Bart Ehrman Debates Old Testament Scholar on Bible’s Treatment of Suffering

This was an interesting debate. Bart Ehrman, though a non-believer, has all of a preacher’s cadences and appeals to the Bible to make his points, so it is very much a back and forth that feels like it’s taking place on the same turf with the same basic weapons. It’s interesting to see how this debate about the problem of evil works out as taking place confined to the specific question of the Bible and its treatments of suffering. His opponent, Michael Brown, an Old Testament scholar and “Messianic Jewish apologist”, makes truly dreadful arguments throughout.

Your Thoughts?

About Daniel Fincke

Dr. Daniel Fincke  has his PhD in philosophy from Fordham University and spent 11 years teaching in college classrooms. He wrote his dissertation on Ethics and the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. On Camels With Hammers, the careful philosophy blog he writes for a popular audience, Dan argues for atheism and develops a humanistic ethical theory he calls “Empowerment Ethics”. Dan also teaches affordable, non-matriculated, video-conferencing philosophy classes on ethics, Nietzsche, historical philosophy, and philosophy for atheists that anyone around the world can sign up for. (You can learn more about Dan’s online classes here.) Dan is an APPA  (American Philosophical Practitioners Association) certified philosophical counselor who offers philosophical advice services to help people work through the philosophical aspects of their practical problems or to work out their views on philosophical issues. (You can read examples of Dan’s advice here.) Through his blogging, his online teaching, and his philosophical advice services each, Dan specializes in helping people who have recently left a religious tradition work out their constructive answers to questions of ethics, metaphysics, the meaning of life, etc. as part of their process of radical worldview change.

  • http://thediscerningchristian.wordpress.com/ Chris

    What is always interesting and frustrating to me in religious debates is that secular scholars always seem to get the worst opponents. It would be far more interesting to me if Ehrman would debate someone like NT Wright, Peter Enns, or someone with a degree of scholarly credibility instead of an apologist. Apologists are almost invariably horrible at supporting their views.

    Of course, I think most of the respected scholars would find themselves agreeing with Ehrman on more points than those on which they disagree, so it might not be much of a debate.

  • busterggi

    I’m waiting for Ehrman vs Price.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X