New Evidence That Demands a Verdict Hardcover – 1 January 1920 by Josh McDowell (Author) 4.7 out of 5 stars 323 ratings 29), the assumptions of skepticism (ch. The chapters cover the “nature” of truth (ch. Note the similarity to Clifford’s evidentialist maxim, discussed at the beginning of chapter 9. 27), how and why you can know the truth (ch. I first became aware of this monumental work when I was just beginning my apologetics journey. Extra props goes to Sean and Josh for adding this section! Therefore, it may be concluded that the Resurrection is a probable historical event.”53. Still, he recognizes that providing “good reason” to believe in a God capable of doing miracles “makes it more plausible to believe” that a particular event is a miracle (71). Montgomery concludes “that on the basis of the accepted canons of historical method . Evidentialists point out that nations have repeatedly tried to annihilate the Jewish culture and people and yet have failed; they see this as evidence of God’s remarkable providential care for the Jewish people.13, Third, evidentialists are especially impressed by the fulfilled prophecies in the life, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus. First, they generally subordinate the classical philosophical proofs for God’s existence to a different place in their apologetic, and a few evidentialists even reject the philosophical proofs as invalid and unhelpful. Although most scientists admit that the universe had a beginning, many try to remain agnostic as to its cause. Detailed plot synopsis reviews of Evidence That Demands A Verdict, Vol. It is argued that the best explanation of the facts is that Jesus did actually rise from the dead. Evidentialists, like classical apologists, seek to offer arguments for the existence of God on grounds that are in principle understandable and acceptable to non-Christians. A rational proof of God’s existence is, moreover, actually inconsistent with the Christian faith.”24, Much more commonly, though, evidentialists retain the philosophical proofs but do not treat them as sufficient to establish theism. Newman points out various paradoxical features of Old Testament messianic prophecies that find their natural and obvious fulfillment in Jesus. Presenting Evidence That Demands a Verdict. Indeed, many apologists, such as William Lane Craig, J. P. Moreland, and Richard Swinburne, cannot for various reasons be neatly placed into one approach rather than the other. Using secular evidences and other historical sources, Josh McDowell's faith-building book is a must read for every Christian. . We have Paul’s firsthand testimony that he saw Jesus alive. And in fact, Habermas and Craig use very similar strategies in arguing for the reasonableness of believing that God raised Jesus from the dead. In other words, there is no one explanation for each instance of evil. Beckwith’s second condition for an event to be regarded as a miracle is that it have an historical-religious significance. Whether you’ve read the earlier version of the book before or not you’ll want to cover each of these! Thus Beckwith quotes with approval Montgomery’s statement that “we accept no miracles unless the primary evidence compels us to it” (100).45 He notes that “most of the objections to the miraculous are pre-evidential. For more than forty years, Evidence That Demands a Verdict has encouraged and strengthened millions of people around the world. He will be both king and priest, offices kept separate in Judaism (Psalm 110).14 Newman also cites prophecies indicating that the Messiah would come toward the end of the Second Temple period (ca. An excellent example of an evidentialist treatment of miracles may be found in the work of Francis Beckwith, particularly his monograph critiquing David Hume’s argument against miracles.41. For example, Montgomery criticizes Altizer’s claim that the modern discipline of comparative religions has demonstrated “an underlying unity of thought between Eastern mystical religion and the Christian faith”18 by noting that the famed comparative religions scholar Mircea Eliade, whom Altizer professes to follow, rejects this idea. Geivett, R. Douglas, and Gary R. Habermas, eds. This is because the scientific data includes information about the universe as a whole (e.g., the universe’s expansion rate, the universal forces of matter, gravity, and electromagnetism). These evidences include the miracles of the Bible, the uniqueness of the Bible, and fulfilled prophecy. See also Boa and Moody, I’m Glad You Asked, 64-66. (3) Stroll begs the question by assuming that the miraculous events reported in the Gospels could not have happened simply because they were miraculous (19-21). These explanations typically function as alternatives to one or more of the generally accepted facts adduced by Craig and Habermas. Bad things happen for a variety of reasons: to develop and refine a person’s faith and character, to bring about a revelation of God’s glory, to experience suffering vicariously in someone else’s place, to punish people for their own acts of evil, to alert people to physical dangers (biologically useful pain), to learn the consequences of evil, or to alert people to their need for salvation (248-250). This model holds that there may be a number of reasonable explanations for a body of evidence, and that one is to choose from this pool of live options that explanation which is the best, that is, which most successfully meets such criteria as having explanatory power, explanatory scope, and not being ad hoc. . 1. P. H. Nidditch (Oxford: Clarendon, 1975; original, 1777), 110. However, if the testimonial evidence is multiplied and reinforced by circumstantial considerations . 44 The expression “convergence of independent probabilities” comes from Montgomery, who in turn attributes it to Cardinal John Henry Newman; see Beckwith, “History and Miracles,” in In Defense of Miracles, ed. Craig comments, “It may seem stupefying that while most New Testament critics who have written on these subjects accept the facts which, at least in my opinion, furnish inductive grounds for inferring the resurrection of Jesus, they do not themselves make that inference; but this is, in fact, the situation.”49 Craig himself bases his argument on facts admitted by this majority, “not because truth is determined by numbers, for it certainly is not; rather, it is precisely because . This section covers the uniqueness of Scripture, how the canon of the Bible was formed, the reliability of the Old and New Testaments, and questions about the so-called ‘gnostic gospels.’ Part Two: Evidence for Jesus