So I was talking to Joel today over the phone, and it hit me. One of the things that annoyed me about my own alma mater is that it was all lectures and “conversations” and exactly zero debates. The other day, Rob Kashow annouced the Bart Ehrman and Daniel Wallace debate, and it reminded me of a post I did a while back. Last March, there was all of this talk about the so called death of the Black Church. And at one point, there was a diavlog between two professors.
Youtube makes it pretty easy to have videos that respond to each other and converse. I was wondering about the possibility of setting of, considering everyone’s schedules, perhaps a quarterly, every 3-4 months, a diavlog or a series of conversations between two bibliobloggers with a opposing view points.
As for rules, that would be up to the 2 bloggers, unless Steve Caruso and company or any other bibliobloggers who want to make any suggestions.
What say you? Would the diavlogs/ debates via video be worth it?