To accuse Dr. Geisler of not being logical or factual is like accusing Aristotle of being an emotional reasoner. This video does not accurately represent Dr. Geisler's arguments. Where is Dr. Licona rebuttal of Dr. Geisler argument? See Dr. Geisler's logical argument on his normangeisler website.
@DrFactChecker Oh please. That's why there are links in the vid description -- page after page of posting answering Geisler on the inerrancy issue and showing where he errs on fact and logic related to those points, as related on his webiste, and showing the accuracy of this vid. Some "FactChecker". Maybe you should rebrand yourself as ChickenInspector. Better yet, stop drinking the Geisler Kool Aid and mindlessly defending him.
What a bunch of boobs. This is the reason I have friends who laugh at Christians (including myself) because of idiotic arguments about garbage. Tell Dr. Geisler to live in Rwanda, Africa for 2 years and then see how his perspective changes. I almost walked away from Christianity but then realized that Christ is what matters and not prideful mongers who think they are the only ones who are right. People like this that call themselves "Christians" make we want to vomit.
@dbferguson12 Very much in line with my own sentiments on many occasions. I can tell you that I have had contact with African Christians who would love our help just with the teaching of basic apologetics. They have asked to use my articles -- as though expecting to be turned down! I always give permission.
@tektontv Satire is a good method for communicating truth in situations where the audience seems deaf, or where it seems like the point isn't "hitting home." Be careful. Making fun of someone's height, for example, does not contribute to any truth communications. Also, there's no reason that you should be belittling the body of Christ. @Zangomatic is your brother; treat him that way.
@sbrazzell I'm afraid that just shows how ignorant you are. Geisler isn't really short (though compared to Licona, a lot of people are!). He was made short in the cartoon to indicate how this controversy makes him out to be a "small" person.
Spare me the self-righteous sermon otherwise...Jesus called Peter "Satan"...I guess he wasn't his brother then....
If you can't defend the Bible's inerrancy as whole, you can't defend any of it. Matthew 27 is not apocalyptic in nature, it's historical. You can't just insert an "apocalyptic" parenthesis into whatever you want, especially when everything else within context says otherwise. You can't compare Matthew 27 to Revelation, unless you want to go as far as saying Jesus' death and resurrection is legendary or symbolic, in which case you aren't really a Christian at all.
@JonPirot Actually, yes, you can insert such parentheses. Ancient writers did it all the time, though not as frequently as some say. On that count Licona's argument was sound (thought not on others, which is why I disagree with him, ultimately, on Matt 27).
Saying this makes Jesus' dath and rez symbolic is merely desperate panic button pushing.
@tektontv I don't see how this is panic button pushing at all. There's a certain line between differing opinions and statements that downright disagree with Christian doctrine and tenets. As you yourself said, you disagree with Licona on Matt 27. The ancient didn't insert apocalyptic parentheses anywhere either
@LuvPeaceUnitySiberi4 It's panic button pushing because it is a manifest non sequitur.
Your comment re inserting apocalyptic parentheses is also a non sequitur. You're simply choosing the category of "apocalyptic" and insisting that it must be that one type of parenthesis found for there to be precedent. But such insertions were not governed by genre.
@tektontv I for one agree that Geisler is going overboard with his accusations with respect to Licona. But I do think that Licona interprets a lot of Scripture as apocalyptic or symbolic due to anti-Christian pressure: i.e. many many scholars who will see Matt.27:52f. as fiction. I just think that Matthew's context in 27:52f. renders a non-historical interpretation implausible. An insertion is not impossible but I think it's unlikely. What's next? The virgin birth as metaphor?
@LuvPeaceUnitySiberi4 Your accusation against Licona is disgusting and almost libelous. I know him very well -- he would never do any of this due to "pressure" -- he does it because he is an honest man trying his best to resolve what he thinks is a problem. He bases his conclusions on evidence, so your threat of a slippery slope is also insulting.
@RPM11111 I consider them OK as starters for people in, say, junior high....but they won't do the job if you're facing down some of the modern atheists, or someone like Robert Price.
