Puritan Board Junior
As I have read, this is only true becasue to debate on an issue, actually gives the issue relevance. For instance, I woudl never debate a oneness pentacostal, and the debating of Bahnsen is parallel. ANd I would have never wanted Geisler representing the truth anyway. There was really no reason to debate him becasue until his death there was no notice of his thought other than being 'out there' on the fringe. Once it became Viral and attached itself to others, then the deabtes happened. "Rabbi Bahnsen" was brilliant though, and probably could have won a debate based on his ability to speak well and captivate the audience with perception and pizazz..While theonomists were probably blackballed from Reformed institutions, and no one ever had the guts to face Bahnsen in a public debate, and while theonomy will never win the day in Reformed circles, I have reason as a theonomist to rejoice.
I found this almost laughable on the inside flap of his book:
This is Greg Bahnsen's response to criticisms of the theonomic position that have been published or circulated over the last ten years. Bahnsen deals not only with Westminster Theological Seminary's Theonomy: A Reformed Critique, but also with two other brief critical books against him, and with various published articles and typewritten, photocopied responses. One by one, Bahnsen takes his critics' arguments apart, showing that they have either misrepresented his position or misrepresented the Bible. Line by line, point by point, he shows that they have not understood his arguments and have also not understood the vulnerability of their own logical and theological positions.
What I find amazing is when someone, who has 50 people showing him scripturally he is wrong, yet all 50 have misrepresented him....