DEBATE: Jimmy Akin vs Bart Ehrman | Are the Gospels Historically Reliable?

The teachings of Jesus Christ have influenced millions of people in the 2,000 years since he lived. But in recent times, many skeptics of Christianity have questioned whether the four Gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—can be trusted as true accounts of his life and teaching. Where do the Gospels come from, and how can we be sure they are an accurate record of historical events?

On Thursday, March 24 at 7 p.m., Catholic Answers author and apologist Jimmy Akin will debate Bart D. Ehrman on the topic “Are the Gospels Historically Reliable?” Be sure to join us for what is sure to be an exciting and informative exchange.

About Jimmy Akin:
Jimmy Akin is an internationally known author and speaker. As the senior apologist at Catholic Answers, he has more than twenty-five years’ experience defending and explaining the Faith. Jimmy is a convert and has an extensive background in the Bible, theology, the Church Fathers, philosophy, canon law, and liturgy.

About Bart Ehrman:
Bart D. Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He began his teaching career at Rutgers University and joined the faculty in the department of religious studies at UNC in 1988, where he has served as chair of the department and director of graduate studies.

Timestamps:
00:00 Waitroom
02:57 Introduction and Prayer
12:28 Bart Ehrman: Opening Statement
34:53 Jimmy Akin: Opening Statement
53:49 Bart Ehrman: Rebuttal
01:04:21 Jimmy Akin: Rebuttal
01:14:37 Bart Ehrman: Cross-Examination
01:26:18 Jimmy Akin: Cross-Examination
01:41:31 Break
01:53:03 Q&A
02:25:34 Bart Ehrman: Closing Statement
02:29:28 Jimmy Akin: Closing Statement
02:33:23 Conclusion and Prayer

[Bogey]

I absolutely love that Bart bows his head during the prayer. Very respectful

[berserker]

I used the same approach as Jimmy when I was still a skeptic, yesterday I was officially received as a catechumen to be baptized the sunday after easter.

[hjvdodh]

Years ago, Erhman shook my Protestant faith to the point I almost reverted to Atheism before I found the beauty and truth of the Catholic faith. The Catholic faith is the only religion that makes sense. In my opinion; either Catholicism is true, or no religion is.

[bilbobaggins]

Even as a Protestant, I really enjoy listening to Jimmy.

[BryceCarmony]

Jimmy has a lot of swagger in this debate. He might as well started with "now I'm just a simple country apologist...."

[gracehoffman]

I'm a student at UNC-Chapel Hill and took Introduction to the New Testament with Dr. Ehrman the same semester that I was finishing RCIA and got baptized and confirmed in the Catholic Church. Needless to say, I struggled to open my Bible for several months and I was extremely confused, but I made it through with my faith intact. This debate would have been so helpful to me back then! It felt like a spiritual battle to go to that class each week.

[rickleonard]

It's refreshing to see two people disagree so much and still be respectful towards one another.

[davidmyton]

Really enjoyed this debate. Good to see two respectful, smart and engaging debaters share their knowledge and perspectives. Never seen Jimmy before but I’ve become an instant fan. Kudos to Bart for stepping outside his comfort zone to take part in this discussion.

[mdc]

Another Protestant who loved the debate. First time hearing Jimmy. Very impressed by his presentation and demeanor.

[meatofpeach]

A truly historical debate (no pun intended)! Thank you to Ehrman, Jimmy, and everyone else who had a hand in putting this together.

[taylorj.]

Excellent debate. God bless Bart Ehrman. He is a class act, very respectful, and very well read. I'm still a catholic, but I think Bart did a great job.

[iu]

It's pretty impressive that Jimmy is using a PowerPoint after rebuttal. He really took the time to see all angles of his opponents points

[williamcurt]

Jimmy's tactical framing of the debate made Bart's position basically impossible to defend. Even if we reject biblical inerrancy, and completely accept all of the points Bart brought up as true contradictions, the Gospels would still be historically reliable. Bart was forced to argue whether or not Mary and Joseph always living in Nazareth or moving to Nazareth, or whether Jesus telling people to go to Galilee or stay in Jerusalem was a major contradiction. His protestant fundamentalism is showing through his atheism.

[lubormrazek]

the second I saw comic sans Ehrman lost the debate

[tau]

Really great and thanks to both these gentleman and to Catholic Answers.

[cactoidjim]

Opening:

Bart gets double points for being in a "hostile" audience and assuming the burden of proof. He offers several challenging points that each could be separate debates. It's a strong open, and a seasoned debate move: he sows doubt.

Jimmy made the right move contrasting Inerrancy and Reliability - and focusing on defining "reliable". That makes Bart's burden incredibly heavy. Then, using Bart's own words to prove **63** points...THEN answers Bart's opening *in his opening*
...That is the best example of strategy and preparation that I have ever seen.

[stooch]

I am so tired of the soft people in our Church who don’t appreciate apologetics. Jimmy (and Tim, Karlo, Joe, and Trent) are doing so much to bring souls home to God.

[Chandransingham]

Seen in London, UK. Very useful and helpful to get a better understanding of the Bible and look forward to the shape of things to come via faith and no-faith. God bless.

[cactoidjim]

First rebuttal:

Bart
presents in a style that would be recognized in any Protestant church: Dynamic vocals - from a soft whisper with small body language to near shouts and wide gesticulations. I may have to rewatch because it's giving me Evangelical flashbacks.

But he didn't seem to *directly* address any of Jimmy's points. He just attempted to sow further doubt.

Jimmy
Brings the focus back to "Major/Intermediate/Minor" issues

Shows further preparation with an unexpected web page for the audience to explore later.

Offers explanation of ancient writing practices by using further points Bart agrees with.

Uses StarTrek as an analogy. 1 bonus Geek Point. Using an analogy makes the point "sticky" for the audience and is a powerful technique.

[Strive]

Erhman has a special on Netflix about this. I sometimes worry that it may cause some to stray from the faith, and for some it may. After watching Barts arguments I'm not so worried anymore. Viva Cristo Rey!