Hmm.....Idk who this Geisler guy is, he appears to be a real jerk but i would feel bad if i judged him over one video so i'll look into some of his views and that 1983 debate, cool glad i found this....
Mr. G seems to have been a Scrooge about it, but that is actually a smaller issue in my mind to Mike Licona's horrible handling of the scriptures in Matthew. PS, I took classes under Geisler. I am thankful to him for that knowledge I received from him. I just wish someone who had read and advanced copy of Mike's book had said something to him. Like, "This is wack".
@crosswayokc Sorry, I wouldn't call it horrible or wack even though I disagree with it. His analysis is highly professional and careful and deserves better than that.
@crosswayokc Define "horrible handling of the scriptures". It's easy to make certain accusations like false witnesses against Jesus, but until you make at least a single point highlighting in what way is Mr Licona's handling of the scriptures in Matthew wrong, then I'd say you're the one that's wack.
@joehardy. Holding has answered that on his blog. Can a Geislerite do anything besides quote Geisler as if he's the final authority and we've never read him?
Different understanding of inerrancy. Norman Geisler and other believe in an absolute inerrancy and verbal inspiration; God dictated to man word for word. Therefore that see everything in the Bible be literal. Mike Licona and others believe in an full inerrancy and plenary inspiration; God inspire the teaching taught by the authors which are wholly true Which deals with the problem phenomenal language (sun setting and rising) and and other biblical problems that absolute inerrancy cannot answer
@JediMasterJerett A good way to put it. Another is that Geisler and Co believe in a 21st century form of inerrancy, while Licona believe in a 1st century form. Now I wonder which one would apply...
“Indeed, they requested that Robert Gundry resign (by an overwhelming vote) for holding a similar view which dehistoricized sections of the Gospel of Matthew. Licona makes no mention of this crucial fact, but insists on redefining inerrancy to fit his errant view. However, in the light of the Gundry decision, Licona has no grounds on which to stand to claim his view is consistent with the historic view of inerrancy, which was embraced by the founders of ETS” (Norman Geisler).
@joehardysr Um, excuse me...did you happen to notice I have a one post at a time rule here? Or do Geisler Kool-Aid drinkers have problems following rules? (He posted 7 times -- I deleted 6.)
Your silly commentary is answered in my blog posts anyway, so don't waste my time.
Holding and Peter's are a disgrace to the field of apologetics. This recent video by them reveals they don't understand inerrancy, nor Geisler's critiques. Licona, Holding, and Peters (and their friends and families) should be ashamed of this ungodly and disrespectful video.
MIKE LICONA-- BY ALLOWING YOUR SON-IN-LAW TO POST THIS AND YOUR WIFE TO POST IT ALL OVER THE INTERNET IS UNGODLY BEHAVIOR. BE A MAN AND CONTROL YOUR FAMILY!
@timtekron First of all, you don’t get yourself a lot of credibility when you fail basic grammar. There is no possessive in “Peters” requiring an apostrophe.
Second, when you grow up past vague authoritarianism and can produce a substantive analysis that actually hits the spot, drop us a line.
@timtekron Adding to what Holding said, you'd do well to learn the basics of netiquette, e.g. SPEAKING IN ALL CAPS LIKE THIS IS AS RUDE AS MAKING YO MOMMA JOKES.
I'm always left astounded by the creativity you show in your vids JP. Something all of us should keep in mind when rightly bashing Norman Geisler is that the sort of pathological literalism he ascribes too is far more common than the sort of contextualized interpretation we hold up. This is a war not a battle.
@jelloladyful I agree. As noted in the latest of the blog entries at the link, the stakes are very high here and Licona/Geisler is just a microcosm of a larger matter.
Licona does not impress me at all, but as others have mentioned, Geisler has lost all credibility with me and the way he has handled the Caner situation and subsequently, the interactions with James White. Geisler has avoided (the nicest way I can put it) White's questions about Caner or far too long. He also has a dubious history with White regarding Chosen But Free, an almost laughable book.
