Wallace vs. Ehrman on the Textual Reliability of the NT

Today and tomorrow Daniel Wallace will be debating Bart Ehrman on “The Textual Reliability of the New Testament.” The debate is part of the Greer-Heard Point-Counterpoint Forum, a ministry of New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary.

Here’s the announcement from DTS:

On April 4-5, 2008, Dr. Dan Wallace, professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas, will participate in a debate with Dr. Bart Ehrman, chair of the department of religious studies at University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, over the textual reliability of the New Testament.

For more information, please visit www.greer-heard.com.

Continue reading ‘Wallace vs. Ehrman on the Textual Reliability of the NT’

More Bahnsen Debates

I recently stumbled across and listened to two other free Bahnsen (Wikipedia | Theopedia) debates:

• Greg Bahnsen vs Edward Tabash: Pt 1 | Pt 2 | Pt 3
• Greg Bahnsen vs George Smith: Pt 1 | Pt 2 | Pt 3 | Pt 4 | Pt 5 | Pt 6 | Pt 7 | Pt 8 | Pt 9 | Pt 10 | Pt 11 | Pt 12

They aren’t quite as good as the debate with Stein (Pt 1 | Pt 2 | Pt 3), but they are still worth listening to.

Continue reading ‘More Bahnsen Debates’

Hitchens–Wilson Debate

Last night I read the final installment in the six-part email debate that has been taking place over the last month on ChristianityToday.com between atheist Christopher Hitchens (website) and Christian theist Douglas Wilson (blog). I thoroughly enjoyed it and heartily recommend it. Wilson is a cogent thinker, effective debater, and engaging writer, and he did a phenomenal job of presuppositionally obliterating the notion of philosophically consistent atheistic morality.

Continue reading ‘Hitchens–Wilson Debate’