# Ergun caner guilty: Removed as dean from seminary



## MLCOPE2 (Jun 25, 2010)

This article was attached to a short story posted on James White's Blog. I wonder what the Caner supporters will have to say now???


----------



## AThornquist (Jun 25, 2010)

lol. I posted this exact same thing in the "Country/World News" but it is awaiting approval. I'm glad LU Board of Trustees has done _something_ about the lies, but we will have to wait and see if there is any better fruit to come (i.e. repentance).


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Jun 25, 2010)

And he is still a professor why?


----------



## Mushroom (Jun 25, 2010)

Scary thing for a man to stand behind a pulpit and say things he knows to be false. Blows my mind that anyone could do that.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Jun 25, 2010)

and so smug while doing it.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jun 25, 2010)

AThornquist said:


> lol. I posted this exact same thing in the "Country/World News" but it is awaiting approval. I'm glad LU Board of Trustees has done _something_ about the lies, but we will have to wait and see if there is any better fruit to come (i.e. repentance).



I think we will leave it here in a forum that is members only for right now. I deleted the other post thinking it should stay in the family discussion area for a bit.


----------



## Scott1 (Jun 25, 2010)

I'm not familiar with this man or this situation.

Only looking at the pattern, a Dean being removed from position for formal reprimand for false information, does not often settle back into a teaching position at the same institution. Not at a Christian institution, not at any institution.


----------



## Andres (Jun 25, 2010)

I still don't find anything about this on the Liberty website. Not saying it's not true, just that they still seem to be trying to cover it up.


----------



## Scottish Lass (Jun 25, 2010)

Chaplainintraining said:


> And he is still a professor why?


 
Tenure, I would imagine. Stupid process (and I'm a teacher).


----------



## Montanablue (Jun 25, 2010)

Scottish Lass said:


> Chaplainintraining said:
> 
> 
> > And he is still a professor why?
> ...


 
Yes, there may be a process by which he has to be removed. (Which I'm actually in favor of, as long as he is removed).


----------



## Curt (Jun 25, 2010)

Even tenured teachers have contractual responsibilities. A proven liar as a tenured professor at a seminary is par for the course these days I guess.


----------



## tcalbrecht (Jun 25, 2010)

"This matter is behind us and we praise God that *Dr. Caner is exonerated* as he is retained at Liberty on faculty."

Dr. Ergun Caner Investigation Completed
by SBC Today


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Jun 26, 2010)




----------



## Grimmson (Jun 26, 2010)

tcalbrecht said:


> "This matter is behind us and we praise God that *Dr. Caner is exonerated* as he is retained at Liberty on faculty."
> 
> Dr. Ergun Caner Investigation Completed
> by SBC Today


 
The article is an example of SBC church politics that exists in support for Ergun Caner. Some of this information has been known for quite a while and it took an AP article to really force the official investigation. I think there is a concern of some that there will be a backlash against them if they actually said that he lied. Truth is not so much the issue, but instead the covering of their own rear ends. I personally find it sad that Thomas Road Baptist Church, Ergun Caner’s church, isn’t involved officially in dealing with the Caner scandal so far.


----------



## AThornquist (Jun 26, 2010)

No accountability. Makes me sick.


----------



## Kevin (Jun 27, 2010)

*Caner Canned*

from CT Liberty University cuts Caner as seminary dean | Liveblog | Christianity Today

I feel that this could have widespread repercussions. "We" have a tendancy to think of Liberty as "them", but to non-christians we are all alike.

Also to what extent does this kind of pulpit liberty take place in reformed churches? I pray not at all, but we should be reminded by this case to be very careful with the truth.


----------



## Herald (Jun 27, 2010)

Caner wasn't canned, he was demoted. Liberty University has effectively embraced the lie, not the truth. How sad for the church of Christ.


----------



## Kevin (Jun 27, 2010)

He was removed from his post as president of LBS, plus it makes a better headline


----------



## toddpedlar (Jun 27, 2010)

If he had actually grown up where he claimed to have grown up, he very well could have been CANED for this! (an even better headline than CANNED)


----------



## MLCOPE2 (Jun 27, 2010)

I had posted on this in an earlier thread.


----------



## torstar (Jun 27, 2010)

One of the most striking differences between a cat and a lie is that a cat has only nine lives.
- Pudd'nhead Wilson


----------



## torstar (Jun 27, 2010)

I thought he was Todd Bentley in a suit for the 7 or 8 highly dramatic clips of his preaching that I saw. Didn't see anything about conviction of sin, repentance, trust in Jesus and a walk in piety at all. Just looked like a rock and roll circus fiasco.

Does the "community" now apologize to the main antagonist from that other religion who led the charge here?

Great example set there for someone who needs Jesus, like we all do.


----------



## TimV (Jun 28, 2010)

Todd, do you know where I can find the penalty for conversion in Turkey?


----------



## TomVols (Jun 28, 2010)

When I read that blurb from _SBC Today_, I know now where the former editors of_Tass_ & _Pravda_ landed after losing their old jobs.


