How should we read the first few chapters of Genesis? Myth, history, or something else? Some thoughts on a video by N.T. Wright, the Bishop of Durham and prominent Biblical scholar.

Bnonn responds to Glenn Peoples’ critique of the doctrine of biblical inerrancy.

McGrath says there is a sense in which the history of Christian theology can be regarded as the history of biblical interpretation. This is particularly true of typological interpretation. Over two thousand years it has been plagued by misuse and misunderstanding. A cloud of uncertainty lingers today over the nature of typology and the hermeneutical principles that might help establish the study of types.

A summary of Paul Copan’s paper on the wars in the OT.

A summary of William Paley’s eleven point argument for the authenticity of the Gospels.

Gary Habermas is considered by many to be the foremost expert on the historicity of Jesus and the events surrounding His resurrection. On September 11th he has a friendly discussion with radio host Reggie Finley, recorded and broadcast on the net for The Infidel Guy, the worlds largest atheist online community. 
You can download just the audio here at:
http://www.garyhabermas.com/audio/audio.htm
PART I (5MB) :|: PART II (6MB) :|: PART III (6MB) :|: PART IV (5MB) :|: PART V (5MB)
 
On The Resurrection with Gary Habermas – The Infidel Guy Show

A follow-up answering some criticisms of “The Argument from Evolution” article, and the charge that the Bible offers nothing scientifically relevant. The refutation is threefold. There is discussion on how the Christian worldview has benefited science; the motivation for Christians pursuit of truth in science; and the discoveries in science that the Bible anticipated.

A follow-up answering some criticisms of “The Argument from Evolution” article. These include defending Premise 1-1: If evolution is true it requires a divine miracle; explaining there is no need for an explanation of the explanation; the science of Intelligent Design and its predictions; and broadly defending the criticisms of religious texts.

An old interview but worth dusting off, if only to see how not to do apologetics. Stephen Colbert, on his show The Colbert Report, engages the agnostic Biblical scholar, Bart Ehrman. Colbert replicates the fundamentalist timbre, retreading the familiar rhetoric and arguments that many Christians can often fall back on too easily. This is Colbert, of course, at his inimitable best – imitating a subculture for deliberate comedic effect. Ehrman however, is not trying to be funny, he actually wants us to take him seriously.
The book he is promoting in …