(4 votes, average: 4.75 out of 5)
Loading...This next week I’m heading out to San Diego for a debate on March 24 with a Catholic Apologist named Jimmy Akin on the question of whether the Gospels of the New Testament are historically reliable. I’ve never debated a Catholic apologist before! This should be fun.
I also (obviously) haven’t done a live event in over two years. So, this will be interesting as well as fun.
The event will be live streamed if you’re interested, and even if you’re not. Here’s the announcement, with ticket information, in case you might want to attend or listen in: Jimmy Akin vs Bart Ehrman – Campaign (catholic.com)
MOREOVER (only distantly conntected): It turns out I’ll be free for breakfast that morning. I’m happy to do a blog event ((as in live, and in person!) if anyone feels like shlepping out to Del Mar. I’m thinkin’ March 24 at 8:00 am. Anyone interested? Just send me an email at [email protected] There’d be no obligation other than showing up, ordering what you want, eating what you order, and … talking. I can go till 10:00 am. Let me know!
My favorite beach is in Del Mar. Hope you have time to catch some sun. Best of luck!
Bart, is it a consensus view that Mary, mother of Jesus, existed?
It’s certainly a consensus that Jesus’ mother existed! And there seems to be no reason to doubt that her name was Mary. I’d say it’s almost a complete consensus.
I wish it was not so long between little Kristiansand, Norway and San Diego. Had it not been for that, I would definitely have come.
Sometimes I just feel a desire to express a gratitude for this blog at a constantly high scholarly level and what I get out of it. Just impressive!
Good luck !
Do you think Catholic Apologists’ arguments will be, well, fundamentally different than those of Protestant Apologists? I suppose you will know in a few days 🙂
I”m eager to find out! I would suppose that the Catholic line will emphasize the traditional views of the church over the centuries rather than modern fundamentalist logic. But we’ll see! May be sone curve balls coming….
Since this is your first debate against Jimmy Akin, what will you do to learn about his arguments prior to the debate?
I was thinking about praying for a Revelation. I did look up to see if he ever debated the topic at length before, and didn’t find much. But, well, I didn’t look that hard. It’s more fun seeing what kinda curveball the opposing pitcher has…
Looking forward to it.
I would give my right arm to eat breakfast and talk with you, but alas, I am but a poor teacher stuck here in rural NC! Haha! Hope you have a great time, sir! I love watching your debates.
Maybe some other time!
Next time please give a little more time for notification. I would come, however already have other commitments.
Sorry ’bout that. I didn’t know what my schedule would be until then … there were other issues/factors. But maybe next time!
Here’s the Youtube link to the livestream of the event on Thursday at 7 pm.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKShBLRixR8
Dr. Ehrman:
Now the debate is over, what did you think of Aken’s argument about the 63 significant historical points that you agree on regarding the gospels, versus the 7 or 8 moderately important or trivial contradictions (I know you disagreed strongly on this latter idea) and discrepancies you pointed out? How do you think of historical reliability given Aken’s “quantity-based” framing of the question, which your detractors in the debate video comments said really blindsided you?
Concomitantly, what did you think of his arguments concerning the gospels being reliable even in things Jesus said because the gist was always retained, Jesus spoke in pithy and memorable sayings that made their way down even if eyewitnesses weren’t involved, and people were really paying attention given how different the circumstances were than listening to Obama’s SOU address?
Finally, I read that you were “flummoxed” by the idea that Joseph had two houses (explaining the Bethlehem/Nazareth birth stories) and the idea that the genealogies in the gospels are giving different lines, eventually connecting with Joseph. Any thoughts on this? Is it easy to summarize what Raymond Brown says on the second point, for us amateurs?
I thought it was a little strange to be arguing that I thought the Gospels were reliable because of the things in the Gospls that I think are reliable. I could easily have listed them myself! And I’d say that definitely the gist is not retained e.g., in the Gospel of John. That was one of my major points. You may have noticed that he didn’t respond to my explanations about the major differences in descriptions of Jesus’ birth, resurrection and teaching!
Brown’s discussion is highly accessible. He goes through every explanation of how to reconcile the genealogies and shows none of them works. And yes indeed I found that a flummoxing idea!!
I thought it wa astonishing that he relegated differences in the Resurrection account to the “Minor Claims.” Your reaction said it all. He used a lot of tricks — arbitrary divisions of claims, and arbitrary assignment of events to them; arbitrarily putting the burden of proof on you; citing his website /bart as part of his answers; etc. — that helped him stay somewhat afloat through the two hours. But he’s an apologist, not a scholar (not even close), so had to resort to this trickery.
I hope that you at least got a good meal out of this, because it seemed an utter waste of your time, especially in front of a largely biased audience that didn’t go there to learn, but to see you demolished (as some of the commenters on YouTube laughingly claimed happened).
Yup, a couple of good meals out of it, a chance to meet up with some blog folk, and a weekend with friends in the area. I call it a success!
Watched your debate with Akin. Most importantly, thank you for doing this even though I know how frustrating it was.
Akin’s main points appeared to be that the Gospel authors used selection to decide what to include in their account and then said it didn’t matter if they were completely correct because they got the “gist” of the message right.
However, then he goes through convoluted explanations of contradictions between the Gospels. Which is it – only the gist matters or the Gospels are in agreement? In my opinion, he’s being intellectually dishonest.
I was unable to attend the debate live, but watched the recording on YouTube. You did an excellent job in presenting your position, professionally and scholarly. I thought Mr. Akin started off inappropriate referring to your presence as “incarnate” (a jab at thinking of oneself as divine), the mock applause at how your books agree with his own position, and then the aggressive “high five” he presented. Maybe these are debate tactics, but still inappropriate in a professional setting. I liked your response to Mr. Akin’s “two home” theory regarding the birth stories in Matthew and Luke. Mr. Akin indicates the word “inn” in Luke is a mistranslation of the Greek term “kataluma”, which he thinks means “lodging place” to support his “two homes” theory. Is this correct, or is Mr. Akin providing an interpretation from the Greek to serve his idea? I think your point that a world-wide census requiring everyone to travel to a thousand-year-old ancestorial home is simply ridiculous – not your point, the idea of such a census.
It’s not a common word and is not the normal room for “inn”; it usually means something like “guest lodging” and can mean a room someone stays in. I don’t believe it’s ever used of a person’s own home though.
Dr. Ehrman: I watched the debate you had with Jimmy Akin on YouTube. First, I would like to thank you for maintaining patience, scholarship, courtesy, professionalism and tolerance in the face of a presentation with silly content by your opponent. His behavior which was immature and silly as well, also, lacked patience, courtesy, scholarship, tolerance and professionalism. His constant interrupting (while you were answering “his” questions) was especially egregious.
Thanks. He’s an interesting guy but these debates are never easy….
Dr. Ehrman, in your recent debate with Jimmy Akin, Mr. Akin rebutted your point about the contradictory stories about Jesus’ birth in Matthew and Luke. He “speculated” that Joseph had 2 homes, one in Bethlehem and another in Nazareth. You probably did not remember in the spur of the moment that in Luke 2:7 the writer of Luke states “..and laid him in an animal stall because there was no room for them in the inn.”
If Joseph had a “second home” in Bethlehem, why did he have to look for a room in an inn? From what I see of Mr. Akin, if you had pointed that out, Jimmy would likely have said…because Joseph was renting out the second home for additional income.
Thank you for your scholarship.
Paul.
Yup, I know. Exactly!