Robert Price vs James White in Innisbrook, FL

I had to actually purchase this one. If you don’t want to do so, e-mail me and I’ll have you over to watch it in my living room, free of charge.

Price leads off by noting a few common apologetic arguments and take a few pokes at them. Memorably, he questions whether the early disciples were really akin a first-century Snopes, assiduously tracking down and debunking any Jesus myths which went beyond their actual experiences. He also outlines some of the processes by which pious fictions are transformed into holy writ and giving examples from Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.


White leads off with an argument against the principle of analogy in favor of internal consistency rather than a Bayesian approach to the a priori likelihood of seemingly miraculous events. He then has a go at Price's view of the authorship and transmission of the Biblical texts. Basically, he is saying that extraordinary claims do not require extraordinary evidence. White goes on to argue, in effect, that it is implausible and unlikely that NT authors would borrow from contemporary Greek religions, whereas it is not implausible and unlikely that actual miracles took place. He makes this argument by stealthily incorporating the principle of analogy as to the former phenomenon, while attacking the principle of analogy as to the latter. He makes a few other arguments, none of which are particularly original, and most of which are directed at tearing down Price's work rather than building an affirmative case for Biblical exceptionalism.

Overall, it was a fine debate. Both men presented some of the best available arguments for his side. I was not, however, such an amazing debate that it was worth spending actual money to watch on mp4 video. I'd advise watching the free Price and Ehrman debates online, which cover pretty much the same ground.

Price vs. Knight in Minneapolis, MN

 

This is debate focusing on the resurrection of Jesus, between Dr. Robert Price and Rev. Dwight Knight.  There is plenty of back-and-forth here, since the format of the debate included cross-ex following each opening statement, kudos to the organizers for that. Also, Robert Price goes into Lewis Black style rant mode a couple times, which is fun to watch.

The general theme running throughout this debate is that one side uncritically accepts pretty much everything in the gospels while the other hypercritically rejects them at every major point. Not a whole load of common ground worth fighting over between these guys, so it turns into a series of projectile artillery volleys.  Nonetheless, there are good arguments pressed on both sides and plenty of direct attempts to refute opponent's premises.  Good stuff!

• Unbeliever rating: 4.5 stars
  
  
• Believer rating: 3.5 stars 
  
  
• Overall rating: 4.0 stars
  

Price vs. Boyd in Los Angeles, CA

This debate centered around the discoverability and nature of the historical Jesus.  I’ll not summarize here, since Peter Kirby took copious and detailed notes which he made available online.  I will note, though, that this was one of the better debates I’ve heard on this particular topic, since both debaters were well-versed in the subject and managed to dig deep during the rebuttal periods, coming up with all manner of obscure facts and counterexamples which one does not usually hear in these sorts of events. 

Kudos to both debaters for remaining civil and focusing on the arguments at hand.  Definitely worth a listen or two.

Overall rating: 4.5 stars

[April 23, 2003]

 

 

 

Price vs. Craig in Columbus, OH

It is striking how much Craig’s modus operandi has gone unchanged for at least a decade or so. In this debate he makes his usual arguments (alleged facts established by scholarly consensus) while Price makes a few unusual ones.  Price mostly goes after Craig’s methodology, pointing out that it is impossible to do anything like objective scholarship if you start with one’s emotional commitment to Jesus as Christ and then work backwards to prove up the death, burial, empty tomb, and post-resurrection appearances of Jesus. Towards the end, Price has a go at the hypothesis that the Markan narrative is cut from whole cloth, woven together from the threads of Pagan and Hebrew mythology.

Overall, Craig definitely comes off stronger, if only because he puts forth about two or three times as many historically substantive arguments (as opposed to methodological criticism bordering on circumstantial ad hominem). However, Craig also poisons the well a bit against Price, preemptively discrediting him as an unscholarly crank (as Craig also did against Carrier). Against this attack, Price makes a memorable comeback which I’ll not relate here.

I’ve no doubt that Price could have made a much stronger case against the historical reliability of the gospels, but he did not focus on making that case here. Also, he got slammed pretty hard during Q & A and had relatively little time to respond, although “Hey, it’s Jesus, take a whiff!” was memorably zingy. Overall, I found this event mildly disappointing, mostly because I expected Price to make a much stronger affirmative case in favor of historical skepticism.

• Unbeliever rating: 2.5 stars
  
  
• Believer rating: 3.5 stars
  
  
• Overall rating: 3.0 stars