Posted on 06/06/2006 11:58:40 AM PDT by dukeman
A Debate between
William Lane Craig and Bart D. Ehrman
On March 28, 2006, Dr. Craig, Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology in La Mirada, California, and Dr. Ehrman, James A. Gray Distinguished Professor and Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, debated the status of the Christian claim to Jesus' resurrection from the perspective of historical data. The debate was sponsored by the Center for Religion, Ethics and Culture and the Campus Christian Fellowship.
When billions of people call Him "Lord" over 2000 years, you can say it's a pretty safe bet.
Jesus is in the realm of religion. Religion is pretty much synonimous with faith. Faith does not require historical evidence.
Is there historical evidence of the :Big Bang?"
Yes, there is evidence of the Big Bang. I think this type of debate is directed to the folks who don't believe Jesus ever existed or, if he did, he did not rise from the dead. I'm a believer, but I don't need faith to evaluate the evidence.
What about the billions that didn't?
I'm a believer too, but just differently.
Well, let's see....
1. Nobody. Not Pontius Pilate, Not The Sanhedrin, Not The Roman Legionnaires, Not The Scribes, Not The Pharisees, Not The man on the street, NOBODY doubted the tomb was empty.
2. The Sabbath changed from last day of the week to the first day of the week. A stiff-necked people did not change their minds on a deep spiritual matter just for giggles or something to do on a slow day.
3. Very important. VERY IMPORTANT!
One disciple and only one did not die a martyr's death. Those 11 disciples who died, at one time were hiding as cowards in an upper room afraid of their own shadows or any knock on the door. After they had seen the Lord, put their hands in His wounds and watched his ascension, they would not shut up or be silenced except by death.
1. James the brother of John was killed by Herod's sword.
2. James the Less was killed by a mob in Jerusalem.
3. Matthew was slain on a sword in Ethiopia.
4. Philip was hanged in Phrygia.
5. Bartholomew was flayed alived (skinned) in Armenia.
6. Andrew was crucified in Achaia.
7. Thomas was run through with a lance in East India.
8. Thaddeus was shot to death with arrows.
9. Simon the Zealot was crucified in Persia.
10. Peter was crucified upside down (he did not feel worthy to be crucified in the same manner as Christ) in Rome.
11. Matthias was beheaded.
12. John was the only one to die of natural causes.
These 11 men left steeples to the sky and a church for Christ in every corner of the then known earth. Not bad for a bunch of reformed cowards.
And people wonder why my family is not embarassed to say Grace together in a public restaurant.
Not requiring historic evidence, and not having historic evidence, are two different arguments.
It always amazes me when people argue over this. Well, they say hell will be a heavily populated place, and I'm seeing evidence every day to point in this direction...
Wow great debate. I'd say the judges all scored it 10-8 with Ehrman winning a unanimous decision.
First hand eye witnesses who were willing to die for what they saw is good enough for me. How else can anyone explain how one person and 12 uneducated disciples would be able to convert so many to believe in Him by just using their own preaching, not radio, TV, internet, or documents?
I know what you say about the disciples is true, but I'm confused by the count. Originally, there were 12, right? One of them was Judas, so that leaves 11. Then, Paul was accepted as one of them, so that makes 12 again. Except that Paul's name isn't on your list, is it? Please explain, for those of us not as knowledgable in biblical history.
Thanks!
No, Matthias was chosen as the new 12th Apostle. Paul was never an Apostle per se, but oddly enough did more than the others in my opinion to spread the Word.
Absolutely the best proof of the Resurrection: the 12 would not go out into the world to spread the Word, just to face death by stoning or by crucifixion for something they knew was a lie. Therefore it was the Truth. That proves it all.
I think you might get some disagreement from Paul on that statement. 1 Corinthians 9:1
There are a multitude of reasons why we know more about Paul's ministry than the others.....but primary is the fact he was chosen by the Lord. Matthias was chosen by men.
Where's the proof other than heresay? There is none. You must have missed the following in the debate:
And an earlier point that Bill made was that the disciples were all willing to die for their faith. I didn’t hear one piece of evidence for that. I hear that claim a lot, but having read every Christian source from the first five hundred years of Christianity, I’d like him to tell us what the piece of evidence is that the disciples died for their belief in the resurrection.
***There are a multitude of reasons why we know more about Paul's ministry than the others.....but primary is the fact he was chosen by the Lord. Matthias was chosen by men.**
Actually, matthias was chosen by lot after much prayer in which all were with one accord. The replacement for Judas had to have been with them from the baptism of John to the resurection. If they had been out of the will of God in this matter the Holy Spirit would have not fallen on them.
Their commission was "to Jerusalem, then Judea, then Samaria, then to the utter parts of the world."
Paul was specially chosen by God to carry the gospel to the Gentiles outside of Judea. he was NOT one of the "twelve".
Another important point is that when Paul went to Jerusalem about 14 years after his conversion, he and the Apostles divided up the conversion areas for each.
The 12 to the "circumcision".
Paul to the " heathen" (uncircumcision or gentiles).
This is why I often point out that the 12 and Paul labored under DIFFERENT commissions.
**Where's the proof other than heresay? There is none.**
Well, look at it this way. When Israel came out of Egypt they were allowed 40 years to die off because they disobeyed God and he would not allow them to go into the Holy Land.
After 40 years a new generation went into the land.
When Christ was crucified the people of Israel were given 40 years. Then the TEMPLE was destroyed, the people scattered and God had a new generation of believers for his people.
Israel has been without a temple, priesthood and sacrifice for almost 2000 years, longer than when they had the Ark of the Covanent.
What better proof does one need than that God has rejected a people called out of Egypt for a people that believes in him!
What do you mean by these words? Are you speaking of a mythical character named Jesus? An actual person? How would you know if you didn't look for evidence? This assertion, itself, needs to be proved.
As a Christian, I would say that Jesus is is the historical person on whom the Christian religion is based. And, that religion is based on historical claims. If the resurrection did not occur, then Christianity is FALSE!
Religion is pretty much synonymous with faith. Faith does not require historical evidence.
Aha! the old faith trick. I suppose you define faith as believing things without or rather in spite of evidence. If so, then you are using the word "faith" differently from a Christian.
The real essence of faith is NOT credulity but trust. And, that trust can and should be based on evidence. In many cases, the evidence may not be hard science but none of us lives their life requiring that everything we trust in be proved scientifically. Often the evidence we use is personal, relational, or, yes, historical.
Is there historical evidence of the "Big Bang?"
Not only is their evidence but William Lane Craig is one of the few persons I know of with the intellect to debate the issue and he has!
He co-wrote a book with an atheist that goes into the evidence for the big bang and whether it points to theism or atheism.
It's called Theism, Atheism, and Big Bang Cosmology by William Lane Craig and Quentin Smith
Like I said...... he was chosen by men, Paul was chosen by God.
Paul was specially chosen by God to carry the gospel to the Gentiles outside of Judea. he was NOT one of the "twelve".
I never said he was one of the twelve. I said he was an Apostle......and called himself as such. He was commissioned to go further than just the Gentiles. Acts 9:15 says he is chosen by the Lord to carry His name before the Gentiles and their Kings and before the people of Israel. This would cover the Jews, the other eleven tribes, and just about everyone else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.