I'm continuing to work on editing Bayesian evaluation for the likelihood of Christ's resurrection.
This week, I switched around the order between considering James's and Paul's testimony, by placing Paul's stronger testimony first. That way, there's no doubt that this testimony carries the odds over to the side of being probable.
Things are still edited down to "Conclusion: there is in fact far more than enough evidence to overcome the prior. (part 4)"
You may next want to read:
Why we should interpret the Bible in light of science
Key principles in interpreting the Bible
Another post, from the table of contents
Bayesian evaluation for the likelihood of Christ's resurrection (edit 9)
I'm continuing to work on editing Bayesian evaluation for the likelihood of Christ's resurrection.
This week, I edited down to the section starting "Conclusion: there is in fact far more than enough evidence to overcome the prior. (part 4)"
You may next want to read:
Christians, read your Bibles
15 puzzle: a tile sliding game
Another post, from the table of contents
This week, I edited down to the section starting "Conclusion: there is in fact far more than enough evidence to overcome the prior. (part 4)"
You may next want to read:
Christians, read your Bibles
15 puzzle: a tile sliding game
Another post, from the table of contents
Bayesian evaluation for the likelihood of Christ's resurrection (edit 8)
I'm continuing to work on editing Bayesian evaluation for the likelihood of Christ's resurrection.
This week, I edited down to the section starting "The evidence for a resurrection - is it enough? (part 4)"
You may next want to read:
Finding pi in a square grid: or, why you can have square brownies for pi day
Key principles in interpreting the Bible
Another post, from the table of contents
This week, I edited down to the section starting "The evidence for a resurrection - is it enough? (part 4)"
You may next want to read:
Finding pi in a square grid: or, why you can have square brownies for pi day
Key principles in interpreting the Bible
Another post, from the table of contents
Bayesian evaluation for the likelihood of Christ's resurrection (edit 7)
I'm continuing to work on editing Bayesian evaluation for the likelihood of Christ's resurrection.
This week, I made some "style guide" type changes to the body of the text: "Bayes' theorem", "Bayes' rule", and "Bayes factor". Incidentally, I prefer "Jesus's" to "Jesus'" in indicating the possessive case for Jesus, because I think it agrees better with how people actually speak, except in certain formulaic phrases: "in Jesus' name", "Jesus' disciples", etc. Apparently there's actually a specific rule about this for "Biblical or classical proper names".
There's also some minor edits starting in the "Double checking the Bayes' factor: Lottery winner" section, but I didn't get very far.
You may next want to read:
The dialogue between two aliens who found a book on Earth
The intellect trap
Another post, from the table of contents
This week, I made some "style guide" type changes to the body of the text: "Bayes' theorem", "Bayes' rule", and "Bayes factor". Incidentally, I prefer "Jesus's" to "Jesus'" in indicating the possessive case for Jesus, because I think it agrees better with how people actually speak, except in certain formulaic phrases: "in Jesus' name", "Jesus' disciples", etc. Apparently there's actually a specific rule about this for "Biblical or classical proper names".
There's also some minor edits starting in the "Double checking the Bayes' factor: Lottery winner" section, but I didn't get very far.
You may next want to read:
The dialogue between two aliens who found a book on Earth
The intellect trap
Another post, from the table of contents