Dr. Brian Chilton, Liberty University, evangelical theologian: I, myself, believe the inner witness (or “inner testimony”) of the Holy Spirit is an important topic to consider.
Gary: So you do perceive the presence of Jesus within you. Very good. How certain are you that the spirit presence which you perceive within you is the resurrected Jesus Christ? 100%?
[This question is then repeated four times with no response from Dr. Chilton.]
Gary: You seem reluctant to express the certainty of your belief in the presence of Jesus within you, Dr. Chilton. Isn’t that a problem? If you were to ask me if I perceive the presence of my wife, I would not hesitate a second to state that I am 100% certain of her presence. I see her. I hear her. I can touch her. I have no doubt. Do you have doubts about the presence of Jesus, Dr. Chilton?
Dr. Brian Chilton: No, none at all.
Gary: Wow! 100% certainty. Not one shred of doubt. No wonder you are a believer.
Who needs historical evidence for the Resurrection with that kind of certainty! And that is why it is a waste of time for counter apologists and other skeptics to debate evangelical Christians regarding the resurrection of Jesus. No amount of historical evidence is ever going to change the evangelical Christian’s mind if he or she can perceive the presence within them of the dead man in question. If we could find the bones of Jesus they still would not believe.
Can you see how your perception of the presence of the resurrected Jesus within you taints/biases your evaluation of the historical evidence for the Resurrection, Dr. Chilton? How can it not?
This is why the scholarship of evangelical New Testament scholars and apologists cannot be trusted. Their objectivity is tainted by their delusion that the ghost of Jesus dwells somewhere within their bodies.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
End of post.
Escaping Christian Fundamentalism 
Skeptics are equally biased in the direction of their own choosing, so what’s the point?
LikeLike
Ultimately it’s an impasse. Christian scholar’s perception of Jesus/Holy Spirit’s presence in their hearts and lives means they will accept a low bar of critical thought and evidence when examining their own scriptures and history for accuracy and validity. But they also believe that non Christians have clouded minds and wills and so are incapable and unwilling to come to proper conclusions when examining evidence of Christianity’s truth. There is no real way around this as far as I can see. Argument generally doesn’t change people’s minds. We now people tend to entrench in their position if challenged. Yet we in the west have become more secular over time, partly from the forces of science and textual criticism and other factors, but not directly from debate and argument, as far as I can tell. It’s often people discovering things on their own, not from direct challenges.
LikeLike
I believe you are correct, Epicurus. But anytime an apologist tries to debate a skeptic on the historical evidence for the resurrection, the first question to ask is: Do you perceive the presence of the resurrected Jesus within you?
LikeLike
Yes, especially since almost all apologists were raised Christian and were born again either as very young children or teenagers.
LikeLike
“This is why the scholarship of evangelical New Testament scholars and apologists cannot be trusted.”
Another big one: doctrinal statements. When a prof. at Liberty U. or some other Christian college signs a doctrinal statement that they believe in the virgin birth (say), and then they write a paper that concludes, “And that’s why the virgin birth actually happened,” what’s the point of the paper? They were obliged to come to that conclusion. That paper is the doctrinal statement talking, not their research.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly. Good point, Bob.
LikeLike