Bart's Debates Archives - Page 4 of 6 - The Bart Ehrman Blog

Paul and the Historical Jesus

In this thread I have been talking about what I discussed in my thirty-minute presentation at the Mythicist Milwaukee conference, in my debate with Robert Price. After pointing out a couple of problems with typical Mythicist arguments I devoted the bulk of my time to laying out the positive evidence for my view that whatever else you might want to say about him, Jesus of Nazareth certainly existed as a real human being. In my last post I stressed the value of the Gospels, and their written and oral sources of information. There were lots and lots of sources, from the early days of the Christian movement, some of them coming straight out of Aramaic-speaking Palestine. It is almost impossible to explain how you could have so many independent sources saying similar things about the man Jesus unless he really was a historical figure. But there is much more. Next in my talk I moved to the apostle Paul, obviously a key figure in the debate. There are thirteen letters written in Paul’s name in [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:35:05-04:00November 1st, 2016|Bart's Debates, Historical Jesus, Mythicism, Paul and His Letters, Public Forum|

Gospel Evidence that Jesus Existed
Gallery
Gospel Evidence that Jesus Existed

Bart's Debates, Canonical Gospels, Historical Jesus, Public Forum

Gospel Evidence that Jesus Existed

Jesus existed. In yesterday’s post, I began to show how Jesus is the best attested Palestinian Jew of the first century if we look only at external evidence. Josephus is better attested because we have his own writings. I am also not including Paul because I’m talking only about Jews from Palestine; he was from the Diaspora. The Gospel Sources We have four narrative accounts of Jesus’ life and death, written by different people at different times and in different places, based on numerous sources that no longer survive. Jesus was not invented by Mark. He was also known to Matthew, Luke, and John, and to the sources which they used (Q, M, L, and the various sources of John). All of this was within the first century. Non-New Testament & Non-Gospel Sources - We Have Many! This is not to mention sources from outside the New Testament that know that Jesus was a historical figure – for example, 1 Clement and the documents that make up the Didache. Or -- need I say it? [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:35:04-04:00October 28th, 2016|Bart's Debates, Canonical Gospels, Historical Jesus, Public Forum|

The Gospels and the Existence of Jesus

If you have only thirty minutes to build a case that Jesus of Nazareth really existed, how do you do it? That was the problem I was confronted with this past Friday at the Mythicist Milwaukee conference, in my debate with Robert Price. Rather than mount a lot of arguments and say very little about each one of them (what we used to call “the shotgun approach” when I was in high school), I thought it would be better just to make a few points and pack them up with evidence and reasoning. The first and most obvious point, to me, is this. Jesus is one of the two best attested Jews living in Palestine in the entire first century. There were hundreds of thousands of Jews in some way connected with Palestine at the time Only one is better attested than Jesus (with a proviso, which I’ll explain). That one is the Jewish historian Josephus. The reason he is better known than Jesus is because he has left us a large number of writings [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:35:04-04:00October 27th, 2016|Bart's Debates, Canonical Gospels, Historical Jesus, Mythicism, Public Forum|

Mythicists and the Stories Told of Jesus

Back to my debate with Robert Price this past Friday. I started this thread by indicating that the majority of my 30-minute talk was devoted to explaining the positive evidence that I think shows beyond reasonable doubt that there was indeed a man Jesus of Nazareth. I’ll be discussing that evidence later in the thread. I began my talk, however, by pointing out that Mythicists often adduce arguments that simply are not very convincing. At least to me. The first was the topic of my last post, the idea that there was no Nazareth at the time of Jesus, which is both wrong (archaeologists have dug it) and irrelevant (if you wrongly think I was born in Topeka that doesn’t mean I don’t exist). The second is argued with particular vim and vigor by Bob Price himself in several of his publications. This is that virtually all the stories about Jesus (Bob would say all of the stories, I think) can be seen as modeled on stories known to early Christians, especially in the Old [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:35:04-04:00October 26th, 2016|Bart's Debates, Historical Jesus, Mythicism, Public Forum|

My Milwaukee Mythicist Debate

I have had several people ask me about how the debate went with Robert Price this past Friday evening. For those of you who haven’t kept up with the blog or who don’t remember (no reason you should!): I was in Milwaukee to have a debate on the question Did Jesus Exist? The event was sponsored by the Milwaukee Mythicists, a rather unusual group of local folk who are committed to the idea that there never was a man Jesus, but that he was completely made up by early Christians, a myth. Hence their name. Robert Price agrees with that view. The Milwaukee Mythicists are not a chapter of a larger nation-wide organization. They are the only group like that that I know of (if there are others, I’m sure members of the blog will let me know). They are a small group, but vibrant, committed, and, apparently, growing. My view, of course, is that their very raison d’être is problematic, since Jesus, in my view, almost certainly existed. Hence the debate. Despite our differences, [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:35:04-04:00October 25th, 2016|Bart's Debates, Mythicism, Public Forum|

Mythicists: Did Nazareth Exist?