----------



## raekwon (Jun 28, 2010)

Funny, I figured it was Saddam Hussein's former "information minister" that landed the SBCToday job.


----------



## DMcFadden (Jun 28, 2010)

Yes, now that Bagdad Bob is (evidently) on the Liberty payroll, he has had much to say . . . "Yes, I said "e-x-o-n-e-r-a-t-e-d." What part of the English language do you not understand, Infidel? Now that Dr. Caner has this matter of character assassination behind him, we can all move forward for the good of the "mother of all schools." Actually, he did not want to be the dean of the seminary any longer. It got in the way of his important teaching ministry. This was actually a promotion for him to be back in the classroom among adoring students and to have more opportunities to speak (and get tased on stage). The Infidel James White is simply playing into the hands of the great one. He has trapped White and will utterly destroy him and his cadre of evil doers."


----------



## Curt (Jun 28, 2010)

As pastor of a Baptist congregation, whose heart and theological understanding is still presbyterian, oh how I yearn for meaningful connectionalism.


----------



## Herald (Jun 28, 2010)

Curt said:


> As pastor of a Baptist congregation, whose heart and theological understanding is still presbyterian, oh how I yearn for meaningful connectionalism.


 
Curt, then why are you a Baptist?


----------



## R Harris (Jun 28, 2010)

Isn't this Caner fellow the one and same who said about 3 years ago that Calvinists were actually a greater threat to Christianity than Muslims? I think he said something to that effect about the same time that Jerry Falwell pronounced Calvinism to be a heresy to a group of visiting prospective students, about three weeks prior to his death.


----------



## SemperEruditio (Jun 28, 2010)

And still absolutely nothing on the Liberty website. There has been action on Ergun's site in that his bio has dramatically changed to now:



> Ergun Caner is a *Professor & Apologist *at the Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary and Graduate School in Lynchburg, Virginia.



Now I find it amazing that not only is he still a professor but still claims to be an apologist. LU should be ashamed.


----------



## Curt (Jun 28, 2010)

Herald said:


> Curt said:
> 
> 
> > As pastor of a Baptist congregation, whose heart and theological understanding is still presbyterian, oh how I yearn for meaningful connectionalism.
> ...


 
I'm not. I'm just the pastor of this reforming Baptist congregation.


----------



## Herald (Jun 28, 2010)

Curt said:


> Herald said:
> 
> 
> > Curt said:
> ...



Interesting.


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Jun 28, 2010)

Curt said:


> Herald said:
> 
> 
> > Curt said:
> ...


 
Is the Baptist church you pastor aware that _their pastor isn't a Baptist?_

---------- Post added at 09:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:31 PM ----------

Putting the school's action aside, I'm just shocked that the _utter shame_ of Caner's sin isn't enough to drive him to resign and drop off the face of the earth! That's some real gumption!


----------



## Curt (Jun 28, 2010)

C. M. Sheffield said:


> Curt said:
> 
> 
> > Herald said:
> ...


 
There has never been any confusion on that point. I have always been upfront and have never preached or taught on infant baptism. The congregation (currently) seems content with my beliefs and my efforts.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jun 29, 2010)

Don't turn this into a Baptism thread. I am sending Pastor Curt a note I think Bill would appreciate. But this is not about baptism.


----------



## Jared (Jun 29, 2010)

R Harris said:


> Isn't this Caner fellow the one and same who said about 3 years ago that Calvinists were actually a greater threat to Christianity than Muslims? I think he said something to that effect about the same time that Jerry Falwell pronounced Calvinism to be a heresy to a group of visiting prospective students, about three weeks prior to his death.



That wouldn't be something I'd want to say right before I died.


----------



## Herald (Jun 29, 2010)

Ergun Caner is definitely a rabid anti-Calvinist. Liberty is of the same genre as the bible college I first attended - Word of Life Bible Institute in Pottersville, NY. Word of Life was decidedly anti-Calvinist. In fact, their catalog stated that if you hold to Calvinism, Reformed, or "Replacement" theology you would be best served by not applying for admission. Calvinists were regarded, as at best, misguided and, at worse, as heretics. John MacArthur was one of the most highly respected adjunct faculty members at Word of Life, but when he came out with the Gospel According to Jesus in 1989, that all changed. The Lordship Salvation position of John MacArthur caused him to be blacklisted at Word of Life. In fact, I attended the last appearance by John MacArthur at Word of Life just before the publication of his book. I can only imagine the fundamentalist reaction when MacArthur clearly articulated that he was a Calvinist.


----------



## tcalbrecht (Jun 29, 2010)

Herald said:


> Ergun Caner is definitely a rabid anti-Calvinist. *Liberty is of the same genre as the bible college I first attended* - Word of Life Bible Institute in Pottersville, NY. Word of Life was decidedly anti-Calvinist. In fact, their catalog stated that if you hold to Calvinism, Reformed, or "Replacement" theology you would be best served by not applying for admission. Calvinists were regarded, as at best, misguided and, at worse, as heretics. John MacArthur was one of the most highly respected adjunct faculty members at Word of Life, but when he came out with the Gospel According to Jesus in 1989, that all changed. The Lordship Salvation position of John MacArthur caused him to be blacklisted at Word of Life. In fact, I attended the last appearance by John MacArthur at Word of Life just before the publication of his book. I can only imagine the fundamentalist reaction when MacArthur clearly articulated that he was a Calvinist.