I find this very disturbing. I have Geisler's books, "When Critics Ask" and "When Skeptics Ask," both of which I found invaluable when confronting objections to scriptural inerrancy and such. I even enjoyed his conversation with Lee Strobel in "The Case for Faith." I've heard that some other apologists don't like him, but until your video I never knew why. Learning that he is resorting to these tactics to silence people with divergent views kind of shakes me inside. I wonder what to do now.
@DecKrash I myself have recommend some of Geisler's books of that level for "starter" apologetics, which is why I do regret that he is spending his legacy going after Licona like this. But indeed, he has done it more than once; others he has done this to include Murray Harris, Clark Pinnock, James White, and Hank Hanegraaff -- though to be fair, I also think he was definitely arguing for the right views with the first two.
While I do have some issues with Mike Licona, Norman Geisler has lost all credibility in my opinion. I don't expect perfection in Christian leadership, but I do, at a minimum expect honesty. Geisler's support of the serial liar Ergun Caner and attacks upon Dr. White are shameful. But let's also be clear, Tim Rogers is just as guilty. Veritas obviously does not live up to its title "Truth". Sad, sad, sad.
@SkiesVibrant I just happened to not follow the Caner matter when it came up, but learning of it later, I simply couldn't see why Geisler jumped to his defense.
@tektontv That's a big plus for you, because there is no excuse for what Geisler did. The evidence of Caner's lies is not even close to being speculative. How is it an 'evidentialist' cannot evaluate facts any better than he did? Clearly, the good 'ol boys in some Baptist enclaves circled the wagons to protect Caner. It's shameful and makes everything they do from now on suspect. Pathetic really.
@tektontv Sure. It will be later today though. I have some family obligations to take care of until early evening. You can get a head-start by looking at Dr. White's website: Alpha and Omega Ministries. He has almost everything documented with videos.
I have lost an awful lot of respect for Geisler in recent times. Chosen but Free and his attempted reply to James White's "The Potter's Freedom" (just awful), his defence of Ergun Caner when it's obvious Caner is a filthy liar, and now this stupid fight with Mike Licona. It seems Geisler doesn't think he needs to listen to anyone but expects everyone to sit up and listen to him. You can't get more arrogant and self important than that.
@Dante666 Yeah, no way Mike would have been able to meet my production schedule with all he has on his plate. And I have to say, Nick's voice sounds much better than mine using that template from the mod software. I'll have to use him again for that.
@XxzeppelinxX Paul did the same thing to Peter, as the former recounted in Galatians 2. It is something we do out of love for each other, as this rebuke is meant to be constructive. We do this for love of truth.
After Roman Geisler debates Mike,then maybe he can debate James White,lol.
CBALLEN 3 days ago
To accuse Dr. Geisler of not being logical or factual is like accusing Aristotle of being an emotional reasoner. This video does not accurately represent Dr. Geisler's arguments. Where is Dr. Licona rebuttal of Dr. Geisler argument? See Dr. Geisler's logical argument on his normangeisler website.
DrFactChecker 1 month ago
@DrFactChecker Oh please. That's why there are links in the vid description -- page after page of posting answering Geisler on the inerrancy issue and showing where he errs on fact and logic related to those points, as related on his webiste, and showing the accuracy of this vid. Some "FactChecker". Maybe you should rebrand yourself as ChickenInspector. Better yet, stop drinking the Geisler Kool Aid and mindlessly defending him.
tektontv 1 month ago
What a bunch of boobs. This is the reason I have friends who laugh at Christians (including myself) because of idiotic arguments about garbage. Tell Dr. Geisler to live in Rwanda, Africa for 2 years and then see how his perspective changes. I almost walked away from Christianity but then realized that Christ is what matters and not prideful mongers who think they are the only ones who are right. People like this that call themselves "Christians" make we want to vomit.
dbferguson12 1 month ago
@dbferguson12 Very much in line with my own sentiments on many occasions. I can tell you that I have had contact with African Christians who would love our help just with the teaching of basic apologetics. They have asked to use my articles -- as though expecting to be turned down! I always give permission.
