An Open Challenge to Norman Geisler

[SarahB]

What dim bulbs like you never understand is that it's not JP you're arguing against, it's his peer reviewed sources written by credentialed experts.

People will sometimes use peer reviewed sources to rationalize false conclusions, do they not?. Holding's Insults for Christ paradigm has no peer review -- even after many years, he still avoids it. He's got no one other than you characters here; he can't even get Licona to side with him.

[Rational Gaze]

I like how SarahB repeatedly uses the phrase "Insults For Christ Paradigm." Sounds like the name for a metal band.

Kind of like how sceptics think shouting ROBERT TURKEL is an argument.

[SarahB]

I missed that because I have the little dumbass on ignore, but you're quite right, and to answer the immediate question:

Get that from the Holy Spirit?

As it stands, very very few people, even scholars, are even aware that the Biblical world was agonistic, so the initial number of persons qualified to assess the arguments about CR in depth would be very, very few.

VERY VERY scholarly of you to repeat for emphasis.

Those poor scholars. You must feel very very sorry for them. There you are, more more qualified than any of them; so so more more qualified that you are unable -- even after years and years -- to find a single scholar qualified enough to support your Insults for Christ paradigm. Apparently, even Mike Licona is less qualified than you.

[jpholding]

I like how SarahB repeatedly uses the phrase "Insults For Christ Paradigm." Sounds like the name for a metal band.

Kind of like how sceptics think shouting ROBERT TURKEL is an argument.

Sh....don't say that. The little dumbass will cry if you take it away from her.

[Teluog]

People will sometimes use peer reviewed sources to rationalize false conclusions, do they not?. Holding's Insults for Christ paradigm has no peer review -- even after many years, he still avoids it. He's got no one other than you characters here; he can't even get Licona to side with him.

Application of biblical principles does not require peer-review

[jpholding]

Application of biblical principles does not require peer-review

It seems the little dumbass thinks that if you want "peer review," all you have to do is go up to the editor of an academic journal and put a quarter in his mouth. I can hardly "avoid" something I don't have access to. And if she wants to get technical, "my characters here" ARE my peers.

Has she accepted Licona's arguments for the Resurrection yet, or is that dead horse still stinking up the room?

[Mountain Man]

Application of biblical principles does not require peer-review

I'm not sure the little hypocrite even knows what "peer review" means.

[SarahB]

I'm not sure the little hypocrite even knows what "peer review" means.

I think I know what it means in this case: you can't get even get Licona to side with you.

[fm93]

Sarah, you've demonstrated an obvious inability to actually deal with arguments, so why don't you just quit this whole anti-Holding enterprise and go make fun of obese people or something?

[Mountain Man]

I think I know what it means in this case: you can't get even get Licona to side with you.

In other words, you have no idea what peer review means in any context.

[fm93]

What does it even matter who sides with JP? It's been established that scripture condones the use of riposte and insults, and until someone can actually present a logical argument showing that JP's style doesn't qualify as Biblically-condoned riposte, its modern usage is a matter of personal taste. Licona disapproving of riposte is akin to Licona disapproving of an ice cream flavor. The fact that he personally doesn't like it (or use it, in the case of riposte) doesn't mean it shouldn't be used.

[37818]

As we have noted, one cannot "dehistoricize" a text that was never intended to be taken as historical.

Then what is the truth of the text if it is not historical? And what role does God's inerrancy play or not play in the text?

[moreta]

Well, Psalms and Proverbs aren't historical texts, but they are full of truth. I know they aren't exactly analogous to the text under general discussion, but they do show that Scripture doesn't need to relate an historical event in order to be true, or truth. I'm not a scholar of anything, let alone the Bible, what little I do know is self taught and subject to change as I learn more, but as I understand inerrancy, there was no error in what the writers wrote. I don't believe there is error in the scriptures as we have them today, only in the translation of them. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "God's inerrancy".

[Manwë Súlimo]

I have not personally studied the story of the rising saints in any considerable detail; but if Licona is correct, the intended truth that the author was probably trying to convey is that Jesus' death was a very significant death of a very significant person because the dead were brought back to life.

[Thersites]

James 3
1 Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. 2 We all stumble in many ways. Anyone who is never at fault in what they say is perfect, able to keep their whole body in check.

3 When we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we can turn the whole animal. 4 Or take ships as an example. Although they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are steered by a very small rudder wherever the pilot wants to go. 5 Likewise, the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts. Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark. 6 The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole body, sets the whole course of one’s life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell.

7 All kinds of animals, birds, reptiles and sea creatures are being tamed and have been tamed by mankind, 8 but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.

9 With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse human beings, who have been made in God’s likeness. 10 Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers and sisters, this should not be. 11 Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? 12 My brothers and sisters, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water.