Bart Ehrman and Mike Licona will be participating in
a written debate on the historical reliability of the New Testament early next year. You can find links to our reviews of their oral debates, as well as other oral debates Ehrman has participated in,
here. My review of Ehrman's debate with James White on the New Testament's textual transmission can be found
here. And
here's an archive of our posts with the Bart Ehrman label. Be sure to scroll all the way to the bottom and click on Older Posts to find more.
BTW, on Sept. 18th Ehrman debated Justin Bass on whether the historical Jesus claimed to be Divine
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/CTgig9F782s
Also, This week David Wood and Shabir Ally are debating 6 times. 4 debates have already occurred.
They can be viewed live or recorded on the Trinity Channel YouTube channel
Correction. Last 2 of the 6 debates between Wood and Ally are next Monday and Tuesday.
DeleteThere's no doubt that Ehrman will appeal to the apparent contradictions and discrepancies in the Gospels as reason to reject the reliability of the New Testament. I suspect Mike Licona will answer those apparent discrepancies in the way he does in in the following lecture:
Deletehttps://youtu.be/xtemSTrkogE
In the above lecture it's clear that Licona's definition of inerrancy is really different than Geisler's. Also, Licona would rather replace the term inerrancy with some other term like infallible. From the lecture I can see why Geisler would consider Licona not really holding to inerrancy. Licona's view really is radical, but I'm not sure he's wrong. It makes some sense to me.