On Roach’s Presuppositional Response to Licona’s

In a recent article, William C. Roach (2019) offers a presuppositional critique, which is inspired by Carl F. H. Henry, of Michael R. Licona’s (2010) so-called New Historiographical Approach (NHA) to defending the resurrection. More precisely, Roach attempts to defend six key theses, namely, that (1) the NHA is an evidentialist approach, (2) the NHA is a deductive argument, (3) the NHA is an insufficient approach, (4) believers and unbelievers share no common ground, (5) the NHA does not embrace a correspondence theory of truth, and (6) the presupposition of divine revelation is necessary for apologetics. We respond to each of Roach’s arguments, respectively.

eISSN:: 2284-7308
Language:: English

Publication timeframe:: 3 times per year
Journal Subjects:: Theology and Religion, General Topics and Biblical Reception

Journal RSS Feed

On Roach’s Presuppositional Response to Licona’s New Historiographical Approach

Published Online: Dec 17, 2021

Page range: 21 - 33

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/perc-2021-0022

Keywords
William C. Roach, Michael R. Licona, New Historiographical Approach, evidentialism, presuppositionalism

© 2021 Jacobus Erasmus et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.