tektontv 1 month ago
I'm still wondering whether Geisler has watched this
chuckycheesemmm 2 months ago
@chuckycheesemmm The implication is that he has, since he has released statements about it on his website.
tektontv 1 month ago
@tektontv Him and Licona need to just get together and dual it out (intellectually). I'm assuming Geisler may be refusing this though?
chuckycheesemmm 1 month ago
@chuckycheesemmm Yes -- per the vid and the note, Geisler refused to attend a conference with scholars on the subject.
tektontv 1 month ago
LOL
seandchoi 2 months ago
@tektontv Satire is a good method for communicating truth in situations where the audience seems deaf, or where it seems like the point isn't "hitting home." Be careful. Making fun of someone's height, for example, does not contribute to any truth communications. Also, there's no reason that you should be belittling the body of Christ. @Zangomatic is your brother; treat him that way.
sbrazzell 2 months ago
@sbrazzell I'm afraid that just shows how ignorant you are. Geisler isn't really short (though compared to Licona, a lot of people are!). He was made short in the cartoon to indicate how this controversy makes him out to be a "small" person.
Spare me the self-righteous sermon otherwise...Jesus called Peter "Satan"...I guess he wasn't his brother then....
tektontv 2 months ago
@JonPirot I don't see a constructive purpose for your comment. Therefore I deleted it.
tektontv 2 months ago
If you can't defend the Bible's inerrancy as whole, you can't defend any of it. Matthew 27 is not apocalyptic in nature, it's historical. You can't just insert an "apocalyptic" parenthesis into whatever you want, especially when everything else within context says otherwise. You can't compare Matthew 27 to Revelation, unless you want to go as far as saying Jesus' death and resurrection is legendary or symbolic, in which case you aren't really a Christian at all.
JonPirot 2 months ago
@JonPirot Actually, yes, you can insert such parentheses. Ancient writers did it all the time, though not as frequently as some say. On that count Licona's argument was sound (thought not on others, which is why I disagree with him, ultimately, on Matt 27).
Saying this makes Jesus' dath and rez symbolic is merely desperate panic button pushing.
tektontv 2 months ago
@tektontv I don't see how this is panic button pushing at all. There's a certain line between differing opinions and statements that downright disagree with Christian doctrine and tenets. As you yourself said, you disagree with Licona on Matt 27. The ancient didn't insert apocalyptic parentheses anywhere either
LuvPeaceUnitySiberi4 2 months ago
@LuvPeaceUnitySiberi4 It's panic button pushing because it is a manifest non sequitur.
Your comment re inserting apocalyptic parentheses is also a non sequitur. You're simply choosing the category of "apocalyptic" and insisting that it must be that one type of parenthesis found for there to be precedent. But such insertions were not governed by genre.
tektontv 2 months ago
@tektontv I for one agree that Geisler is going overboard with his accusations with respect to Licona. But I do think that Licona interprets a lot of Scripture as apocalyptic or symbolic due to anti-Christian pressure: i.e. many many scholars who will see Matt.27:52f. as fiction. I just think that Matthew's context in 27:52f. renders a non-historical interpretation implausible. An insertion is not impossible but I think it's unlikely. What's next? The virgin birth as metaphor?
LuvPeaceUnitySiberi4 2 months ago
@LuvPeaceUnitySiberi4 Your accusation against Licona is disgusting and almost libelous. I know him very well -- he would never do any of this due to "pressure" -- he does it because he is an honest man trying his best to resolve what he thinks is a problem. He bases his conclusions on evidence, so your threat of a slippery slope is also insulting.
You should apologize for your slander.
tektontv 2 months ago
@JonPirot
Dude, that's simplistic and lame. To make your argument you would have to ignore the very case Licona presented!
Birdieupon 2 months ago
I like Norman Geisler's work. Never met him, but his books are good...
RPM11111 2 months ago
@RPM11111 I consider them OK as starters for people in, say, junior high....but they won't do the job if you're facing down some of the modern atheists, or someone like Robert Price.
tektontv 2 months ago
Comment removed
Zangomatic 2 months ago
@Zangomatic If you can't figure it out, you're probably not going to be able to get it if it is more directly explained to you either.
