期刊名称：Perichoresis: The Theological Journal of Emanuel University
电子版ISSN：2284-7308
出版年度：2021
卷号：19
期号：4
页码：21-33
DOI：10.2478/perc-2021-0022
语种：English
出版社：De Gruyter Open
摘要：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.
