Jesus and the Eyewitnesses – where does Bauckham go wrong?
I host a radio show called, Logos Live. It’s broadcast on a couple of radio stations in Australia.
This is an episode I recorded last year and it was broadcast this last week. I interviewed well respected scholar Richard Bauckham about ‘Jesus and the Eyewitnesses’. I discussed with him many (reasonable) questions and objections that skeptics often ask. For example questions including, ‘Are the Gospels historical?’, ‘Isn’t eyewitness testimony unreliable?’ ‘Aren’t the Gospels fiction?’ ‘Are miracles incompatible with history?’ and so on. It made for a fascinating discussion and it’s recorded here.
I’d be really keen to hear some atheist/skeptical responses to Bauckham’s arguments. What do you think he gets wrong? (and why?) Is there some literature or author he has overlooked? I’d be keen to hear some atheist responses.
Also (for the sake of balance) – I’d be keen to hear (from skeptics) what were the things that Bauckham says which you find reasonable, noteworthy or will require you to make further investigations?
I hope this interview stimulates some fruitful and thoughtful conversations and discussions.