dc.contributor.author |
Licona, Michael R. 1961-
|
|
dc.contributor.author |
Van der Watt, J.G. (Jan Gabriel), 1952-
|
|
dc.date.accessioned |
2009-08-28T05:08:27Z |
|
dc.date.available |
2009-08-28T05:08:27Z |
|
dc.date.issued |
2009 |
|
dc.description.abstract |
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 fi rst, 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. |
en_US |
dc.description.uri |
http://explore.up.ac.za/record=b1001341 |
en_US |
dc.identifier.citation |
Licona, MR & Van der Watt, JG 2009, 'The adjudication of miracles : Rethinking the criteria of historicity', HTS Teologiese Studies/ Theological Studies, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 1-7. [http://www.hts.org.za/index.php/HTS/issue/archive] |
en_US |
dc.identifier.issn |
0259-9422 (print) |
|
dc.identifier.issn |
2072-8050 (online) |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/2263/11099 |
|
dc.language.iso |
en |
en_US |
dc.publisher |
Faculty of Theology, University of Pretoria |
en_US |
dc.rights |
Faculty of Theology, University of Pretoria |
en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh |
Miracles -- Criticism and interpretation |
en |
dc.title |
The adjudication of miracles : rethinking the criteria of historicity |
en_US |
dc.type |
Article |
en_US |