 
Liberty itself can't be that anti-Calvinistic. Dr. Roger Schultz, their Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, is a rabid Calvinist and a Presbyterian to boot. I've known other Calvinists that have worked at the school. I think Caner is a useful pawn in the hands of certain rabid anti-Calvinists within the SBC, but Liberty is not an SBC school. Neither is Thomas Road BC an SBC congregation. (Which raises an interesting quesiton: Does anyone known for sure which church actually holds his membership?)

I would place Liberty and, say, Bob Jones University, in different categories.


----------



## Herald (Jun 29, 2010)

Tom,

I'm aware of Dr. Schultz, but he is an anomaly at Liberty. Don't get me wrong, I'm thankful Dr. Schultz is there, but he does not represent the prevailing theological bent of the University.


----------



## tcalbrecht (Jun 29, 2010)

Bill,

I wasn't suggesting that LU was pro-Calvinist. But it's my impression that Caner is the anomaly, a useful pawn of the anti-Reformed forces in the SBC. But if LU were rabidly anti- they could not afford to have someone like Dr. Schultz as a dean, in my opinion.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jun 29, 2010)

tcalbrecht said:


> Liberty itself can't be that anti-Calvinistic. Dr. Roger Schultz, their Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, is a rabid Calvinist and a Presbyterian to boot. I've known other Calvinists that have worked at the school. I think Caner is a useful pawn in the hands of certain rabid anti-Calvinists within the SBC, but Liberty is not an SBC school. Neither is Thomas Road BC an SBC congregation. (Which raises an interesting quesiton: Does anyone known for sure which church actually holds his membership?)
> 
> I would place Liberty and, say, Bob Jones University, in different categories.



Liberty is affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention. Thomas Road is a Southern Baptist Church Congregation.


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Jun 29, 2010)

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Liberty is affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention.


 
Liberty is not an institution nor under the oversight of the SBC. They may have a friendly relationship, but the SBC only has six schools (SBTS, SEBTS, SWBTS, NOBTS, MBTS, GGBTS).


----------



## tcalbrecht (Jun 29, 2010)

PuritanCovenanter said:


> tcalbrecht said:
> 
> 
> > Liberty itself can't be that anti-Calvinistic. Dr. Roger Schultz, their Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, is a rabid Calvinist and a Presbyterian to boot. I've known other Calvinists that have worked at the school. I think Caner is a useful pawn in the hands of certain rabid anti-Calvinists within the SBC, but Liberty is not an SBC school. Neither is Thomas Road BC an SBC congregation. (Which raises an interesting quesiton: Does anyone known for sure which church actually holds his membership?)
> ...


 
Sorry, I guess I was working from old data. When did they align with the SBC?


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Jun 30, 2010)

Looks like 3 years in jail in Turkey.
penalty for conversion to christianity turkey - Google Search


----------



## TimV (Jun 30, 2010)

The linked article says


> Citing articles 301, 216 and 135 of the Turkish penal code, the indictment accuses the defendants of approaching grade school children and high school students in Silivri and attempting to convert them to Christianity, Compass reported.
> 
> According to the written charges, the three plaintiffs, identified as 23-year-old Fatih Kose, 16-year-old Alper and Oguz, 17, claimed the two Christians had called Islam a “primitive and fabricated religion” and had described Turks as a “cursed people,” Compass reported.
> 
> They also accused Tastan and Topal of opposing the Turkish military, encouraging sexual misconduct and procuring funds from abroad to entice young people in Silivri to become Christians. Tastan and Topal deny all charges, Compass reported.



and




> “but I am doing missionary work. I am a Christian evangelist and I don’t deny that. So you can put me in jail for that, if you want. But you know what I’m doing is not against the law.”



Turkey recently gave up the death penalty to get into the EU, and has been a member of NATO for years. I would be surprised if converts were subjected to punishment just for converting. Not that I'd want to live there....


----------



## Herald (Jun 30, 2010)

torstar said:


> I thought he was Todd Bentley in a suit for the 7 or 8 highly dramatic clips of his preaching that I saw. Didn't see anything about conviction of sin, repentance, trust in Jesus and a walk in piety at all. Just looked like a rock and roll circus fiasco.
> 
> Does the "community" now apologize to the main antagonist from that other religion who led the charge here?
> 
> Great example set there for someone who needs Jesus, like we all do.



I am no Ergun Caner fan, but let's be careful not to try him in the court of YouTube.