I suppose Thomas Nast had no constructive purpose with respect to Boss Tweed, either.
tektontv 2 months ago
Comment removed
Zangomatic 2 months ago
@Zangomatic How about you get a clue? Maybe you can find one while Christmas shopping.
tektontv 2 months ago
@Zangomatic
Why wasn't this video not constructive enough for you?
ukchristian28 2 months ago
@Zangomatic Is there any constructive purpose in your formulation of this particular question?
Dante666 2 months ago
tektontv, I put together the Caner File and sent it to you. Let me know if you need anything else.
SkiesVibrant 2 months ago
OH WOW THIS IS GREAT!!!!
Birdieupon 2 months ago
Really well done and very creative... but sad.
ElasticGiraffe 2 months ago
Hmm.....Idk who this Geisler guy is, he appears to be a real jerk but i would feel bad if i judged him over one video so i'll look into some of his views and that 1983 debate, cool glad i found this....
Intellectual4God 2 months ago
@tektontv
You wanted to emphasise that point did you?
ukchristian28 2 months ago
@ukchristian28 I got error message the first two times I tried to post that and it worked the third time, but showed only once. YT stinks, man.
tektontv 2 months ago
@tektontv
Lol, I thought so. I have had the same kind of thing happen to me. It seems that Youtube gets worse every time they do "maintenance."
ukchristian28 2 months ago
@tektontv Happens with multiple open windows,that or youve been targeted by "the man" for some tabernacles;-)
PEACE=-)
iwanttocrashmybike 2 months ago
Mr. G seems to have been a Scrooge about it, but that is actually a smaller issue in my mind to Mike Licona's horrible handling of the scriptures in Matthew. PS, I took classes under Geisler. I am thankful to him for that knowledge I received from him. I just wish someone who had read and advanced copy of Mike's book had said something to him. Like, "This is wack".
crosswayokc 2 months ago
@crosswayokc Sorry, I wouldn't call it horrible or wack even though I disagree with it. His analysis is highly professional and careful and deserves better than that.
tektontv 2 months ago 6
@crosswayokc Define "horrible handling of the scriptures". It's easy to make certain accusations like false witnesses against Jesus, but until you make at least a single point highlighting in what way is Mr Licona's handling of the scriptures in Matthew wrong, then I'd say you're the one that's wack.
Dante666 2 months ago
As much as I love and appreciate Geisler's works (and recommend them), I think he had to take a chill pill for his comments against Licona.
drcraigvideos 2 months ago
@joehardy. Holding has answered that on his blog. Can a Geislerite do anything besides quote Geisler as if he's the final authority and we've never read him?
ApologiaNick 2 months ago
Different understanding of inerrancy. Norman Geisler and other believe in an absolute inerrancy and verbal inspiration; God dictated to man word for word. Therefore that see everything in the Bible be literal. Mike Licona and others believe in an full inerrancy and plenary inspiration; God inspire the teaching taught by the authors which are wholly true Which deals with the problem phenomenal language (sun setting and rising) and and other biblical problems that absolute inerrancy cannot answer
JediMasterJerett 2 months ago
@JediMasterJerett A good way to put it. Another is that Geisler and Co believe in a 21st century form of inerrancy, while Licona believe in a 1st century form. Now I wonder which one would apply...
tektontv 2 months ago
@tektontv Another way to put it: Licona believes in inerrancy of Scripture; Geisler believes in inerrancy of his own interpretation of Scripture.
Dante666 2 months ago
@Dante666 Yeah, I think Mike himself said that too. :D
tektontv 2 months ago
I gotta get me a copy of that book!
ykl4hoijgbojo5jijoji 2 months ago
“Indeed, they requested that Robert Gundry resign (by an overwhelming vote) for holding a similar view which dehistoricized sections of the Gospel of Matthew. Licona makes no mention of this crucial fact, but insists on redefining inerrancy to fit his errant view. However, in the light of the Gundry decision, Licona has no grounds on which to stand to claim his view is consistent with the historic view of inerrancy, which was embraced by the founders of ETS” (Norman Geisler).
joehardysr 2 months ago
@joehardysr Um, excuse me...did you happen to notice I have a one post at a time rule here? Or do Geisler Kool-Aid drinkers have problems following rules? (He posted 7 times -- I deleted 6.)
