On Behalf of Resurrection:
A Second Reply to Cavin and Colombetti


Stephen T. Davis

Davis is the Russell K. Pitzer Professor of Philosophy, emeritus, at Claremont McKenna College.


Internet Archive

*Data sourced from Dimensions, an inter-linked research information system provided by Digital Science.

Article Information:

Author: Stephen T. Davis

Title: "On Behalf of Resurrection: A Second Reply to Cavin and Colombetti"

Journal: Socio-Historical Examination of Religion and Ministry

Journal Issue: Volume 2, Number 2

Date: Fall 2020

Pages: 13-24

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33929/sherm.2020.vol2.no2.02

Abstract

This essay is a reply to “The Implausibility and Low Explanatory Power of the Resurrection Hypothesis—With a Rejoinder to Stephen T. Davis” by Robert Greg Cavin and Carlos Colombetti. In it, I establish what natural laws are, what a miracle is, and how “naturalism” and “supernaturalism” differ as worldviews. Cavin and Colombetti argue that if the Standard Model of particle physics (SM) is true, then the resurrection of Jesus did not occur and physical things can only causally interact with other physical things. I argue that neither point follows.


 

Keywords: Standard Model, Particle Physics, Resurrection, Robert Greg Cavin, Carlos A. Colombetti, Naturalism, Supernaturalism

Share This Article
  • 4
    Shares
More From the Author:

If you see a problem with this webpage, find some of the links are not working, or are unable to properly view the article, please contact SHERM immediately.


Citation Examples:

Turabian/Chicago:

(footnote) Stephen T. Davis, “On Behalf of Resurrection: A Second Reply to Cavin and Colombetti,” Socio-Historical Examination of Religion and Ministry 2, no. 2 (Fall 2020): 13‒24, https://doi.org/10.33929/sherm.2020.vol2.no2.02.

(bibliography) Davis, Stephen T. “On Behalf of Resurrection: A Second Reply to Cavin and Colombetti.” Socio-Historical Examination of Religion and Ministry 2, no. 2 (Fall 2020): 13‒24. https://doi.org/10.33929/sherm.2020.vol2.no2.02.

MLA:

Davis, Stephen T. “On Behalf of Resurrection: A Second Reply to Cavin and Colombetti.” Socio-Historical Examination of Religion and Ministry, vol. 2, no. 2, Fall 2020, doi.org/10.33929/sherm.2020.vol2.no2.02, pp. 13‒24.

APA:

Davis, S. T. (2020). On Behalf of Resurrection: A Second Reply to Cavin and Colombetti. Socio-Historical Examination of Religion and Ministry, 2(2), 13-24. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.33929/sherm.2020.vol2.no2.02.

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 2.0 License. Information on obtaining permissions beyond the scope of this license is available at SHERM Journal Permissions.

References:

Armstrong, D. M. What Is a Law of Nature?. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1983. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139171700.

Cavin, Robert Greg, and Carlos A. Colombetti. “Assessing the Resurrection Hypothesis: Problems with Craig’s Inference to the Best Explanation.” European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 11, no. 2 (Summer 2019): 205‒28. http://dx.doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.v11i2.2836.

Cavin, Robert Greg, and Carlos A. Colombetti. “The Implausibility and Low Explanatory Power of the Resurrection Hypothesis—With a Rejoinder to Stephen T. Davis.” Socio-Historical Examination of Religion and Ministry 2, no. 1 (Spring 2020): 37‒94. http://doi.org/10.33929/sherm.2020.vol2.no1.04.

Davis, Stephen T. “Cartesian Omnipotence.” Philosophia Christi 19, no. 2 (2017): 455‒61. http://doi.org/10.5840/pc201719236.

Davis, Stephen T. “The Gospels are Reliable as Historically Factual Accounts.” In Debating Christian Theism, edited by J. P. Moreland and Chad Meister. Translated by Khaldoun A. Sweis, 417‒29. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013.

Davis, Stephen T. “Craig on the Resurrection: A Defense.” Socio-Historical Examination of Religion and Ministry 2, no. 1 (Spring 2020): 28‒35. http://doi.org/10.33929/sherm.2020.vol2.no1.03.

Quinton, Anthony. “Spaces and Times.” Philosophy 37, no. 140 (1962): 130‒47. http://doi.org/10.1017/s0031819100036792.

Swinburne, Richard. The Concept of Miracle. New Studies in the Philosophy of Religion. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1970. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-00776-9.

Swinburne, R. G. “Times.” Analysis 25, no. 6 (1965): 185‒91. http://doi.org/10.1093/analys/25.6.185.

Ward, K. “The Unity of Space and Time.” Philosophy 42, no. 159 (1967): 68‒74. http://doi.org/10.1017/s0031819100000863.

Wright, N. T. The Resurrection of the Son of God. Christian Origins and the Question of God 3. London: SPCK, 2003.

Share This Page