----------



## Herald (Jun 30, 2010)

I've been following the whole Ergun Caner debacle through the lens of James White. I'm now of the opinion that Liberty University's sin is far greater than Ergun Caner. Liberty could have reigned him in. They could have put an end to his using the clout and credibility of his seminary position. Instead they gave Caner a slap on the wrist. The rest of fundamentalist Christianity is coming to Caner's defense (Geisler leading the charge). They are now the power behind Caner's throne (small "t").


----------



## torstar (Jun 30, 2010)

Herald said:


> torstar said:
> 
> 
> > I thought he was Todd Bentley in a suit for the 7 or 8 highly dramatic clips of his preaching that I saw. Didn't see anything about conviction of sin, repentance, trust in Jesus and a walk in piety at all. Just looked like a rock and roll circus fiasco.
> ...


 

Live by theatrics and exaggeration, die by them.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jun 30, 2010)

tcalbrecht said:


> PuritanCovenanter said:
> 
> 
> > tcalbrecht said:
> ...


 
Well, I think I was wrong concerning the Southern Baptist Convention, Liberty University, and Thomas Road Baptist Church. I was taking my information from wikipedia and it evidently is not correct. 



> Thomas Road Baptist Church - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Pastor Schoen provided me with this information. 

Southern Baptist Convention - Colleges and Universities


> The Southern Baptist Convention lists the following colleges and universities as a service to Southern Baptists and the Baptist state conventions with which it maintains a cooperative relationship. With the exception of the five theological colleges associated with our SBC seminaries, the Southern Baptist Convention has no direct connection with any of these institutions. It provides no funding. It elects no trustees. Each institution is related to one of our partnering Baptist state conventions.


----------



## JasonGoodwin (Jun 30, 2010)

tcalbrecht said:


> Bill,
> 
> I wasn't suggesting that LU was pro-Calvinist. But it's my impression that Caner is the anomaly, a useful pawn of the anti-Reformed forces in the SBC. But if LU were rabidly anti- they could not afford to have someone like Dr. Schultz as a dean, in my opinion.



If I recall correctly, there are some profs at LU who lean toward being Reformed, if they are not outright Reformed. However, I think they are under different disciplines other than theological, meaning, that they might be IT profs or some other thing they specialize in that is in no way connected to the seminary.


----------



## JasonGoodwin (Jun 30, 2010)

Herald said:


> I've been following the whole Ergun Caner debacle through the lens of James White. I'm now of the opinion that Liberty University's sin is far greater than Ergun Caner. Liberty could have reigned him in. They could have put an end to his using the clout and credibility of his seminary position. Instead they gave Caner a slap on the wrist. The rest of fundamentalist Christianity is coming to Caner's defense (*Geisler leading the charge*). They are now the power behind Caner's throne (small "t").



Bill, here's the link to prove your point. Unfortunately, some of the comments left on there demonstrate that they will support, for lack of a better term, a "cult of personality" and not use sound judgment nor discernment.

As for what Liberty decided to do, this is just utterly tragic. I take no joy in this whatsoever.


----------



## Justin Williams (Jul 1, 2010)

tcalbrecht said:


> Bill,
> 
> I wasn't suggesting that LU was pro-Calvinist. But it's my impression that Caner is the anomaly, a useful pawn of the anti-Reformed forces in the SBC. But if LU were rabidly anti- they could not afford to have someone like Dr. Schultz as a dean, in my opinion.


 
I had the pleasure of taking one of Dr. Schultz's history courses my senior year (great teacher; absolutely loves history). I have to say that the reason he is allowed to be dean is because he is the dean of the College of Arts and Sciences where theological beliefs have no influence. I highly doubt that someone of Dr. Schultz's theological leaning would ever have the opportunity to chair any area within the religion department or seminary. 

By the way, I have a nice graduation picture on my mantle of Dr. Schultz handing me my bachelor's degree in 2006. 

Justin
LU Alum (who refuses to give a penny to his alma mater until they stop building idiotic things like the Snowflex and improves the library and language departments)


----------



## Ivan (Jul 1, 2010)

Liberty Mountain Snowflex Centre

Wow!


----------



## Grimmson (Jul 1, 2010)

For those of you who want a brief run down of the event in question regarding Caner, I would suggest the following link to a Washington Post article:

Liberty U. removing Ergun Caner as seminary dean over contradictory statements


----------



## Andres (Jul 1, 2010)

Ivan said:


> Liberty Mountain Snowflex Centre
> 
> Wow!


 
They're open on the sabbath too.


----------



## TxSpurgeon (Jul 1, 2010)

Joshua said:


> What will be most devastating about all of this is not Caner's _*lies*_, but the refusal of professing Christian "leaders" to call him to repentance (in course of discipline by his church, ideally) for his _*lies*_ instead of glossing over them. Any person with any innate sense of morality (and every man born to woman has it written on his heart) can smell the deception a mile away. How telling it must be that not only have those in authority over Caner taken too long to address the matter, but they have essentially attempted to sweep it under the proverbial rug.



I agree completely. That is a testament to the shallowness of many churches within the SBC. One of the many reasons I left. Church discipline is un-heard of in many of them. Plus, politics are the order of the day in the SBC. Ergun Caner has always come off as a blow hard to me. Although I don't agree with his theology, I hope he repents. Praise to God, that He is leading me down a reformed path!


