The adjudication of miracles : rethinking the criteria of historicity

Show simple item record

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


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record