11 August 2006

Dan Wallace weighs in

by Phil Johnson

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.

Phil's signature

27 comments:

Joe L. said...

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

Phil Johnson said...

I think it's fixed now. Give it a try.

Joe L. said...

Good to go, it works.

Thanks,
Joe

donsands said...

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.

mjbeasley said...

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.

Charles Sebold said...

Can we complain about his pre-trib rapture position, then?

Oh, wait, forgot where I was. Nevermind. (/joke)

Steve said...

Your call for a 4-week moratorium will probably prove to be a wise move.

I say this not so much in connection with Dan Wallace, but because past comment threads have been riddled with so many bullet holes from quick-triggered types who obviously didn't pay attention to the target (the post they were reacting to).

Lot said...

... WHAT? Wallace didn't contact you?!? ...

... hmpf ... go figure ...

Lots

David said...

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.

Broken Messenger said...

Phil,

Excellent approach! Kudos.

Brad

Kaffinator said...

And here I thought moratoriums on polemics were only for emergents.

C.H.H. said...

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.

CalvDispy said...

That's how long it takes to cool the fires here at Pryos.

Kaffinator said...

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?

Jonathan Moorhead said...

Phil, nicely done.

Caddiechaplain said...

Good then, I can work on my golf game these next four weeks . . . FORE!

Joe said...

I promise not to mention Dr. Wallace's name for at least 4 weeks.

Rats! I just did!

BritB said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Carrie said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Phil Johnson said...

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.

DJP said...

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.

BritB said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
marc said...

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.

Phil Johnson said...

Marc:

If I'd closed the comments, where you would have posted yours?

marc said...

Phil,
If you had closed comments then I wouldn't have said anyth... but I'm commenting now.. Ahhh... head... spinning... from... METAphysical paradox.

Daniel said...

I second Mr. Moorhead's sentiment - nicely done!

Ben said...

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.