And now for some debate

I listened to this debate between Dr. Michael Brown and Dr. Sam Waldron.  Going in, I was hoping to hear strong, biblical arguments on each side.  I have to say I was disappointed by Dr. Waldron's lack of scripture to support his position.  When challenged to produce an explicit text to support his position, he simply argues that he does not need one.  That said, he raises important points about the cannon and the authority and infallibility of prophesy.  His challenge to Dr. Brown asking if there are two kinds of prophesy clearly needs to be addressed in greater depth than was done here.  If I were going by this debate alone, I would have to say that Dr. Brown clearly presents a stronger biblical case for his position.

One final thought.   I have heard Michael Brown debate before, against Reformed Theology.   I didn't find him nearly as convincing then.  I have no doubts that my bias affects my judgement as to who presented a better case.  Had these two been debating Calvinism versus Arminianism, I very might suddenly have a higher opinion of Dr. Waldron's ability to present a convincing case.