We’re interrupting the E-Block
series on Doug del Tondo to let the reader know that Norman Geisler still doesn’t
know when it is in his best interests to leave well enough alone. Indeed, at
this point he seems to be taking on the habits of a cyberstalker, digging out
whatever little opportunity he can to say the same things he’s already said
once before which weren’t correct before and haven’t gotten any more correct
with age.
Geisler’s peashot is aimed this time
at an interview Licona did for a website that is geared towards helping people
select a school (link below). One wonders why Geisler would even bother, but at
this point, his obsession is apparently so great that Licona could probably
appear opposite Big Bird as a special guest on Sesame Street and it would
result in a 500 page Geisler response. Further than that I look for a Geisler
article in the future which begins, “Recently Mike Licona was taking out his
trash and….”
But like I said, there’s little new
here, really. Geisler repeats the same stale arguments we’ve covered before in
prior entries you can see under the subject link for this post.
He still hasn’t learned that
Greco-Roman bioi is not a “generic category” and still has not taken up my
challenge to refute scholars like Burridge; all he adds is the sort of frightened,
head-in-sand language we have come to expect from an unschooled fundamentalist in
over his head (e.g., Licona was “poisoned by his baptism into Greco-Roman
literature which penetrated his mind by unbiblical presuppositions” – next week,
Licona will “go to hay-ul if he don’t repent”).
He still doesn’t get that maybe,
just maybe, Gary Habermas one-upped him by thinking more deeply about his
position on these subjects between 1983 (the time of Robert Gundry’s confab)
and now (for as we may expect, someone like Geisler pretty much intellectually stays
in stone no matter how long he takes, and no matter how much scholarship
bounces off his scalp).
He continues to quote unnamed and
anonymous sound bites as though anyone ought to pay attention, and sound bites
as well for unqualified “great men” like Mohler and Patterson (who still doesn’t
deserve that bronze statue – sorry – but does deserve the pigeons that come
with it).
He still thinks he can hoist the 300
ICBI “scholars” (ha ha!) as authorities and that relatively and contextually unqualified
people like himself, Packer, and Sproul are competent to judge this matter. No, sorry, none of that trio is within their
depth here.
He still hoists that rather silly
argument about not being able to discern author intention. Apparently being
chased around by the Ehrmanator didn’t give him a clue.
He’s still hoisting his
inconsequential “survey” of “leaders and laypersons” (the old Brian Flemming
technique).
He still whines about being made
into a cartoon and quotes a few anonymous people with too-tight Fruit of the
Looms who were disturbed by it. Aww. How sad.
He still fudges in reporting that ETS kicked
out Gundry with a 70% vote (never mind all the abstentions). And he still has
delusional views of himself as a new Martin Luther (“Here we must stand.
We can do no other.”).
He manages to expand all of this
stale bread into 25 or so points, but nowhere does he advance his arguments one
step, much less responds to detailed criticisms of his errors offered by this
blog and so many others.
One the few “new” bits is where
Geisler says:
Licona boasts of his successful debates with
many noted unbelievers using his “new historiographical approach.” Yet I
was told by some persons friendly to Licona view who were present at the Bart
Ehrman debate that they believed that Licona had lost the debate. After the
event, one father told me that he was informed by his son who heard the debate
that he did not want to go to church any more!
Well, gee, Norm. I have been told by
tons of people – atheists and Christians alike – that you botched and made a
fool of yourself in your “debate” with Farrell Till. And I’ve seen it used
repeatedly by atheists as an example of how piddly-poor Christian apologetics
really is. (One example linked below.) And in fact, thanks to you, I probably
had to beat Till on the bunions a few more times than would have been necessary
had you done a competent job of it. News flash: This is why I find debates
useless. As someone once said, the “atheist” side could be represented by a dog
howling “I Dream of Jeannie” off key, and there would be atheists who would
still say the Christian lost.
But anyway, given all that, maybe
you’d better get that redwood out of your eyeball before trying to take that
toothpick out of Licona’s. The way you keep spinning around, you're liable to
kill people with it.