Coined by Robert M. Price in "The Case Against The Case For Christ", derived from The Wizard of
Oz.
Arguing for the
truth of a controversial, often religiously significant claim by presupposing the
truth of some other equally controversial claim.
"This is why, if apologists like William Lane
Craig can get an opponent as far as admitting that
Joseph of Arimathea probably did have Jesus interred in his own tomb, and if the women did probably visit the tomb, and that the tomb was probably found to be empty, he can press on to the conclusion that Bingo! Jesus must have risen from the
dead! What they somehow do not see is that to argue thus is like arguing that the Emerald City of
Oz must actually exist since, otherwise, where would the Yellow Brick
Road lead?" -The Case Against The Case For Christ (p.209)
"The disciples clearly didn't hallucinate Jesus after the crucifixion since he allowed Thomas to poke his wounds and he shared bread with them. Simultaneous hallucinations involving multiple sensory modalities just
don't happen."
"Yeah, that's just yellow brick
road apologetics."
