ince snippets from Dan Wallace's writings have come under fire in the meta here, it's only fair to note that he has replied to some of the comments and questions that have been raised.Notice that even we Pyros have publicly agonized (and not necessarily agreed in every detail with one another) about the proper way to read some of the statements Dan Wallace has made about inspiration, inerrancy, and the vital question of where precious doctrines fit in the hierarchy of fundamental doctrines. Despite what some have suggested, we don't ever deliberately try to breach the bounds of charity, especially when it comes to the work of someone who has contributed as much of value as Dr. Wallace has.
So I'd like to let Dr. Wallace have the last word on this—at least for a few weeks' time. We want to allow everyone ample time to give Dr. Wallace's response due consideration. And lest someone here use the meta to answer Dr. Wallace too hastily or too sharply, we're calling a 4-week moratorium on debate about his works. If you're concerned about the issue, please take that time and read what he himself has written. We may or may not revisit the topic again in a month or so. We'll see.
Meanwhile, if you want to carry on any controversy related to specific things Dr. Wallace deals with in this most recent response from him, please take it somewhere other than the meta at PyroManiacs.
PS: For those who have already asked—No, Dr. Wallace did not attempt to contact me privately before posting his reply. I'm fine with that.
23 comments:
Phil - The link to Dr. Wallace's response is not working. Seems the link is a combination of two links. Here is the one I think you are referring to.
http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=4200
I think it's fixed now. Give it a try.
Good to go, it works.
Thanks,
Joe
I just skimmed it. It's a lot to read over.
But I don't remember anyone calling Mr. Wallace a heretic.
I'll have to go back and read through it some more. A little over my head to be honest.
I just read through his article. As one who uses Dr. Wallace's Greek grammar myself, I found it to be very interesting to learn more about him and his convictions. Many thanks for posting this Phil.
Can we complain about his pre-trib rapture position, then?
Oh, wait, forgot where I was. Nevermind. (/joke)
As usual, Dan thinks far deeper than almost everyone.
It is also interesting that he felt that this blog has such an impact that it necessitated such a long response at bible.org.
Phil,
Excellent approach! Kudos.
Brad
And here I thought moratoriums on polemics were only for emergents.
Yeah, this "let's wait a while and then talk about it" approach smells a little too Maclaren-esque to me. Phil must be a heretic, too.
That's how long it takes to cool the fires here at Pryos.
You know, I was just reflecting on how weird it is that we are actually prohibited from making on-topic comments. Thus, I simply must take this opportunity to give Phil a hearty shout-out for reinforcing such a cool moniker for us fan-boys. It's like, "Honey, no, I can't do the dishes right now, I'm in the meta at Pyro." And who can say "no" to that? I mean, besides my wife?
Phil, nicely done.
Good then, I can work on my golf game these next four weeks . . . FORE!
I promise not to mention Dr. Wallace's name for at least 4 weeks.
Rats! I just did!
The post above is pretty clear. If you have an opinion to express on this issue, save it until the four-week cooling-off period is over, and you can have your say without being censored. But please honor the request regardless of whether you have criticism or praise, and regardless of which side of the issue you fall on.
I don't know what the deleted posts said, but another maybe-goes-without-saying is that anyone who simply wants to share a thought with any of us during this period could still email us.
Phil,
Why didn't you just close the comments on this post right off the bat? Oh wait, so we could talk about not talking about Dan Wallace.
Marc:
If I'd closed the comments, where you would have posted yours?
Phil,
If you had closed comments then I wouldn't have said anyth... but I'm commenting now.. Ahhh... head... spinning... from... METAphysical paradox.
I second Mr. Moorhead's sentiment - nicely done!
Phil,
In light of the fact that you've blogged about the need for a hierarchy of doctrine, I'd be interested at some appropriate point in your take on Wallace's approach.
Post a Comment