Your silly commentary is answered in my blog posts anyway, so don't waste my time.
tektontv 2 months ago
Wait, are you trying to tell us that Ehrman will not age like the rest of us?
damildlyshreddah 2 months ago
@damildlyshreddah ROFL....well, I take that to be only ten years ahead at most...maybe he uses hair dye.
tektontv 2 months ago
Holding and Peter's are a disgrace to the field of apologetics. This recent video by them reveals they don't understand inerrancy, nor Geisler's critiques. Licona, Holding, and Peters (and their friends and families) should be ashamed of this ungodly and disrespectful video.
MIKE LICONA-- BY ALLOWING YOUR SON-IN-LAW TO POST THIS AND YOUR WIFE TO POST IT ALL OVER THE INTERNET IS UNGODLY BEHAVIOR. BE A MAN AND CONTROL YOUR FAMILY!
timtekron 2 months ago
@timtekron First of all, you don’t get yourself a lot of credibility when you fail basic grammar. There is no possessive in “Peters” requiring an apostrophe.
Second, when you grow up past vague authoritarianism and can produce a substantive analysis that actually hits the spot, drop us a line.
tektontv 2 months ago
@timtekron Adding to what Holding said, you'd do well to learn the basics of netiquette, e.g. SPEAKING IN ALL CAPS LIKE THIS IS AS RUDE AS MAKING YO MOMMA JOKES.
Dante666 2 months ago
@Dante666 And by the way, he posted exactly the same comment on Nick's blog, so he also needs some help with originality.
tektontv 2 months ago
@tektontv well, people who conform to authoritarianism can't exactly be "original", lest they be deemed "heretics" :D
Dante666 2 months ago
The Ghost of Christmas future isn't supposed to talk... but I still liked this video.
YodatheJedi12 2 months ago
@YodatheJedi12 I guess this controversy was so important he had to break his silence. :D
tektontv 2 months ago
I'm always left astounded by the creativity you show in your vids JP. Something all of us should keep in mind when rightly bashing Norman Geisler is that the sort of pathological literalism he ascribes too is far more common than the sort of contextualized interpretation we hold up. This is a war not a battle.
jelloladyful 2 months ago
@jelloladyful I agree. As noted in the latest of the blog entries at the link, the stakes are very high here and Licona/Geisler is just a microcosm of a larger matter.
tektontv 2 months ago
Ooh, Nick Peter's voice was disguised well. I listened carefully the second time and could kind of tell it was him.
Mectrixctic 2 months ago
This situation sounds much like our Lord went through with the Pharisees. They saw the letters but violated the spirit of the scripture.
BrotherMichael1000 2 months ago
Licona does not impress me at all, but as others have mentioned, Geisler has lost all credibility with me and the way he has handled the Caner situation and subsequently, the interactions with James White. Geisler has avoided (the nicest way I can put it) White's questions about Caner or far too long. He also has a dubious history with White regarding Chosen But Free, an almost laughable book.
blazingdan 2 months ago
Loved the video as always.
markderosa 2 months ago
I find this very disturbing. I have Geisler's books, "When Critics Ask" and "When Skeptics Ask," both of which I found invaluable when confronting objections to scriptural inerrancy and such. I even enjoyed his conversation with Lee Strobel in "The Case for Faith." I've heard that some other apologists don't like him, but until your video I never knew why. Learning that he is resorting to these tactics to silence people with divergent views kind of shakes me inside. I wonder what to do now.
