What warrants the step from Trinity to Christianity?

• Sub-Task: Canon Authority, Contemporary Head-to-Head Exchange Test (Kruger vs. a Named Contemporary Catholic Critic)

  Costs on both sides

  Strongest case · Why this source satisfies the task brief's search strategy 1 (a named contemporary scholar engaging Kruger by name), not merely strategy 2's fallback: Douglas Beaumont (Ph.D., theology, North-West University; ten years on faculty at Southern Evangelical Seminary before entering the Catholic Church; author of Evangelical Exodus, 2016) wrote "Kruger, Canon, and Catholicism" (douglasbeaumont.com, 2014) as an explicit, chapter-ordered response to Canon Revisited's own chapter on "the Roman Catholic

• Sub-Task: Canon Authority, the Orthodox-Specific Voice Test (Kallistos Ware / Georges Florovsky vs. Kruger and Beaumont)

  Costs on both sides

  Strongest case · Two sources, not one, because Orthodoxy's own popular and technical registers answer different parts of the question. Metropolitan Kallistos Ware's The Orthodox Church (first published 1963, revised and still the standard English-language introduction cited across Orthodox seminaries and parishes today — a book, not a blog post, and the exact source the task brief named) supplies the plain doctrinal claim; Georges Florovsky's essay "The Authority of the Ancient Councils and the Tradition of the

• Sub-Task: Canon Authority — "Church/Tradition Determines the Canon" vs. Sola Scriptura / Self-Authenticating Scripture

  Costs on both sides

  Strongest case · The core claim: no book of the Bible contains an inspired table of contents; therefore the very judgment "these 66 (or 73, or more) books, and no others, are canonical" is itself an extra-biblical judgment, made by someone, at some point in history. EO and RCC agree that this judgment was made — and had to be made — by the visible, historically continuous Church acting under the Spirit's guidance, and that this act of reception is itself a form of authoritative tradition standing alongside (not

• (sub-task 3): Dating, Extent, and Reliability of the Pre-Pauline Creed (1 Cor 15:3–7) — Comparative-Adequacy Packet

  Argument incomplete

  Strongest case · (a) The standard dating argument, independently checked rather than assumed The core textual basis, read directly: Paul states in 1 Cor 15:3, "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received (παρέδωκα ... παρέλαβον), that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve" (NIV, as reproduced directly from the primary text quoted in Ehrman'

• (sub-task 2): Historical Evidentiary Test of the Empty Tomb — Comparative-Adequacy Packet

  Argument incomplete

  Strongest case · (a) Multiple, formally independent narrative attestation The empty-tomb-discovery narrative appears in all four canonical Gospels. The load-bearing question is whether these four attestations are genuinely independent or merely four copies of one source. William Lane Craig, in his own words, defending this point directly against a critic: QUOTE — "Minimally, John's literary independence proves the existence of a shared pre‑Markan burial tradition. Moreover, Mathew and Luke have other sources tha

• Incarnation Coherence Test, Sub-Task 2: Kenotic Christology vs. the Orthodoxy/Immutability Objection

  Costs on both sides

  Strongest case · Biblical anchor (SOURCE PARAPHRASE, Loke 2024 citing Fee 2007: 377-385, 383-384 — a secondary scholar's paraphrase of Fee's exegesis, not a direct quotation of Fee): Philippians 2:6-7's ekenōsen ("emptied himself") is the textual root of the doctrine. Gordon Fee's own reading, as reported by Loke, is more cautious than the classic 19th-century kenotic reading: "'emptied himself' does not have to mean 'emptied himself of something'; rather, it could be a metaphor, meaning something like 'he made

• Incarnation Coherence Test, Sub-Task 1: Pawl's Reduplicative Strategy vs. Its Strongest Objection

  Costs on both sides

  Strongest case · SOURCE PARAPHRASE (unverified — from training-data familiarity with Pawl's 2014 Journal of Analytic Theology paper "A Solution to the Fundamental Philosophical Problem of Christology" and his 2016 Oxford University Press book In Defense of Conciliar Christology; not checked against primary text this session): Pawl names the objection the "Fundamental Philosophical Problem of Christology" (FPPC): conciliar Christology (Chalcedon 451, Third Constantinople 681) affirms that one subject, Christ, tru

• Incarnation Coherence Test, Sub-Task 3: The Two-Minds Model vs. the Nestorianism Objection

  Costs on both sides

  Strongest case · The model's basic structure (SOURCE PARAPHRASE, cross-corroborated by three independently-fetched secondary sources plus the directly-read SEP entry): Morris proposes that the Incarnation is the realization of one person with two minds — a human mind and a divine mind — rather than one mind bearing contradictory properties. The SEP entry states this directly: QUOTE (Michael Murray & Michael Rea, "Philosophy and Christian Theology," Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, first published 2002, subst

• (new sub-task): Did the Historical Jesus Himself Claim or Clearly Understand Himself to Be Divine? — Comparative-Adequacy Packet

  Argument incomplete

  Strongest case · (a) The Mark 14:61–64 trial scene, read at face value: the high priest asks, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?" Jesus answers, "I am [ego eimi]; and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven" — a direct fusion of messianic self-identification with Daniel 7:13's heavenly, judgment-authority figure and Psalm 110:1's "right hand" enthronement language, provoking an immediate charge of blasphemy and the death sentence (Mark 14

• (sub-task 1): Historical Evidentiary Test of the Resurrection — Comparative-Adequacy Packet

  Argument incomplete

  Strongest case · Primary case identified: Two complementary formulations, verified from primary sources rather than assumed: (a) Gary Habermas's "Minimal Facts" method, as stated in his own words: QUOTE — "Each event had to be established by more than adequate scholarly evidence, and usually by several critically-ascertained, independent lines of argumentation. Additionally, the vast majority of contemporary scholars in relevant fields had to acknowledge the historicity of the occurrence." (Gary R. Habermas, "Th

• Two-Minds Model, Follow-Up Verification: Does Pawl's Supposit/Faculty Reply Withstand DeWeese's I-Thou Objection?

  Argument incomplete

  Strongest case · The reply's structure, now verified via direct quotation rather than paraphrase alone: Pawl does not evade DeWeese's/Loke's premise; he explicitly reformulates it as a conditional and then denies the antecedent's relevant term picks out what the objection needs it to pick out. QUOTE (Pawl 2016: 226, as quoted by Loke 2017, per §1a): "If the consciousness could address each other in an I-thou relationship, then Nestorianism is true." Pawl's reply, per Loke's own report of it (SOURCE PARAPHRASE, c

2 further research notes on this question are still in researcher language (internal IDs, packet filenames, extraction state). Those notes stay in the research workspace. This page only shows copy written for readers.