Home » Kiosk » Kiosk Article » Open Letter to Dr. Adam Francisco, Editor of the Global Journal of Classical Theology

Open Letter to Dr. Adam Francisco, Editor of the Global Journal of Classical Theology

I believe that legal apologists, either intentionally or unintentionally, use one-sided and specious arguments that mislead laypersons. Your predecessor, Dr. John Warwick Montgomery, is probably the world’s leading legal apologist. I therefore invited him to cooperate with me to present arguments for and against his claim that Jesus’ resurrection can be proven by the type of evidence that is admissible in court. He responded that, as a result of a very full schedule, he regretfully declined involvement.

I therefore tried to find another Christian who would obey the command of 1 Peter 3:15-16. However, I could not find anyone willing to defend the faith. I therefore published my “Unopposed Brief Challenging Legal Apologetics.”

I write to you now as the current editor of the Global Journal of Classical Theology. The Journal’s website states that the focus of the Journal’s articles includes legal and apologetic issues and that it seeks to provide a medium for “Christian scholarly advancement and critical interaction.” Responding to my brief seems well within the Journal’s mission. The Journal previously published articles by Dr. Montgomery and Boyd Pehrson responding to an article by Richard Packham criticizing some Dr. Montgomery’s arguments.

As the Journal’s editor, you certainly have the ability to organize a response to my brief. Two members of the Journal’s editorial board (Craig Parton and Ross Clifford) have published their own books on legal apologetics. If they are also too busy to obey the biblical injunction to make their defense to anyone who demands it, then you could issue a call for papers on the subject.

With due respect, this wall of silence is not a good look for the Journal. Dr. Montgomery gave a lecture at Village Lutheran Church on “A Lawyer’s Defense of Christianity” in which he explained (at about minute 26 of the video):

There is a Principle in the French Civil Code, which goes something like this: If a witness has not responded as any reasonable person would to a claim, his non-response to the claim is evidence against him.

My brief guts practically every argument legal apologists have made regarding evidence for Jesus’ resurrection. A reasonable person who has written books on legal apologetics would want to discredit my claims if they are not sound.

Dr. Montgomery has also argued that the hostile Jewish religious leadership “had the means, motive, and opportunity to expose the apostolic witness as inaccurate and deceptive if it had been such. The fact that they did not can only be effectively explained on the ground that they could not.”[1] The Journal obviously has the means and the opportunity to publish a reply. You still have the same motive to expose anything inaccurate or deceptive in my brief as you had when you published two articles in response to Mr. Packham.

Therefore, I invite you to, no later than August 15, 2024, contact me via Internet Infidels to inform me when the Journal—or any other person that you choose—will publish a response to my brief. I also hereby and by these presents do formally double dog dare you to poke a single hole in my arguments.


[1] John Warwick Montgomery, “The Jury Returns: A Juridical Defense of Christianity” in Christians in the Public Square, Law, Gospel & Public Policy ed. John Warwick Montgomery (Edmonton, Canada: Canadian Institute for Law, Theology & Public Policy, 1996): 223-250, pp. 234-235.