Debate Review! Mike Winger vs Matt Dillahunty on the Resurrection

BibleThinker

Mike Winger

Christianity, Religion & Spirituality

4.8 • 2.6K Ratings

🗓️ 24 April 2019

⏱️ 121 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

At the end of a long day when I was abnormally busy, and cutting back on my coffee intake, I did a 2 hour debate review video. Haha. I may be a bit tired but I think the content here is valuable and I'm looking forward to getting some feedback on it. Here are the timestamps (though I strongly recommend you watch this whole video) 8:00 Matt's flawed treatment of history 8:55 "Claims not evidence" 17:43 How history actually works 21:01 How a cumulative case works 25:48 Matt vs history and historians 57:20 Double standards which avoid the evidence 1:13:59 Elvis sightings and testing miracle claims 1:25:26 Summary of historical problems in Matt's criticism of the case for the resurrection. 1:27:55 BIGGEST ISSUE IN THE DEBATE: Philosophy 1:50:55 When I offended Matt. Dr. Craig Blomberg's article on the potential ages of the gospel writers. https://ntscholarship.wordpress.com/2012/02/22/did-none-of-jesus-disciples-live-long-enough-to-write-a-gospel/ How we really got the books of the New Testament (watch 4 consecutive videos in this playlist) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hItK8IY-Us&list=PLZ3iRMLYFlHuhA0RPKZFHVcjIMN_-F596&index=12 Journal of the American Medical Association article "On The Physical Death of Jesus Christ" https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/403315 Inspiring Philosophy's video "Matt Dillahunty vs Science" https://youtu.be/2TfLsHl2INE Dr. Tim McGrew "How to Think About Miracles" https://youtu.be/l3PW-2X-9bA Matt implied that we didn't really know what the New Testament originally said. Here's 3 videos about textual critcism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WclIZwBFhq0&list=PLZ3iRMLYFlHuzJhPtmrgqpVoXhjvqiIjW How "inference the best explanation" (my method for concluding that Jesus rose from the dead and God did it) is solid epistemology https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/abduction/ Great video from Acts17Apologetics called "Scooby Doo and the Silly Skeptic", which helps explain the problem of special pleading https://youtu.be/YrGVeB_SPJg Lastly, for those who want more info on why "inherent improbability" of a miracle is not a good reason to reject one outright check out these two podcast episodes from Capturing Christianity. Calum Miller walks through the problems this philosophical position which is called "frequentism". https://capturingchristianity.com/tag/calum-miller/ If you would like to support this ministry please click here https://biblethinker.org/index.php/donate

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	I'm Pastor Mike Winger and this is Bible Thinker the program dedicated to thinking
0:05.9	biblically about everything. Okay this is going to be an analysis of my recent debate with Matt Dilla Hunty on is belief in the resurrection unreasonable.
0:18.0	And let me start by saying this. I don't really feel super good about this debate. I mean what I mean is I have
0:25.1	real mixed feelings about it. Many people were left with the impression that
0:28.2	Matt had demolished my arguments, while some others were left with the impression that he didn't touch my
0:33.5	arguments and that my case was solid. My own opinion is that the logic and facts of the
0:38.7	debate or with me or rather with the case for the resurrection of Christ, but that the rhetoric is where Matt did do better
0:46.2	than me. I fully admit. Part of this is because in debate there's always a number of things that are left unanswered
0:54.0	and a part of this is because probably my own
0:56.0	inexperience with debate and not having more skill at it
0:59.0	means I don't have the developed
1:01.0	those sort of you know techniques of handling the
1:03.8	rhetorical things that Matt did but another part of it is due to the fact that it's
1:07.5	just hard for people to really track with the substantive points in a debate and
1:11.5	to weigh what is said carefully and when you can't do this especially in a
1:16.6	Ratorically charged environment when you're having our time doing that
1:19.3	Persuasion tactics and rhetoric can take over your perception of the logic and reasoning in the
1:24.6	discussion. So I want to evaluate the logic and the rhetoric of the debate and see
1:30.7	if it impacts how you view it.
1:32.8	In fact, please let me know in the comments below if this gives you a different perspective
1:36.8	on the debate if perhaps you were one of those who, you know, thought the rhetoric dominated.
1:43.0	So there's another reason why I'm doing this though and that is Matt came to the debate with a lot of the same kind of stuff you're likely to encounter when you talk to some people about the truth of Christianity.
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Mike Winger, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Mike Winger and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.