"The New Testament Picture of Jesus: Is It Accurate?," Shabir Ally & Thomas Ross, is now live!

I had the privilege of debating Dr. Shabir Ally, possibly the Western world's leading defender of Islam, a while ago at the University of Wisconsin at Whitewater.  The University newspaper covered the debate as a front page news item (entitled "The New Testament, Fact or Fiction,"), getting our campus organization a lot of free publicity, for which I am thankful, even if it did not represent the content of the discussion especially accurately.  The debate video is now live, and can be viewed on the What is Truth blog here:

or on the page on my website with the debate video, or on YouTube at the link "The New Testament Picture of Jesus: Is it Accurate?" or at the Christian Debates playlist, where the debates with Dan Barker can also be located and where future debates, Lord willing, will also be updated.  If you believe it is worth watching, please feel free to "like" the video on YouTube, post a comment, and share it on social media or on other platforms.

I have recorded some material reviewing the content of the debate which will also go live, Lord willing, in the relatively near future.  I thought the debate went very well, and that it was clear that the Muslim position had no ancient evidence at all in its favor, but required a rejection of all the ancient evidence.  I am also thankful that I had the ability to defend the New Testament from the historic Christian position of the independence of the synoptic Gospels rather than from compromised and unbiblical positions of too many of those whom Shabir has debated.  When those representing Christianity affirm Markan priority and the dependence of Matthew and Luke on Mark and "Q" they are giving away to theological liberalism far too much and make Islam and atheism's case against the Bible easier, in addition to simply accepting what cannot by any means be historically substantiated.  I am also thankful that Shabir Ally argued against the Bible the way standard theological liberalism would argue against it, rather than arguing for, say, wild-eyed mythicism the way Dan Barker did when I debated him.  I am very thankful for those who prayed for me and for the debate and those who worked hard on every aspect of what took place, and give glory to the one true God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, for the good that can come out of the debate.

-TDR