9 votes, average: 4.89 out of 59 votes, average: 4.89 out of 59 votes, average: 4.89 out of 59 votes, average: 4.89 out of 59 votes, average: 4.89 out of 5 (9 votes, average: 4.89 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this post.

Ehrman vs Craig: Evidence for Resurrection

Over ten years ago now (March 28, 2006) I had a debate with William Lane Craig, author of Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics and On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision, at the College of the Holy Cross, on the question: “Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus?”  Craig is a conservative evangelical Christian philosopher (yes, a real philosopher — that is, he teaches courses in philosophy and writes about it; but from a very conservative Christian perspective).

I had never met Craig before the debate, and in places the debate gets a little … lively.  Even testy. Craig and I have had zero contact with each other ever since.

Craig provided a full transcript of the debate on his site Reasonable Faith here: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/is-there-historical-evidence-for-the-resurrection-of-jesus-the-craig-ehrman  I would assume that since he posted the transcript he thinks he pretty much mopped me up.  Maybe he did!

Please note: The video quality from the source is not great, since old-style equipment was used to record the event. We have added color and audio correction, but overall it is not up to our normal standards.

Please adjust gear icon for pseudo 720p High-Definition:

Drew Marshall Show – Jesus Before The Gospels
Can Biblical Scholars Be Historians?



  1. Avatar
    JosiahBent  May 26, 2020

    Hey Bart, what is your take on Dr Gary Habermas and his argument for the historicity of Jesus’s resurrection?
    *I’ve been searching to see if you had ever responded to any of his claims*

    • Bart
      Bart  May 26, 2020

      I don’t find them convincing at all, and am struck by the fact that they are convincing almost exclusively to those who are already convinced and want ammunition to convince others. I know hundreds of historians, and not one of them would give the arguments the time of day. He’s a smart fellow, but in my view he is doing theology, not history.

You must be logged in to post a comment.