I am interrupting my thread on the relationship of Jesus to the Jewish law (I haven’t gotten very far: I’m still on Marcion!) because of what is most pressing on my mind right now, the debate I’m having this evening with Robert Price. It is here in Milwaukee sponsored by a group called the Milwaukee Mythicists. It’s a small group of people committed to, or (for some of them) at least attracted by, the idea that Jesus was not a real human being but is a myth invented by his later followers. I suppose roughly speaking, most Mythicists are a subgroup of people who are atheist. Originally, for most of these people, Jesus was understood to be a divine being who lived in the heavenly realm (“outer space,” as some of them put it) who was crucified by demonic powers. Later followers of Jesus historicized him and made him, in their myths, into a human being. And then the stories emerged about him that we now have in our Gospels. They are based principally on [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:35:04-04:00October 21st, 2016|Bart's Debates, Historical Jesus, Mythicism, Public Forum|

Did Jesus Exist? My Debate with Robert Price

Right now, as we speak, I am en route to Milwaukee for my debate with Robert Price, one of the best known Mythicists on the planet (for those of you who don’t know, a Mythicist claims that Jesus was a myth made up by early Christians; there never was a historical figure, Jesus of Nazareth). Of the many thousands of scholars in the world that have a PhD in New Testament or Early Christian studies he is the one, so far as I know, who takes this position. The fact that almost everyone thinks he is wrong does mean that he *is* wrong of course. For a long time the vast majority of the world’s population thought that the earth was the center of the universe and that sun and stars revolved around it. The fact they thought so had no bearing on whether it was true or not. For that reason, Mythicists have often gotten upset with me for pointing out that almost no one with any qualifications in the requisite fields of scholarship [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:35:04-04:00October 20th, 2016|Bart's Debates, Mythicism, Public Forum|

Debate with a Mythicist! And the Book of Revelation. Readers’ Mailbag September 25, 2016

In this week’s Mailbag I’ll be addressing two questions, one about me personally – my preparations for the upcoming debate with Robert Price on the question of whether Jesus even existed as a human being – and the other about the book of Revelation. If you have a question you would like me to address on the Mailbag, simply ask it in a comment on this post or any other. ************************************************************************ QUESTION It seems the debate between yourself and Robert Price will be going ahead next month, right? I follow Price on Facebook and he has evidently been re-reading all your books in preparation. How much of his books do you intend on reading prior to the debate? How will you prepare for the debate? I’m really looking forward to it! RESPONSE Right! Yes indeed! On October 21 I will be having a three-hour debate in Milwaukee with Robert Price, who has two PhDs from Drew University, one in New Testament Studies and the other in Theology, and who is an atheist who supports [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:34:45-04:00September 25th, 2016|Bart's Debates, Canonical Gospels, Mythicism, Public Forum, Reader’s Questions, Reflections and Ruminations, Revelation of John|

Bart Ehrman vs. Michael Brown on Suffering

In my post on Saturday I discussed the issue of death and laid out briefly my view that this life is all there is. That does not mean, however, that I think we should just party-hard since there is no life to come. I have long been intrigued by the "problem of suffering," and I have never, in fact, taken it to be just an intellectual problem. I think as human beings we need to deal with suffering if we want to lead life to its fullest. But I'm still intrigued with the problem: how can there can be such massive suffering in the world if there is a God in control of it? I have had several debates on the subject, and here is one of the hardest, on video. The debate was with Dr. Michael L. Brown, a very smart Jewish believer in Jesus. We had the debate on April 15, 2010, at Ohio State University. The debate was inspired largely by my book, "God's Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:34:11-04:00September 19th, 2016|Bart's Debates, Video Media|

My Debate with Richard Bauckham – Round 2

Here is round two (two out of two) of my debate with Richard J. Bauckham join on the radio show "Unbelievable," a weekly program aired on UK Premier Christian Radio and hosted by Justin Brierley. Richard was in the station's London studio, I was on the phone. Here we pursue other issues related to whether the Gospels of the NT represent distorted memories or if, for the most part, they can be trusted to be reliable because they are based on eyewitness testimony. Richard and I disagree about the matter, as about oh so many other things! Richard J. Bauckham is a prominent New Testament scholar and professor emeritus of New Testament studies at St. Mary's College, University of St. Andrews, Scotland. He retired from teaching in 2007 to pursue his research and writing. Please adjust gear icon for 1080p High-Definition:

