Intellectual pit bull
February 27th, 2006
If Ergun Caner can be the “Intellectual Pit Bull of the evangelical world,” can I be the “Intellectual Golden Retriever of the evangelical world”? Or maybe the “Blogging German Shepherd of the evangelical world”?
Just a thought.
I’ve come to the conclusion that you are the the yiping, ankle-biting chihuahua of both the intellectual and blogging world, Tim.
Tim, it’s your blog. You can be whatever you decide to call yourself. Isn’t the Internet great?
I think I’m going to start calling myself the Saint Bernard of Evangelical Blogging. I’m not all that hairy, but I’ve never seen a Saint Bernard get in a hurry and that is about my speed.
That’s about your smell too.
Wanna go quail hunting, Cameron?
What a nice thing to say, Tony. :rollseyesandshakeshead:
Oh, lighten up. I could have said Basset Hound. Or the chic breed these days is a Labradoodle. Believe me, Chihuahua is a compliment.
Well, if being a pit bull means you embarass yourself the way Dr. Caner did over at the Founders’ blog, then I’ll be a chihuahua any day.
Tim, sorry, but this post is a logical fallacy because you started with a false premise, “if Ergun Caner is the intellectual pit bull of evangelicalism.” I think James White proved that was a false statement. Sorry man, but I think you should ask the “Keepers of all things Canine” in the blogosphere over at Fide-O what they think. They apparently have the authority to declare such things. As for me, I think you might be one of those frisbee-catching dogs of evangelicalism (whatever breed those are).
Caner being called the “intellectual pit bull of evangelicalism” is three lies for the price of one.
Here’s an interesting interview of Mr. Caner. Very insiteful stuff.
http://www.kfuo.org/issues_etc/ie_05_03_05.htm (See hour two)
OKAY!!! (this one is for you, Jeremy) Dr. Caner vs Chuck Norris….
Tim, you just don’t like anyone from Liberty, do you? I would like to see Dr. Ergun’s statements as they were made in proper context (as I am a Calvinist). He’s going to be at our church this year in September. If you’d like an exclusive, I’ll see if I can set it up. Then you can straighten him out on the things in which you claim he embarasses himself. Man, if he had only gone to Union….
Tony, he called Calvinism a virus, for crying out loud — and essentially said that Calvinists have no place in the SBC. Go read it for yourself. As a Calvinist you ought to take great offense at his statements.
After reading the above post, I better not today, David.
Wow.
Deep breath, everybody.
It’s about what the BIBLE says, not Arminianism or Calvinism or any other “ism”!
The biggest problem in Christianity today is interpreting the Word according to our human preferences. It’s not about Union vs. Liberty, or marginal things like that. It’s about GOD’S WORD.
Deep breath.
Caner is one pit bull whose bark is way bigger than his bite.
Alex,
Would that make him an “intellectual Chihuahua” meaning small, loud, obnoxous, and un-socialble?
At the risk of starting something here, may I suggest that Ergun Caner is God’s man? I realize that some of his recent remarks may not have been made with the best spirit, but remember that even David was called by God “a man after mine own heart” after he sinned with Bathsheba.
Gordon that does not excuse his behavior, nor does it mean that he should not be confronted about it. Wasn’t Peter God’s man, yet Paul had no problem calling him out for his dumb actions. And then he wrote about it in a letter that was circulated worldwide! Was it gossip. NO! It was the truth. Nothing said here is gossip. He does claim to be the “intellectual pit bull of evangelicalism” and he did say “calvinism is a virus.” It’s ok to disagree with the guy and state your dismay.
But, just to let everyone know, it seems that Caner is going to debate James White afterall. At least that is what James White sorda-kinda reported in his Tuesday radio show. I have his comments up over at my blog.
D.R., I agree with you. I was not excusing his actions. Some of the things he said in the debate at Tom Ascol’s blog were out of line, (as were a lot of other people).
My point is this, I fail to see where ridicule and mockery in the third person constitue “confrontation”. I think there are better ways to handle this. Unlike Pat Robertson, who was discussed on this blog recently, Dr. Caner can be approached. He can be e-mailed, called, and judging from his cameo appearance on Founder’s blog, he is not afraid to get out and debate with the rest of us. There are ample opportunities to confront him without resorting to the direction that some of these comments are taking us.
Just for the record, I am not a Calvinist.
Gordon,
You said, “remember that even David was called by God “a man after mine own heart” after he sinned with Bathsheba.” I could not find that scripture after David’s sin with Bathsheba. Can you help me out?
Mark, the scripture is Acts 13:22. Although the actual timing of God saying that was at the time of David’s anointing, the Holy Spirit is still leading Paul to refer to that fact in the New Testament.
We must also keep in mind that God used to David to write a number of Psalms after he sinned.
Again, I am not making excuses for wrong-doing, and I am not calling the comments made here gossip. I do believe, however, that just because one person (in this case Dr. Caner) perhaps made some comments with the wrong spirit, it does not give the rest of us license to nip at his heels (or go for the jugular either, for that matter), with mockery and caricature.
Point well taken. I agree. There has to be a balance between making every effort to love the person, speaking the truth and making a defense for sound doctrine. I enjoyed your blog on this topic.
Thanks, Mark.
Gordon, I like and respect you, so I apologize in advance for this, but I’m just too irreverent to resist.
Here’s a quote from Caner’s site:
“Ergun is author of eleven books, including the new best seller CHRISTIAN JIHAD (Kregel 2004). CHRISTIAN JIHAD has been endorsed by Beth Moore and Ann Coulter, and examines the recent war in light of thirteen hundred years of Islamic-Christian conflict.”
Does it strike anyone else as outrageously funny that Caner — “the intellectual pit bull of evangelicalism,” mind you — is boasting that his book about terrorism is endorsed by Beth Moore and Ann Coulter?
Tim, he only said that because J.I. Packer hadn’t endorsed it yet. (No offense taken:-)
Perhaps I should clarify something. While I do have a degree of respect for Ergun Caner, I do not see myself as his self-appointed guardian. He certainly doesn’t need me to protect him.
My point, that I seem to be slowly arriving at, is that this debate between Calvinism and non-Calvinism has been raging at various levels for centuries. It is not going away any time soon, I realize that. I am simply, in my limited way, trying to say that our arguments should stand on their own merits without resorting to personal attacks and mockery.
Yes, calling oneself “the intellectual pit-bull of evangelicalism” may be over the top. Yes, perhaps he needs to demonstrate more gracious rhetoric. But at some point, someone needs to take the high road of Christian statesmanship in this debate. Why not start it here on this most excellent blog? (I am truly sincere in saying that.)