For those who enjoy listening to free NT scholarship.
I think listening to these sites and podcasts beats listening to the maximally conservative Evangelical scholarship over at Apologetics 315. The questions raised, the uncertainties pointed out by the following scholars are well worth pondering. (Iʼve heard them all, great stuff).
You can search for particular topics discussed in past Bible Geek shows by visiting which summarizes topics covered per show, then use Firefox to find specific text. Chrome doesnʼt list all entries from the RSS feed. Not sure about other browsers.
Dale Martin recently debated maximally conservative Evangelical scholar/apologist, Michael Licona, and Dale raised some obvious knotty questions.
A clearing house for maximally conservative Evangelical apologetics on the web, plenty to listen to there, as I have done, though you soon discover that apologists like Habermas, Keener, McGrew, Blomberg, and many others, were either raised Christian or converted in their teens, and they seem less interested in asking questions than supplying answers to fellow Christians with doubts, including themselves. But why not continue to ask questions, especially since the questions are obvious as pointed out by scholars at the sites I am sharing? And I donʼt think Martin, Goodacre, Allison or Sanchez are atheists, but they raise some interesting questions for their maximally conservative brethren and recognize that “proving Gospel history” or even proving the physical resurrection of Jesus is far from being a slam dunk. And the theological questions are even more varied and slippery than the historical ones.)
I had heard Dale Martin via his free NT lectures at itunes U, so it was refreshing to see him debate Licona. After you listen to Daleʼs questions regarding the NTʼs resurrection stories you might want to read my post, A Carnival of Questions for Resurrection Apologists, which was posted before I had listened to the debate, though my questions mirror many of Daleʼs points.
Examples of Later Additions to Scripture, Including Pauline Interpolations
Also, there are some things even an Evangelical apologist canʼt help but notice and hence needs to try and explain away, like the endings that later Christians added to Mark (of which there are more than one, and even those appear in variant forms in different early texts).
Speaking of adding to Scripture, there is also evidence that Paulʼs letters feature interpolated material (1 Corinthians 14:34-35 and 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16). See this fascinating discussion and link to a slide show: http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2011/06/pauline-interpolations.html These are basic questions raised by Pauline scholars, and arranged well by Richard Carrier. Worth pondering, along with William O. Walkerʼs arguments concerning additional interpolations in Paulʼs letters.
Furthermore, the Gospels, Matthew and Luke, DIFFER MOST FROM EACH OTHER in exactly those places where the ostensibly earliest Gospel, Mark, was silent, i.e., in their tales of Jesusʼ infancy and post-resurrection appearances (where Mark was silent, so neither Matthew nor Luke could maintain their closeness to one another by following Mark in those areas, hence they diverge the most from each other in exactly in those places).
Later Gospel stories certainly appear to depend on earlier ones, starting with Mark (with of course, a few later urban myths/tall tales about Jesus added to each freshly written Gospel as each appeared). Tracing obvious Gospel trajectories (developments in the story from Mark, Matthew, Luke and finally John).
Thereʼs even a trajectory in the Gospels involving the Judas character.
NOT FREE AUDIO, BUT MORE NT QUESTIONS... (if you canʼt afford them try obtaining them via interlibrary loan at your local library--they are worth a listen!)