Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Panic in the Henhouse

About a week ago, I issued a challenge to Norman Geisler (link below) regarding his presuppositions concerning certain aspects of his arguments against Mike Licona.

A day or so later, someone posted a link to that challenge on Geisler’s ministry Facebook page.


Sometime in the last day or two, it was deleted – with no comment.


We want to know why – and we’ll keep the pressure on until an answer is produced.


Of course, it is possible that Geisler doesn’t manage his own ministry Facebook page (I don’t), and that it was deleted without his knowledge. But that still calls for an explanation. And to paraphrase his original open letter to Licona, he owes us one. (That’s being facetious, by the way.)


While we’re at it, I’m in the process of investigating this point made by Geisler:


…[t]here are far bigger and better scholarly circles than this, such as, the nearly 300 international scholars who formed the ICBI statement on inerrancy and its statements which declare that views like Licona’s were incompatible with the view of full inerrancy which declared that the Bible is wholly and completely without error and denied all dehistoricizing of the Gospel record.


I had an idea that “scholars” here was used a little too liberally, so I received a list of those “300 international scholars” to see how many actually qualify. I am up to the Es as of this typing, and the results are appalling. The list is top-heavy with pastors so far, most of whom we have no reason to believe would have sufficient knowledge to judge the issue Licona was writing on, and are decidedly undeserving to be called “scholars” in any real sense. Theologians are also top-heavy on the list: People whose scholarship is not in the right field. A handful are utterly unqualified; the list includes Josh McDowell, Hal Lindsey (!), Bill Bright, and a couple of businessmen so far. Many names cannot be further identified with anyone, presumably for reasons such as that they were deceased before record of them reached the Internet. I hope to confer with someone about any names I cannot correlate with known persons once I get done with my initial survey.


OT scholars are found in fair number (but still not many), while so far only 8 people out of 87 checked could be regarded as having some sort of competence in the subject area of concern to Licona (among them, D. A. Carson). And of course, Licona had gotten two of those 300 to sign in his favor already.


I’ll publish the results of my survey when it is complete. In the meantime, perhaps it is not hard to see why Geisler deleted that challenge.


Link

2 comments:

  1. That was me who posted the challenge there. A few days later I noticed it was deleted, several of my comments were deleted, and I was banned from posting anymore on the page!

    As a result, my respect for Geisler has plummeted significantly. I expected better of him, and I hope the Evangelical community puts enough pressure on him and Mohler to cause them to admit their error and back off from Licona.

    But, like you, I'm not holding my breath for these two.

    Greg M

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you for letting me know about that. I'll note this on TheologyWeb, too, where we're having a thread on it. Feel free to stop by:

    http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?148145-An-Open-Challenge-to-Norman-Geisler

    For my part...I'll be keeping the pressure on.

    ReplyDelete