Ask Norman Geisler
Loading...
Uploader Comments (joehardysr)
Video Responses
All Comments (234)
-
This is Norman Geisler’s initial charge against Mike Licona, which has been very consistent throughout this debate and which often gets overlooked: “First of all, what is being done here is the same basic thing that Robert Gundry did in dehistoricizing sections of Matthew and for which he was asked to resign from the Evangelical Theological Society in 1983. How then can another evangelical interpretation of the same kind be overlooked as unimportant to orthodox Christianity?”
-
IAM had it
You can't give something you do not have! SO IAM had it first and he got it from his civilization that he was one of the last survivors of the ice melt.
it also is a teaching that all villages should be closed like a ship and built of concentric circles make of arches.... more stuff you did not know.
-
Tell me!
-
I ask,
who was first with the Ark?
(bet you get it wrong!)
1:23:28
Why I am Not a 5 Point Calvinist - Norman Geislerby crystalm36499 views- 10:30
JesusOrMuhammad - Islamic Dilemma 101 Part 1/4by JesusOrMuhammad1,321 views
- 43:56
Norman Geisler interviewed by Apologetics315by Apologetics315212 views
- 11:11
Ravi Zacharias Q & A: God's Sovereignty and the Genocide of the Old Testamentby 98nafets1,683 views
- 43:56
Norman Geisler - Christianity and the Need for Apologeticsby orlibonurb482 views
- 1:41
Dan Wallace on the Geisler Controversy.MP4by milico8852,085 views
- 10:20
If God Exists, Why is there Evil? (1 of 4)by philosophyreligion1,388 views
- 1:26
107. Is the God of Islam the God of Christianity?by oneminuteapologist1,713 views
- 33:23
Ehrman-Licona Debate: Can Historians Prove Jesus Rose From The Dead Part 1by SEvangelicalSeminary23,470 views
- 1:01
BadTheistby CopalFreak331 views
- 3:56
Endorsements of Mike Licona.mp4by milico8851,078 views
- 5:42
Silly Atheist Commentsby AmericanWayne520 views
- 1:47
If someone in hell changes their mind, God would release them from hell?by johnankerberg440 views
- 3:59
Albert Einstein was WRONG!!!by PeacefulChristianTV2,635 views
- 3:22
If God created everything, and what He created was perfect and good, how did evil originate?by johnankerberg502 views
- 9:14
Hugotoutseul, la révélation du webby tvmag151,285 views
- 1:00
Dr. Wayne Grudem of Phoenix Seminary (Part 2/3)by PhoenixSeminary1664 views
- 9:52
Challenge: The Bible Has Been Changedby BrettKunkleSTR219 views
- 3:05
Geisler Deals with an "Icon" from Pluralismby SeanG20040 views
- 2:35
Where did evil come from?by johnankerberg444 views
THE CHICAGO STATEMENT ON BIBLICAL INERRANCY
Article XVIII
“We affirm that the text of Scripture is to be interpreted by grammatico-historicaI exegesis, taking account of its literary forms and devices, and that Scripture is to interpret Scripture.
We deny the legitimacy of any treatment of the text or quest for sources lying behind it that leads to relativizing, dehistoricizlng, or discounting its teaching, or rejecting its claims to authorship.”
joehardysr 3 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 3 months ago
THE CHICAGO STATEMENT ON BIBLICAL INERRANCY
Article XVIII
“We affirm that the text of Scripture is to be interpreted by grammatico-historicaI exegesis, taking account of its literary forms and devices, and that Scripture is to interpret Scripture.
We deny the legitimacy of any treatment of the text or quest for sources lying behind it that leads to relativizing, dehistoricizlng, or discounting its teaching, or rejecting its claims to authorship.”
joehardysr 3 months ago
Frank Turek, William Dembski, Gary Habermas, Josh McDowell, William Lane Craig, Daniel B. Wallace, W. David Beck, Craig Blomberg, James Chancellor, Jeremy A. Evans, Craig S. Keener, Douglas J. Moo, J. P. Moreland, Heath A. Thomas, William Warren, Edwin M. Yamauchi, and yes, Norman L. Geisler endorse the man Mike Licona, but do they also endorse the method? This is what Norman Geisler terms “Methodological Unorthodoxy.”
joehardysr 3 months ago
A handful of scholars, including Norman Geisler—“I have examined your work on the resurrection (The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach (IVP, 2010). Overall, it is a massive (718 pages), scholarly resource, and I commend you for your efforts and for your defense of the bodily resurrection of Christ”—endorses the man Mike Licona, but do they also endorse the method? This is what Norman Geisler terms “Methodological Unorthodoxy.”
joehardysr 3 months ago
Subsequent to Norman Geisler’s article, “Methodological Unorthodoxy,” in March of 1983, Robert Gundry was asked to resign from the Evangelical Theological Society by a 70% vote.
Among other things, Geisler noted: “He denies that the saints were literally resurrected after Jesus died as reported in Matthew 27, and so on.”
Do you agree with this majority decision against Gundry’s membership of ETS, and how much different is the Mike Licona’s controversy from the Robert Gundry’s?
joehardysr 3 months ago