Wednesday, May 12, 2010

Critiquing Bart Ehrman's Objections to Christianity MP3 by William Lane Craig

In this lecture, William Lane Craig gives an overview and analysis of textual critic Bart Ehrman's objections to Christianity. A very helpful talk addressing Ehrman's misuse of historical criteria for authenticity, and other flaws in Ehrman's approach. Original audio at reasonablefaith.org here.

Full MP3 Audio here. (1 hr)

Enjoy.

15 comments :

Paul said...

Excellent talk, Dr. Craig is always refreshing to hear!

I loved the way he responded to the question at the end about God transcending time, you could tell the audience were all stunned!

The Seeking Disciple said...

Thanks for this. Dr. Craig is a man of God who I pray for often as he defends the one true faith.

Askm: Larry Valencia said...

I remember the first time I heard Dr. Bart Ehrman's popular opening statement. It made me shake a bit. Later, I did more research on the topic of Textual Criticism and realized his statements were not as weighty as they seemed. Here I see the logical inconsistencies in Dr. Ehrman's assertions. Dr. Craig did a good job exposing his logical fallacies.

Logic is very important!

Go to: www.LogosApologia.org said...

Dr Craig calls him "Bad Bart"... rofl

Davitor said...

A God that requires our rational and moral behavior as human beings and who resorts to irrational and immoral behavior such as a resurrection is in it of itself contradictory.

This apparent contradiction lies unsettled deep in the heart of most critical thinking Christian and it is why the likes of Dr Craig are paid well to band aid their doubts but to no avail.

Davitor said...

A God that requires our rational and moral behavior as human beings and who resorts to irrational and immoral behavior such as a resurrection is in it of itself contradictory.

This apparent contradiction lies unsettled deep in the heart of most critical thinking Christian and it is why the likes of Dr Craig are paid well to band aid their doubts but to no avail.

winteryknight said...

Brian, is this video the video for this talk?

http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2010/05/13/william-lane-craig-lectures-on-bart-ehrman-and-the-historical-jesus/

Ex N1hil0 said...

Davitor,

Nice assertions. Now, please do tell us what is irrational and immoral about resurrection.

Evan Garrett said...

Davitor, why is a resurrection irrational and immoral?

Russell said...

Hi Davitor,

After listening to many of Dr. Craig's lectures and debates, I believe it is quite evident that he feels fully grounded in his faith.

What exactly do you see as irrational or immoral about the resurrection? Also, if you don't mind me asking, what alternative to Christianity do you believe is more rational or moral?

Davitor said...

If you believe in a God that is omnipotent and omniscient then such actions are immoral.
Logical step for critical thinking.
1.If an all-powerful and perfectly good god exists, then evil does not.
2.There is evil in the world.
3.Therefore, a perfectly good god does not exist.
If the resurrection belief is helping you become a better person then more power to you. But if it’s not then you need to go back to logical, critical thinking. :D

Ex N1hilo said...

Davitor,

You wrote:

If an all-powerful and perfectly good god exists, then evil does not.

How do you come to this conclusion? Why does it follow that if God is all powerful and perfectly good that such a God could not have some reason for which He would allow evil to exist for a time?

And what in the world does this have to do with the rationality and morality of the resurrection anyway?

Evan Garrett said...

Davitor,

First, I want to challenge your contention that the problem of evil has anything to do with the resurrection. This doesn't even necessarily need to be linked to Christianity. It could be linked to any religion that believes in an all-powerful, loving God.

In fact, I think one of the blatant messages from God in the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus was, "I care", or, "You're not alone in your suffering". I can't see anything immoral about that!

Also, I take issue with your first premise.

"If an all-powerful and perfectly good god exists, then evil does not."

I'm not sure if this is true. First of all, there is the issue of free will. Once the free agent of man (who is free BECAUSE of God's perfect love) rejects God, sin comes into the world. The wages of sin, I'm sure you've heard, are death. That means evil. Now, why does God allow evil? Because he allows us to allow what we like. Might God have a reason for allowing seemingly pointless natural evil? Of course. In the Bible, it is made clear that suffering brings about the freedom from sin that God values.

I think you may be making an underlying assumption that God has no good moral reason to allow evil, and that assumption isn't too well founded!

I would in turn ask you where you get your idea of evil, and exactly what constitutes it or defines it?

Peace to you Davitor!

(I may not rejoin this discussion.. because I often forget about having posted here)

Ex N1hilo said...

One thing is striking about atheists, at least many of those I have encountered. Here are people who claim to lack belief in God. And yet, they know definitively--they have no doubt whatsoever--what God would be like and how God would act if God existed.

Fact is that they know God exists; that He created them; and that He will judge them. The game they play of "God would have to act like X, but since we don't see X at work in the world, there can be no God," is just a coping mechanism they use to ease their fear of the coming judgement.

Davitor said...

I'm not an atheist, I lean towards pantheism which to me is the only logical conclusion after one analyses all the available data “so far”.

Post a Comment

Thanks for taking the time to comment. By posting your comment you are agreeing to the comment policy.

Blog Archive

Amz