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Jul 1, 2010)

TxSpurgeon said:


> I agree completely. That is a testament to the shallowness of many churches within the SBC. One of the many reasons I left. Church discipline is un-heard of in many of them. Plus, politics are the order of the day in the SBC. Ergun Caner has always come off as a blow hard to me. Although I don't agree with his theology, I hope he repents. Praise to God, that He is leading me down a reformed path!


 
Again, let's be clear, Liberty University is NOT a institution of the SBC. So no agency of the SBC had anything to do with puttin' Caner in office or takin' him out. I'm one of the SBC's toughest critics, but lets give credit where credit is due.


----------



## Grimmson (Jul 1, 2010)

C. M. Sheffield said:


> TxSpurgeon said:
> 
> 
> > I agree completely. That is a testament to the shallowness of many churches within the SBC. One of the many reasons I left. Church discipline is un-heard of in many of them. Plus, politics are the order of the day in the SBC. Ergun Caner has always come off as a blow hard to me. Although I don't agree with his theology, I hope he repents. Praise to God, that He is leading me down a reformed path!
> ...


 
First of all let us recognize that even though Liberty University is not an SBC intuition, it is still affiliated with the SBC by being “in partnership with the Southern Baptist Conservatives of Virginia” (see Southern Baptist Convention - Colleges and Universities and Liberty University now linked to SBC ). Even though it is true that Caner was not given the position by an agency of the SBC, he was promoted there through the influence and friendly relations with high ranking leaders of the SBC. So like it or not, the controversy does directly affect the SBC because of that promoted influence. Liberty faculty (including trusties), some of which are involved with the SBC, did officially place him into and out of Caner’s position as president, but one cannot deny the lack of involvement publicly with Thomas Road Baptist Church that has ties to Liberty and is officially an SBC church. Thomas Road has not given any public statement of disciple, which I think is important for three reasons:

1) He lied in front of the pulpit publicly in SBC churches and there video present to prove that.
2) It has turned into a national public scandal giving a black eye to the SBC and Liberty University because of their promotions of Caner. 
3) As Christians we should be more concerned with the truth and the truthfulness of our leaders then the politics of protecting big named people to protect our own identity. By doing so it will backfire against us and show there no difference between the church and the world and reinforce to the world that all the church wants is money and political power.

Which is why I call not only Caner to repentance, but also the leaders who support Caner publicly to repentance. If no discipline is willing to be given by the church (his church- Thomas Road Baptist Church), the Southern Baptist Conservatives of Virgina as an association, and the SBC leadership then I would question not only the legitimacy of his church as a true church but also the associations that allow and promote him to speak in SBC churches. Therefore placing into question the legitimate existence of the SBC. If the SBC cannot be trusted with the truth for the protection of the people of God then how can we trust them to propagate the Gospel here in the U.S. and abroad? The double standard regarding the truth should never be allowed for any reason for any denomination. I would be saying the same thing if it was a PCA, PCUSA, or even URC. Therefore, pressure from within must be placed on Thomas Road to do something and for a retraction on that SBC Today article that exonerated him. So that the world can see that we as Christians stand for the truth in secret and in public. 

I am sorry I keep beating that horse.  

The SBC!


----------



## Damon Rambo (Jul 1, 2010)

Herald said:


> Ergun Caner is definitely a rabid anti-Calvinist. Liberty is of the same genre as the bible college I first attended - Word of Life Bible Institute in Pottersville, NY. Word of Life was decidedly anti-Calvinist. In fact, their catalog stated that if you hold to Calvinism, Reformed, or "Replacement" theology you would be best served by not applying for admission. Calvinists were regarded, as at best, misguided and, at worse, as heretics. John MacArthur was one of the most highly respected adjunct faculty members at Word of Life, but when he came out with the Gospel According to Jesus in 1989, that all changed. The Lordship Salvation position of John MacArthur caused him to be blacklisted at Word of Life. In fact, I attended the last appearance by John MacArthur at Word of Life just before the publication of his book. I can only imagine the fundamentalist reaction when MacArthur clearly articulated that he was a Calvinist.


 
This is simply not true. Liberty is far from "Anti Calvinist." I am currently a student there, and thus far, I have taken classes from two very devout five pointers, and have met many, many "reformed" students. I have gotten into some good debates with some non-reformed students...but I have gotten just as many "amens." As far as the "Lordship" debate, all of Liberty's faculty, are required to reject "Free Grace" (or, "cheap grace") theology in order to teach there (the statement of faith rejects it), and Macarthur has been cited multiple times. One of the professors that I had was even an adjunct from the Master's Seminary.

FYI, One of Liberty's professors even appear on the "Amazing Grace" (History and Theology of Calvinism..)...attacking Arminian beliefs.

Liberty is very open, to all within historic orthodoxy. No one is attacked for there beliefs.


