- Journal Details
- Format
- Journal
- eISSN
- 2284-7308
- First Published
- 20 Sep 2012
- Publication timeframe
- 3 times per year
- Languages
- English
Joseph Blado critiqued my probabilistic arguments against Roman papal doctrines by deploying probability arguments, particularly Bayesian arguments, in favor of the papacy. He contends that there are good C-inductive arguments for papal doctrine that, taken together, add up to a good P-inductive argument. I argue that his inductive arguments fail, and moreover that there are three good C-inductive arguments against papal doctrine in the neighborhood of his failed arguments. I conclude by critiquing his retreat to what he calls ‘skeptical papalism’ as a last ditch sort of move to defend papal doctrine.
Keywords
- papal doctrine
- probability arguments
- Luz
- intertextuality
To Touch or to Be Touched. Doubting Thomas in the Bible, Apocryphal Texts, and the Arts. A Literary Perspective Perichoresis as a Hermeneutical Key to Ontology: Social Constructionism, Kierkegaard, and Trinitarian TheologyCyril and Theodoret on the Temptation of Christ: An Imaginary Dialogue Between Alexandrian and Antiochene Christological Positions An Evaluation of the Puzzled Syntax of 2 John 1: 5 U. S. Political Economy on Migrants-Citizens Relations: State-Raids Vs. Church-Sanctuaries (Charity Re-Privatization) A Sign of the Types: A Critical Reflection on the Church-Sect Typology