William Lane Craig calls Norman Geisler’s argument for inerrancy invalid. But was it ever offered as a formal syllogism? Here’s why the argument can be stated validly and still stands.
Michael Licona’s talk at the 75th meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society says the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy needs a facelift. Does it? Dr. Bill Roach explores the question.
Leaders of the International Society of Christian Apologetics explain why inerrancy is part of ISCA’s foundation, how ISCA differs from ETS, and whether the Chicago Statement needs revising.
The Gospel Coalition (TGC) recently announced that they are “hosting a series about the need to revise and clarify arguments in light of new hermeneutical and cultural arguments.” But should the Chicago Statement be revised after four decades of service?
This is mainly a tribute to J. I. Packer, one of the most deserving members of the Biblical Inerrancy Hall of Fame (if there were one).
Norman Geisler (1932-2019) fought the good fight of faith. He was arguably the foremost champion of biblical inerrancy of his era, and he started DefendingInerrancy.com in 2014. Here’s our tribute.