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:33:07-04:00May 1st, 2016|Bart's Debates, Public Forum, Video Media|

Bart Ehrman vs Richard Bauckham – Round 1

This is a debate I had on April 9, 2016 with Richard J. Bauckham, a well-known and influential British scholar who has written extensively on many of the areas of my own interest, the New Testament, the historical Jesus, and the non-canonical literature. He is a fine scholar, and a conservative Christian, and I disagree with him on, well, so many things! This was the first of a two-part debate that was hosted by Justin Brierley on his weekly radio show "Unbelievable," aired on UK Premier Christian Radio from the London studio. Our topic was "Are the Gospels Based on Eyewitness Testimony?" My new book, Jesus Before the Gospels, argues that the stories about Jesus would have changed and evolved before they were written down in the Gospels(and that the authors of the Gospels were not eyewitnesses and had no access to the eyewitnesses). Bauckham's earlier book Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, claims that the view that the Gospels were written by those with access to eyewitness testimony of Jesus' first followers (and that therefore we can trust [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:32:51-04:00April 24th, 2016|Bart's Debates, Public Forum, Video Media|

Evaluating My Debate on the Book of Acts

I have now completed my posts on the debate I had with myself in front of my New Testament class on the question of whether the New Testament book of Acts is historically reliable. If you want to see the whole debate, just read the posts in sequence: the affirmative speech arguing Acts is indeed reliable; the negative speech arguing that it is not; the negative rebuttal of what the affirmative side said; and finally the affirmative rebuttal of what the negative side said. In class I delivered the speeches one after the other. When “affirmative” I was wearing a sport coat, but no cap; when “negative” I was wearing a baseball cap but no sport coat – just so students would realize that it was a “different” speaker speaking. I have pointed out on the blog before that even though I do a lot of public debates, I often find them more than a little frustrating and frequently (in fact, almost always) ask myself, in the course of the debate, why I’m doing this [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:32:51-04:00April 6th, 2016|Acts of the Apostles, Bart's Debates, Public Forum|

Is Acts Historically Reliable? The Affirmative Rebuttal

I have been (intermittently) discussing the debate that I had with myself in front of my New Testament class on the resolution, Resolved: The Book of Acts is Historically Reliable. So far I have indicated what the Affirmative side argued in favor of the resolution; what the Negative side argued against the resolution; and what the Negative side said in its rebuttal to the first Affirmative speech. NOW, at last, I can indicate what the Affirmative side said in its rebuttal to the two Negative speeches. Recall: in this post I’m not indicating what I really thing; I’m indicating what I would argue if this were the side I was required to argue (and what I did argue in class that day). Here it is: ******************************************************** Despite what the negative side has maintained, we remain convinced that the New Testament book of Acts is historically reliable. The first point to stress is that it is of utmost importance that we not impose modern standards of historical accuracy on an ancient text. Of course the author [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:32:51-04:00April 5th, 2016|Acts of the Apostles, Bart's Debates, Paul and His Letters|

Is Acts Reliable? The Negative Rebuttal

What follows is the “negative rebuttal” of the speech given by the “first affirmative” in its support of the resolution, “Resolved: The Book of Acts is Historically Reliable.” If you need to refresh yourself on what the affirmative team argued, you can find it on the March 24 post, here: https://ehrmanblog.org/is-acts-historically-reliable-affirmative-argument/ In the first negative speech (yesterday’s post) the negative team argued its case, without direct reference to the affirmative side. This, now, is the negative response to what the affirmative said (the next post in the thread will be the affirmative rebuttal to the negative side) (recall: this was a debate I staged with myself in front of my New Testament class earlier this semester. I didn't read this speech: I winged it. But this is the essence of what I argued, on the negative side against the affirmative) *************************************************************** If you choose to go point by point through the affirmative team’s case that the book of Acts is historically reliable, you will find that they have advanced their views on very thin grounds. [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:32:51-04:00March 31st, 2016|Acts of the Apostles, Bart's Debates, Public Forum|

Is the Book of Acts Historically Reliable? The Negative Case.

This post will lay out the Negative case, arguing against the resolution, Resolved: The Book of Acts if Historically Reliable. Again, I am not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing with this argument; I’m giving it as I would in a debate. ********************************************************** The New Testament book of Acts is not historically reliable. Before showing that to be the case, I want to make two preliminary remarks, both of them related to the question of what it means for an ostensibly historical account (a narrative of what allegedly happened in the past) to be reliable. First, when readers today want to know whether the book of Acts is reliable, they mean that they want to know whether the events that it narrates actually happened in the way it describes. Or not. Readers are not primarily interested in knowing if he wrote his account the way other authors in his day would have done. They are mainly interested in knowing whether his narrative happened the way he says it did. Second, it is indeed important to know whether [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:32:50-04:00March 30th, 2016|Acts of the Apostles, Bart's Debates, Public Forum|

Is the Book of Acts Historically Reliable? Smoke and Mirrors.