----------



## Grimmson (Jul 1, 2010)

Damon Rambo said:


> Herald said:
> 
> 
> > Ergun Caner is definitely a rabid anti-Calvinist. Liberty is of the same genre as the bible college I first attended - Word of Life Bible Institute in Pottersville, NY. Word of Life was decidedly anti-Calvinist. In fact, their catalog stated that if you hold to Calvinism, Reformed, or "Replacement" theology you would be best served by not applying for admission. Calvinists were regarded, as at best, misguided and, at worse, as heretics. John MacArthur was one of the most highly respected adjunct faculty members at Word of Life, but when he came out with the Gospel According to Jesus in 1989, that all changed. The Lordship Salvation position of John MacArthur caused him to be blacklisted at Word of Life. In fact, I attended the last appearance by John MacArthur at Word of Life just before the publication of his book. I can only imagine the fundamentalist reaction when MacArthur clearly articulated that he was a Calvinist.
> ...



Jerry Falwell gives the requirements of beliefs for Liberty and calls Calvinism heresy:
YouTube - Jerry Falwell Identifies Calvinism as Heresy

Liberty may not be anti-calvinism school now, but Caner sure is based on at least one sermon of his I heard from Thomas Road, I looked for it in my collection of sermons on another computer but I am sorry I cannot find it to show you. When Jerry Falwell was in charge, it seemed clear to me that he was not willing to promote or allow for Calvinistic teaching at his university. It may have changed, but I would like to see something official that supports that change and when that change took place.


----------



## torstar (Jul 1, 2010)

Grimmson said:


> Damon Rambo said:
> 
> 
> > Herald said:
> ...


----------



## Damon Rambo (Jul 1, 2010)

Grimmson said:


> Damon Rambo said:
> 
> 
> > Herald said:
> ...


 
#1 Jerry Falwell has not determined what the Seminary would teach, or allow, for a long, long time (even before he died). Liberty, like other institutions, has a board that it is run by.

#2 Liberty has never "officially" denied admission to Calvinist students, nor "officially" denied jobs to Calvinist professors. So why would they "officially" need to change a policy, which never existed?

#3 Regardless of Ergun's and Falwell's rants (yes, they are rants) they do not speak on behalf of the Seminary. Liberty's policies are set by the board of directors.

#4 Right now, in one of my classes, there are two Presbyterian students, a whole bunch of various Baptists, a couple of Charismatics, and a couple of non-denoms. Anyone that affirms basic, historically orthodox Christianity, is welcome. And as far as I am concerned, that is great!


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jul 1, 2010)

Damon Rambo said:


> #3 Regardless of Ergun's and Falwell's rants (yes, they are rants) they do not speak on behalf of the Seminary. Liberty's policies are set by the board of directors.



Just to be honest with you Damon, I find this statement to be rather incredible and in denial of the truth considering who these two men are. One is the founder and the other a past President. You can't tell me they have never spoken on behalf of the School or related their speech as representative of the policies they wanted to enforce. 

Of course they would allow other denominations to come and learn. I imagine most Seminaries and Bible Colleges accept students without prior doctrinal prerequisites. Of course your point 4 has no bearing on this argument. Especially if you consider the ecclesiology of some of the people you refer to and their understanding of who is a member in the New Testament Church. Just because there are Reformed folk there does not give credence that they accept their teaching in scripture. Remember, Liberty is a credo only school with a congregational church with only deacons and Pastors. They oppose other reformed stuff also. Heck I would even bet there are non Christians attending along with a few others who hold to cultic beliefs. Those people are there to gain an education. 

Just a question.... Can you tell me what the formal doctrinal stance is for Liberty as set up by the board of directors? I don't know who is on the board and I really don't have a dog in this fight. But I am sure it is mostly a dispensationalist teaching and is opposed to reformed hermeneutics. I have also heard there are good men teaching there. I went to a Bible College that had many different strands of teachers. But that College had a doctrinal position. 

I have some friends who graduated from Liberty. They are anti-Calvinistic. They are mostly what some refer to as 3.5 Calvinists. That really means they semi-pelagians as was Jacob Arminius.


----------



## Grimmson (Jul 1, 2010)

Damon Rambo said:


> #1 Jerry Falwell has not determined what the Seminary would teach, or allow, for a long, long time (even before he died). Liberty, like other institutions, has a board that it is run by.
> 
> #2 Liberty has never "officially" denied admission to Calvinist students, nor "officially" denied jobs to Calvinist professors. So why would they "officially" need to change a policy, which never existed?
> 
> ...


 
Response to number 1: I would suggest reading Jerry Falwell’s 10 Distinctives on the Liberty University website, which he wrote as the founder of Liberty. Here you see the prominence of dispensational pre-millennialism to be taught, which he was before he died, anti-alcohol position, which he was also, and focus on political conservatism (also mentioned at the statement purpose that approved by the board of trustees- https://www.liberty.edu/index.cfm?PID=6899 in 2006). These are all things reflected by Jerry Falwell that Liberty is bounded too. If Liberty wasn’t bounded to it then it shouldn’t be on their website as a promotion of the school ( see https://www.liberty.edu/index.cfm?PID=6909 for the 10 Distinctives). 

