I may have commented on that in the past. If it didn't have Bahnsen's name on it, it wouldn't stand out. I don't think his presentation requires any special response, over and above the usual critiques of physicalism and defenses of dualism.
I don't get what Licona's appeal is. He seems to be confused by a number of passages in Scripture. Aside from what Lydia has pointed out, I also remember him being stymied in his debate with Ehrman about the "two passovers" in John.
You have defended substance dualism and I was wondering what your thoughts are on Bahnsen's view?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cmfnow.com/articles/PA143.htm
I may have commented on that in the past. If it didn't have Bahnsen's name on it, it wouldn't stand out. I don't think his presentation requires any special response, over and above the usual critiques of physicalism and defenses of dualism.
DeleteI don't get what Licona's appeal is. He seems to be confused by a number of passages in Scripture. Aside from what Lydia has pointed out, I also remember him being stymied in his debate with Ehrman about the "two passovers" in John.
ReplyDelete