DecKrash 2 months ago
@DecKrash I myself have recommend some of Geisler's books of that level for "starter" apologetics, which is why I do regret that he is spending his legacy going after Licona like this. But indeed, he has done it more than once; others he has done this to include Murray Harris, Clark Pinnock, James White, and Hank Hanegraaff -- though to be fair, I also think he was definitely arguing for the right views with the first two.
tektontv 2 months ago
LOLOL AT THE LADDER-STOOL THING. Geisler's a shorty....like them hebroo joos. lol
TheFunkyTheist 2 months ago
and btw, SATAN IS A DRAGON, MR HOLDING. SO YOU DENY INNERANCY. U NEED TO TAKE THE BIBLE LITERALLY! LOL jk
TheFunkyTheist 2 months ago
@TheFunkyTheist Really? Well, if he's a literal dragon, I'm callin' Goku out to take care of him. So there!
tektontv 2 months ago
@tektontv As long as you don't send out MISTER Satan to fight Dragon-Satan... that'd be like pitting a one-year-old girl against a panther!
DLAbaoaqu 2 months ago
While I do have some issues with Mike Licona, Norman Geisler has lost all credibility in my opinion. I don't expect perfection in Christian leadership, but I do, at a minimum expect honesty. Geisler's support of the serial liar Ergun Caner and attacks upon Dr. White are shameful. But let's also be clear, Tim Rogers is just as guilty. Veritas obviously does not live up to its title "Truth". Sad, sad, sad.
SkiesVibrant 2 months ago
@SkiesVibrant I just happened to not follow the Caner matter when it came up, but learning of it later, I simply couldn't see why Geisler jumped to his defense.
tektontv 2 months ago
@tektontv That's a big plus for you, because there is no excuse for what Geisler did. The evidence of Caner's lies is not even close to being speculative. How is it an 'evidentialist' cannot evaluate facts any better than he did? Clearly, the good 'ol boys in some Baptist enclaves circled the wagons to protect Caner. It's shameful and makes everything they do from now on suspect. Pathetic really.
SkiesVibrant 2 months ago
@SkiesVibrant If you would, PM me with a couple of links that you feel give the most thorough treatment of the issue.
tektontv 2 months ago
@tektontv Sure. It will be later today though. I have some family obligations to take care of until early evening. You can get a head-start by looking at Dr. White's website: Alpha and Omega Ministries. He has almost everything documented with videos.
SkiesVibrant 2 months ago
I love Tektontv! his videos always help me learn more of Gods word on the things i dont understand :DD
maplemanful 2 months ago
@maplemanful Thanks for the good word! That is indeed my goal.
tektontv 2 months ago
I have lost an awful lot of respect for Geisler in recent times. Chosen but Free and his attempted reply to James White's "The Potter's Freedom" (just awful), his defence of Ergun Caner when it's obvious Caner is a filthy liar, and now this stupid fight with Mike Licona. It seems Geisler doesn't think he needs to listen to anyone but expects everyone to sit up and listen to him. You can't get more arrogant and self important than that.
ukchristian28 2 months ago
Meanwhile, old Norm makes excuses for Ergun Caner.
labarum312 2 months ago
Nice! Shame we couldn't have Mike Licona voicing himself, but Nick Peters did a great job dramatizing the Ghost of Inerrancy Future!
Dante666 2 months ago
@Dante666 Yeah, no way Mike would have been able to meet my production schedule with all he has on his plate. And I have to say, Nick's voice sounds much better than mine using that template from the mod software. I'll have to use him again for that.
tektontv 2 months ago
Geisler got owned, Christmas style!! ^_^
thunderbolt94 2 months ago
Totally unnecessary. Is this how Christians treat one another? Lame sauce.
XxzeppelinxX 2 months ago
@XxzeppelinxX What a thoroughly substantive and relevant response. Give us another-- do a watusi on a beanbag.
It's very necessary, as the blog posts explain, and there's nothing forbidding it....so pour the cranberry sauce on yo' own self.
tektontv 2 months ago
@XxzeppelinxX Paul did the same thing to Peter, as the former recounted in Galatians 2. It is something we do out of love for each other, as this rebuke is meant to be constructive. We do this for love of truth.
Dante666 2 months ago
@XxzeppelinxX I guess you didn't notice how Geisler treated Licona?
fmu93 2 months ago
Thanks for doing this video. Interesting work. Blessings to you this joyous Christmas season.
jfrontier1 2 months ago