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
Lingua:: Inglese

Frequenza di pubblicazione:: 3 volte all'anno
Argomenti della rivista:: Theology and Religion, General Topics and Biblical Reception

Feed RSS della rivista

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

Pubblicato online: 17 dic 2021

Pagine: 21 - 33

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

Parole chiaveWilliam 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.

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