Comments on: More on Geisler, Licona, and the Issues Involved http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/more-on-geisler-licona-and-the-issues-involved/ A Blog About the Bible, Books, and Beating People Up... Mon, 28 May 2012 07:30:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: The Geisler-Licona Controversy:Part 1: What Is This All About? | SBC Today http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/more-on-geisler-licona-and-the-issues-involved/#comment-41865 Thu, 01 Dec 2011 16:21:17 +0000 http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/?p=20064#comment-41865 [...] Press articles. Among others, Peter Lumpkins, Tim Rogers, James White, and Nick Norelli (here and here) essentially agreed with Geisler and Mohler that Licona’s interpretation of Matthew 27 (and [...]

]]> By: When is an inerrancy debate not really about inerrancy? « scientia et sapientia http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/more-on-geisler-licona-and-the-issues-involved/#comment-40768 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 21:18:35 +0000 http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/?p=20064#comment-40768 [...] Nick Norelli: Good for You Norman Geisler; More on Geisler, Licona, and the Issues Involved [...]

]]> By: irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/more-on-geisler-licona-and-the-issues-involved/#comment-40760 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:48:17 +0000 http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/?p=20064#comment-40760 Btw Nick, I quoted somewhat from G.C. Berkouwer purposely, as he like Barth had/has a different view and position on the Word of God. Sadly it seems many “Evangelicals” don’t know this? Even those who write and make authoritative & absolute like statements! Myself I know this, but I am just not sure I agree with this depth, in both Barth & Berkouwer? This is not so much hermeneutics here, as the ontological of the Text itself.

]]> By: irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/more-on-geisler-licona-and-the-issues-involved/#comment-40758 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:29:41 +0000 http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/?p=20064#comment-40758 Nick: Not much changes however. The problem of biblical authority in Evangelicalism still exits! I just thank God I no longer belong to any “society”, save the Church Catholic, and historically Anglican!

]]> By: Nick Norelli http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/more-on-geisler-licona-and-the-issues-involved/#comment-40757 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:18:55 +0000 http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/?p=20064#comment-40757 Bryan: That’s essentially what Steve Hays has been arguing. He raises some interesting points. And Geisler is only one voice among many. He might not represent all of the framers; it’s possible he’s in the minority on this one.

Fr. Robert: Apparently the ETS’s authority is immaterial for Licona since he’s not a member.

SLIMJIM: I’m glad I could be of service.

]]> By: SLIMJIM http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/more-on-geisler-licona-and-the-issues-involved/#comment-40755 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 16:47:00 +0000 http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/?p=20064#comment-40755 Thanks for this post as it puts some things into perspective for someone like myself who have not followed up with all the details.

]]> By: irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/more-on-geisler-licona-and-the-issues-involved/#comment-40754 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 16:13:11 +0000 http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/?p=20064#comment-40754 Sadly, this shows again, the great problem with authority and the ETS and CSBI, etc. One of the grave ongoing problems of postmodern Evangelicalism also. I have seen what has happened to the Anglican Communion here, it took many years. Now, the slide and even apostasy will be much quicker…the Emergents, etc. This is also one of the reasons that some Anglican conservative types go to Rome and the EO, or Orthodoxy. Authority, Holy Scripture and the historic Church are always connected!

]]> By: El Bryan Libre http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/more-on-geisler-licona-and-the-issues-involved/#comment-40753 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 15:59:58 +0000 http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/?p=20064#comment-40753 Well said. I haven’t been following this debate but this post seemed very reasonable.

At this point I find the most interesting question to be whether Geisler can decide who is and isn’t in violation of the ETS position on inerrancy even if he was ONE of the framers the CSBI. Are we going to allow extra-CSBI material (Geisler’s modern day opinion) to DETERMINE what the CSBI means? ; )

]]>