# Doug Wilson v Dan Barker



## Hippo (Mar 9, 2009)

The Dividing Line (James White) starting in the 03/03/09 broadcast, continuing in the 05/03/09 broadcast and still to finish features a debate from the 90's between Wilson and Barker on "Does the Triune God Live".

What is noteable is how really awful Dan Barker is in a whole host of ways and while Wilson is hardly challanged he does come up with some really well made points.

What stands out to me is how he queries how Barker can complain about the entreaty that:

9 Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones 
and dashes them against the rock! 

(Ps 137:9)

When Barker sees nothing wrong with abortion and also Wilsons comment that the fact that when Christians disagree over doctrine this shows the fault lies in humans, not the bible.

I do find it hard to see how a non calvinist can debate with an atheist as Wilson played a straight bat when showing full confidence in a biblical God who willed evil for his glory. This completely disarmed Barker whos only refuge was that he would not worship such a God which is precisiely what a Calvinist would expect the unregenerate to say.

What I do not understand from this debate was why Barker spent all his time attempting to establish inconsistencies in Wilson's position, which is almost impossible against a presupporsitionalist Calvinist and why he did not challange the validity of the revelation which would be be much more challanging for Wilson?

I fully endorse the presupositionalist approach to deprive the atheist of his wordview but is the classic Bahnen approach of claiming that only the Christian worldview give an inteligible presuposition actualy prove anything in itself? Maybe it is just something that cannot be proved?


----------



## Scott1 (Mar 9, 2009)

Given the former's growing identification with the serious error of "federal vision" theology, one would hope others without that would be chosen to be a public face for biblical Christianity, both on television in the popular culture and "in-house" within the church, especially our reformed part of it.


----------



## Hippo (Mar 9, 2009)

Scott1 said:


> Given the former's growing identification with the serious error of "federal vision" theology, one would hope others without that would be chosen to be a public face for biblical Christianity, both on television in the popular culture and "in-house" within the church, especially our reformed part of it.



Wilson stood in at short notice due to the sad death of Greg Bahnsen and in this debate he was excellent, none of the FV issues were in point.


----------



## Pilgrim (Mar 9, 2009)

I don't keep up with him very much, but despite his identification with the FV I've seen Wilson make several good points against N.T. Wright, specifically on the issue of imputation.


----------

