 +0000 http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/?p=3223#comment-19993 Great post Michael. Out of curiousity where would you say your "starting point" is (or where should ours be)? In other words, obviously the Gospel and Christ's ressurection are the key points that we are aiming for (in terms of affirming the probability); however dead people (in my and most people's experience) don't rise from the dead, they stay dead. So are we starting with the probability that some sort of creator exists (which the majority of religions have), if so, how do we get from that point to the Christian God? Pointing to the Bible is often not "helpful" at this point because a large portion of other faiths have a sacred text or even a tradition they they point to as divinely inspired as well. Thus it becomes more of a circular arguement. Look forward to your thoughts. Your brother in Christ, -Joshua Great post Michael. Out of curiousity where would you say your “starting point” is (or where should ours be)?

In other words, obviously the Gospel and Christ’s ressurection are the key points that we are aiming for (in terms of affirming the probability); however dead people (in my and most people’s experience) don’t rise from the dead, they stay dead.

So are we starting with the probability that some sort of creator exists (which the majority of religions have), if so, how do we get from that point to the Christian God? Pointing to the Bible is often not “helpful” at this point because a large portion of other faiths have a sacred text or even a tradition they they point to as divinely inspired as well. Thus it becomes more of a circular arguement.

Look forward to your thoughts.

Your brother in Christ,

-Joshua

]]> By: Drew K http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2009/10/the-sufficiency-of-probability-in-the-christian-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-19992 Drew K Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:04:57 +0000 http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/?p=3223#comment-19992 Love this! It's better sport than football! (Go Colts! 6-0!) The Solas are not alone from each other. Scriptura - truth, fide - the leap, gratia - the ability, Christus - the pupose, Deo gloria - the motive. Love this! It’s better sport than football! (Go Colts! 6-0!) The Solas are not alone from each other. Scriptura – truth, fide – the leap, gratia – the ability, Christus – the pupose, Deo gloria – the motive.

]]> By: C Michael Patton http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2009/10/the-sufficiency-of-probability-in-the-christian-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-19991 C Michael Patton Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:45:39 +0000 http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/?p=3223#comment-19991 kis, perfect mock of something that is, unfortunately, believed. Thanks! kis, perfect mock of something that is, unfortunately, believed. Thanks!

]]> By: Tyler http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2009/10/the-sufficiency-of-probability-in-the-christian-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-19990 Tyler Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:10:17 +0000 http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/?p=3223#comment-19990 I wonder what presuppositional apologists like Bahnsen or Frame would say about the sufficiency of probability. I'd bet that they would say that it is enough to morally compel people to believe, but they would probably also say that God has already proved Himself persuasively to every person and they just suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Rm 1). Bahnsen would say that the Christian worldview coherently provides necessary preconditions of intelligibility for human experience of rational thought, uniformity in nature, and moral absolutes, etc. -Tyler I wonder what presuppositional apologists like Bahnsen or Frame would say about the sufficiency of probability. I’d bet that they would say that it is enough to morally compel people to believe, but they would probably also say that God has already proved Himself persuasively to every person and they just suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Rm 1). Bahnsen would say that the Christian worldview coherently provides necessary preconditions of intelligibility for human experience of rational thought, uniformity in nature, and moral absolutes, etc.

-Tyler

]]>