Who Wrote Mathew? Part 2

Kabane nails Dillahunty here on his subjective claim that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

@2:00

Kabane nails him again and exposes him for his bias against Theism.

@3:17

Matt again makes a category mistake by saying the scientific method is the best way to find truth. While this maybe true in the area of science, it is a category mistake to assume the way to get to the truth of historical claims is by the scientific method.

Dillahunty espouses the view of "scientism". Scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality. This is a classic example of why this view fails! When dealing with historical claims one must use historical criteria, NOT the scientific method.

@8:20

Dillahunty shows that he would never be open to believe in the resurrection because it is a historical event which can not be put under the scientific method.

So it is not a rejection based on the evidence for the resurrection, but he rejects the resurrection because of his philosophical commitment to "scientism".


@9:00

Kabane asks him if in his view that science is only informer of truth. Dillahunty says emphatically no, and then goes on to say no way of finding truth has been shown to be better than the scientific method. So he again double speaks trying to hide his bias and commitment to scientism.

Again, on his view he could never look objectivley at the evidence for the resurrection because it is a historical event and not able to undergo the scientific method, which he claims is the best and most reliable way to find truth. This is just a basic category mistake on his part which is a logical fallacy and Kabane did a great job exposing his views!