In my next post I will be staking stake out the “negative” side on the debate I had with myself in class, arguing against the resolution, Resolved: The Book of Acts is Historically Reliable. I have already made the affirmative case; in the negative I will argue that the book is not reliable (that first speech was a set speech, prepared without reference to anything the affirmative side said). I will then give a negative refutation of the affirmative’s first speech, and I will end with an affirmative rebuttal of the negative’s two speeches. Before I do all that, however, I need to take a time-out and explain one negative counter-argument that would take too much space if it were simply part of a longer post laying out the negative position. The affirmative side in the debate argued that based on archaeological evidence Luke can be shown to have presented accurately the laws, custom, and geography mentioned or alluded to in the book of Acts: there really was an Areopagus where philosophers gathered, as mentioned [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:32:50-04:00March 29th, 2016|Acts of the Apostles, Bart's Debates, Public Forum|

Bart Ehrman vs Tim McGrew – Round 2

Here is the second part of my on-radio debate with Christian apologist Timothy J. McGrew, which aired on the Unbelievable," a weekly program aired on UK Premier Christian Radio. I recorded the interview from the station's London studio; McGrew was on the telephone. In the discussion we address the question Do Undesigned Coincidences Confirm the Gospels?" We also debated whether historical research can ever validate miraculous conclusions, as we express differ views over accounts in the book of Acts. For McGrew's views on what he calls these Un-designed Coincidences, see http://www.christianapologeticsalliance.com/2013/09/01/undesigned-coincidences. He's also the author of The Foundations of Knowledge and Internalism and Epistemology. Please adjust gear icon for 1080p High-Definition:

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:32:36-04:00March 26th, 2016|Acts of the Apostles, Bart's Debates, Video Media|

Bart Ehrman vs Tim McGrew – Round 1

On Saturday 18th July 2015 I held a kind of radio debate with Timothy J. McGrew, a conservative Christian apologist and professor of Philosophy at Western Michigan University. He's also the author of The Foundations of Knowledge and Internalism and Epistemology. It was a two-part back-and-forth on "Unbelievable," a weekly program hosted by Justin Brierley, which airs on UK Premier Christian Radio. I taped the interview from the station's London studio. The debate was on the topic: Can We Trust the Gospels?" Here Part One. Please adjust gear icon for 1080p High-Definition:

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:32:36-04:00March 19th, 2016|Bart's Debates, Canonical Gospels, Video Media|

The Value (or Not) of Debates

As most readers of the blog know, I do a good number of public debates, almost always (I’m trying to think if there is an exception!) with conservative evangelical Christians or fundamentalists who think that my views are dangerous to the good Christians of their communities and to all those non-Christians they very much want to convert. My view all along has been that my historical views are not a threat to Christian faith, but only to a particular (and particularly narrow) understanding of that faith. But most of my debate partners can’t see things that way. For them, their views are Christianity, and any other kind of Christianity is not actually Christianity. I usually look forward to these debates in advance, but I have to say that almost every time I’m actually having one, I start jotting notes to myself, asking “Why Am I Doing This?” or “Why Do I Do This To Myself?” I often find the debates very frustrating. I imagine my debate partners do as well. They just can’t understand why [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:32:35-04:00March 10th, 2016|Bart's Debates, Public Forum, Teaching Christianity|

Did the Earliest Christians Believe Jesus Became God?

This will be my final post on the debate I had in New Orleans with Michael Bird on “How Did Jesus Become God” a couple of weeks ago. As I indicated in my previous post, it appears where we disagree in particular is with how the resurrection affected the disciples’ understanding of Jesus. My view is that when they came to think Jesus was raised from the dead, the disciples thought that this entailed his being exalted up to heaven. And *that* is why thy started calling Jesus “God,” because in ancient thinking – as documented widely in both pagan and Jewish circles – it was believed that a mortal being who was taken up to heaven was made immortal, and was in fact, considered then to become a God. That is the belief attested for such figures as Romulus in Roman circles and Enoch in Jewish circles. And it is, I’ve contended, how the earliest Christians understood Jesus. Only as they thought about it more did they start saying even more exalted things about [...]

BDEhrman2025-09-10T12:32:19-04:00February 29th, 2016|Bart's Debates, Early Christian Doctrine, Public Forum|

Previous 1···345 6 Next