Sunday, June 13, 2010

Bart Ehrman vs. Craig Evans: Does the New Testament Misquote Jesus?

Play all videos (9)
March 31, 2010 at First Family Church
Bart D. Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He came to UNC in 1988, after four years of teaching at Rutgers University. At UNC he has served as both the Director of Graduate Studies and the Chair of the Department of Religious Studies.

Craig Evans is the Payzant Distinguished Professor of New Testament at Acadia Divinity College of Acadia University, in Wolfville, Nova Scotia, Canada. A graduate of Claremont McKenna College, he received his M.Div. from Western Baptist Seminary in Portland, Oregon, and his M.A. and Ph.D. in Biblical Studies from Claremont Graduate University in southern California. He has also been awarded the D.Habil. by the Karoli Gaspard Reformed University in Budapest. A well-known evangelical scholar throughout the world, he is an elected member of the prestigious SNTS, a society dedicated to New Testament studies.

Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why (Plus) Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (and Why We Don't Know about Them)


  1. This debate is the ultimate example of the futility of trying to deprogram the religious. Evans is undeniably a highly educated man, yet his ability to compartmentalize his IQ is absolutely stunning. He confirms that 2+2=5 when it suits his purpose and simply avoids answering questions on realizing that an answer would make his religious scholarship look like superstitious babble disguised in highly-sophisticated verbosity.
    He's also dishonest. The writings of Josephus on Jesus have long been discredited by HONEST scholars as doubtful at best, forgeries at worst.
    Next time you feel the urge to debate a fundie, realize that he/she would watch this entire debate and give a standing ovation to evans.

  2. In light of evidence to the errancy of the Bible, is the Bible inerrant?  

    "Yes, I believe it is"

    What a tool.  It's embarrassing how the human mind can de-rationalize factual evidence when it has already "made up it's mind" about what it believes.  "I believe it, so it's true."  Evidence means little to these people.

    I don't like how Evans keeps quoting "Scholars", yet doesn't define or give credentials to these scholars.  I'm sure the majority of 'his' scholars  are evangelicals that have been through seminary and already figured out how to justify the Bible in light of it's 'flash-flood' of errors.

  3. Perhaps you might take another run-thru. Ehrman was the one who spent an inordinate amount of time with long lists of universities with scholars who back up his view. No credentials. Argument by association.
    I. too. believe the man is a tool, but it might be wise to keep criticism consistant.

  4. William Lane Craig is another Craig tool who has debated Bart Ehrman.  What is it with Craigs and tools? What's up with that?

  5. I really want to listen to this- but the guy is weirdly excited and overly animated. I just watched the Hitchens one and of that frame of mind. Now theres this chuckle head all ron burgandy n shiiiit.

  6. Ehrman did shout a lot, which was a shame. He would start out answering every question talking in a normal tone of voice and then quickly pick up the volume. That was my only complaint when watching this. 

    I thought the crowd was very civil, considering this shouting and the fact that they were all literalists.

  7. What an awful debate format! Perpared questions, prepared answers, no real opportunity for follow up... Blech - I couldn't watch the whole thing.

  8. This wasn't a debate at all. No back and forth. Ehrman is a highly educated guy and the only one alive to debate / school Christians on their own subject. OK - he's not graceful and all shouty - point taken - that doesn't detract from his core message. The fact is that there's inaccuracies that both parties agree on, but you're bending over backwards to debate the issue and still having to resort to highly filtered rhetoric for it to take part. He should be on an intelligence squared debate. Next time some one says "Jesus said......." you can say "well no he didn't thats from a textual variant and is probably wrong". 9/10 you're going to be right - good odds.