We have gotten a number of inquiries based upon this blog entry, so I’m expanding it and adding two graphics.
When Norman Geisler’s anti-Calvinism book, Chosen But Free was first released, I encountered a number of basic errors in the text, not just on the level of theology and argumentation, but errors of fact as well. I even found typographical errors and reported them to Bethany House Publishers, and these became the basis of Dr. Geisler’s later accusing me of mis-citing him (see one example here). But on page 222 of The Potter’s Freedom (TPF) I noted, in passing, another error on Geisler’s part. Though I did not make a big deal about it, he erred when he stated in CBF (p. 59) that in Romans 9:16 the Greek term “ek” appears. Specifically, he wrote, “Again, the Greek word for ‘of’ here is ek, which means ‘out of.'” Now, since some folks are actually questioning whether I have been accurate in representing this (and many do not have the original edition), here is a scan of the relevant paragraph:
Now, after the release of TPF, a second printing of the first edition was released by BHP. In it, this phrase was changed, without notification, to read, “Again, the Greek idea ‘of’ here can mean ‘out of’ (cf. John 1:13).” And, since there is a question regarding it, here is the relevant paragraph as it appeared in the second printing of the first edition:
Now, my point all along is that Dr. Geisler is simply wrong in his attempt to get around this tremendous passage, and it seems that even when shown to be wrong on the Greek text itself, he simply removes the wrong word but keeps the wrong idea in the text. Nothing is really “fixed” outside of the technicality of having misread the Greek text, and it seems obvious that it is not the text that is driving his understanding here anyway.
Why do I bring this up a few years later? Because this morning one of the very first e-mails I had to read was from someone who concluded, on the basis of the edited second printing, that I was guilty of mis-citing Geisler! The sad irony is that I am the one constantly misrepresented by Geisler’s appendix to his second edition (as documented in the URL above). I invested so much time and effort in accurately citing and representing Dr. Geisler, and yet because of his editing of his own material I am left “holding the bag.” It was obvious the person writing just assumes Dr. Geisler could never make a basic error regarding Greek, and hence I must have been purposefully altering my citation (as if I needed to make some point!).