If Jerry Falwell ( I know he is dead) thinks a particular doctrine is heresy, do you really think he would allow for it to be taught at an intuition that he founded? Particularly when you see his ideals spread across not only what I just mentioned, but also in Liberty’s doctrinal statement (https://www.liberty.edu/index.cfm?PID=6907 ). I would make an argument for no. This leads to me respond to your third point. The clip that I showed at Youtube shows him speaking on some level as a representative of a seminary. To my knowledge he never retracted his thoughts of Calvinism as heresy. And from what I hear from past grads from Liberty, there isn’t really a strong reformed presence of the doctrines of grace or reformed theology being taught. 

Like it or not, it is a president’s job to speak on behalf of the university that they are president of. And what Caner says and contributes to the university in his speeches and addresses reflects on the intuition that he is a part of. It is not something that he can just turn off whenever he likes, especially when he mentions the university by name in that speech or address. If he is not representing Liberty and what they stand for as an intuition then Liberty must remove him as a figure head, a high representative, of the university. 

Now to point 2: Of course he wouldn’t deny a Calvinist student at the seminary. For one, their means of income. Secondly, as long as they follow their rules of the university then there will not be much of the way of contention, even though there may be points in the lecture or chapel times they may disagree with the preacher or lecture. The acceptance of Calvinists as students are not much of an issue. 

Dr. Schulz, who was in the Amazing Grace video, was not hired to teach reformed theology in 2002, but instead history. His expertise is in American History, and not so much theology. The question isn’t whether or not a Calvinist is hired to teach, but is he hired to teach reformed theology. And I do not see that really being a major focus of Liberty’s discussion under their curriculum. Of course students are going to need some level of reformed theology to be able to develop the background of the historical development of the puritans here in the U.S., but am sure that background overview is limited. I know there a 3 credit history of the reformation class that can serve this period, but before I pass this off as a completely positive, one must consider who teaching the class and their level of historical understanding of the reformation. He did served as chair for a while, but what was that chair in? History, not theology. I still stand by my position that they would not hire someone like Renihan or Tom Ascol, because of their Calvinistic position. The policy may not be officially on paper, but that will not stop whoever in charge, such as the board or a president, to do what is in relation to their conviction of what should be taught. And if they, regarding the board, think Calvinism is a heresy like Caner and Jerry Falwell, then Calvinistic teaching will be limited to a minimum and probably poisoned like Caner attempted to do prior to the attempted debate with Tom Ascol and James White at Liberty. Which may I add did not take place because Caner wanted to change some terms/rules of the debate a couple weeks prior to the debate after both parties previously agreed to the terms of the debate well in advance. 

No offensive, but I do have my doubts about the historical orthodox Christianity being completely welcomed. If that was to be the case then they would move away from the dispensational position that they hold officially, they would be more welcoming of the doctrines of reformed theology and have it be represented properly by their Apologist, Dr. Caner himself who was also the president, and give a proper view of the Anabaptist view of scripture (instead of just peaking the pacifistic groups that they liked) in relation to the classical reformed position of sola scriptura. Now that I think about it, I don’t think any of their faculty has a patristic background, but I can be wrong about that. 

If this thread turning more into a discussion of Liberty, perhaps we should start a new thread. I think I said all that I know on Liberty and need to say. Then again I can be wrong there.


----------



## Ivan (Jul 1, 2010)

Grimmson said:


> C. M. Sheffield said:
> 
> 
> > TxSpurgeon said:
> ...


 
So you are questioning the legitimate existence of any Southern Baptist church? Are you questioning the legitimate existence of my church? Are you questioning the legitimate existence of my ministry?


----------



## Damon Rambo (Jul 2, 2010)

Grimmson said:


> Damon Rambo said:
> 
> 
> > #1 Jerry Falwell has not determined what the Seminary would teach, or allow, for a long, long time (even before he died). Liberty, like other institutions, has a board that it is run by.
> ...


 
O.K.

First, I am a student there. How you "feel" or what you "think" does not matter, brother. I have first hand experience. There are Calvinist professors (at least, of the Baptist variety, of which I am one as well) who are teaching theology, church history, etc., in the Seminary itself...not just in secular studies. 

Second, when I use the word "reformed" in reference to Liberty's toleration, and employment of professors, I am of course speaking in terms of Reformed Baptists/ Soteriologically reformed. Personally, I am a very outspoken Historical Premillenialist. I have never had a problem. Yes, Liberty is dispensational, but so are several institutions, which are soteriologically reformed (which, of course, is the primary point of this thread, since Caner and Falwell primarily attack the doctrines of Limited Atonement, and Unconditional Election). 

So, yes they are pre-millennial...but so is the Masters Seminary, Dallas Theological Seminary, and a lot of other good schools. This does not mean they shun other groups. I have criticized in my work there, both Arminian Soteriology, as well as Dispensational Eschatology, both in formal writings, and in open debate, and have consistently received high marks, and "Great job."


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jul 2, 2010)

Ivan said:


> Grimmson said:
> 
> 
> > C. M. Sheffield said:
> ...


 
I don't think anyone made a personal attack here. Some SBC churches have ended up out of bounds as have in Presbyterian Churches also. I do think that there is a place where we do finally find that a Church is not an Ecclesia of the Lord. I even think that many ministers will acknowledge that. Sometimes the Lord shuts things down and resurrects them in other places. I don't know why he let Ephesus fall. It is no longer a Church.

I do know the gates of Hell will not prevail. Sometimes we just need see both sides.

I want to input this. I believed Ergun Caner Lied. To bad. He was the President of Liberty. I think they should own up to it. He has probably been a gracious guy because he knows he is a sinner. I would fear of standing in judgment if I were him. He has brought some disrespect to the faith. Too Bad. Others have also. 

Should he be fired? I am not the judge but he is not a man who has fulfilled scriptural requirements for an Elder in my understanding of the question. He is not a man above reproach. He should just step down on his own if he wanted to really repent. He should also confess. His lies are published and the inconsistencies are way overboard. That is what makes them lies. 

So it would be wonderful if Caner were to repent and start over graciously. He can still have a ministry if he does this. Just my humble opinion. Maybe I am wrong.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jul 2, 2010)

Let me put it in another light. When a Jehovah's Witness goes about knocking on doors propagating things that aren't truth, even if he doesn't believe they are lies, ARE THEY STILL LIES? The answer is yes, he has a lying spirit. The one thing up on a Jehovah's Witness that Ergun Caner doesn't have is that they are receiving their facts maybe 3rd hand. His are suppose to be First hand.


----------



## Ivan (Jul 2, 2010)

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Ivan said:
> 
> 
> > Grimmson said:
> ...


 
I wish to hear a response from Mr. Jolley.


----------



## Grimmson (Jul 2, 2010)

Ivan said:


> PuritanCovenanter said:
> 
> 
> > Ivan said:
> ...


 
I do not question your church if they are willing to practice discipline on members when needed and that includes bar some from the Lord ’s Supper temporarily if needed. I see church discipline as a mark of a true church. I do not question the legitimacy of your ministry either. Your church is not the state association or the convention, even though they may be a member of them. If all the Southern Baptist do and promote collectively are things like the purpose driven life, fads of church growth, social and political issues, poor Lifeway Research studies, increase of reported baptismal numbers by multiple rebaptisms in the same church or association; and the members of their congregations of twenty plus years cannot give you the Decalogue, The Lord’s Prayer, or most importantly the Gospel itself, but instead can name the various programs of the church and the biggest cultural concern of the day then I do question the job that we as the association and convention are doing in creating disciples and fulfilling the Great Commission. 

If we allow our leaders no accountable, then what good is the association or church? The purpose of the association is suppose to strengthen and assist each other as Baptist in the calling and purpose of God in the Gospel. We are suppose to be a people who value the truth, but instead I have seen lies covered up and am not just talking about the Caner controversy. I have seen things on smaller scales and prefer not to discuss here. If our pursuits are not towards honesty and integrity then what value is our witness to a Mormon, Buddhist, Roman Catholic, or Muslim when we proclaim the truth of the Gospel? Why should they believe us if were unwilling to live what we preach in our churches? Why call such to repentance if were not calling those that have sinned against and who are in the church? What fellowship does light have with darkness? 

It is one thing if someone makes a simple mistake, but if that mistake results in the increase of more lies that you then profit from you have not only broken the ninth commandment, but also the eighth because you have stolen from the people of God who have sacrificed their time and their money for the pursuit of the work of God, the seventh because you have committed adultery against your Lord and Savior, the sixth because you show hate for the truth and not love to your sacrificial brothers and sisters who are giving what they can to aid you with the mission one claims to be on. And by allowing for created factions based on false information and old boys club pact friendships that results into more pain to the body of Christ. 

Paul was able to put Peter to task concerning the Judaizers, why cannot one pastor or a group of pastors of equal footing do the same in the association for conduct unfitting of a minister of God? I stand by the statement that the day a church refuses to do discipline within their body for the sake of the gospel and the day that a denomination or association favors actively the hiding of their own sins, covering it up for their own profit and pride, then the church is lacking in the love of Christ and that of the brethren and is not a true church of God. If it is acting not like a true church of God we should call them to repentance and if they do not then have nothing to do with them. 

I do not want to cause trouble in my association or church, but it is so frustrating when you have seen and heard all I have seen and heard. Primarily, a low view of the church that Christ has died for; and I can give many examples of this to the doctrine of grace to the necessity of Sunday collective corporate worship for the church to God. 

I am not attacking faithful ministers within the SBC, but if we have serious issues with what we been seeing then we should forgo the church politics and go straight to the heart of the issues. No joking or playing around, but a serious discussion and plan on what to do; followed then by action. We divide over the most silliest things, but things such as well-known ministers telling one story at many pulpits and a different truthful story to a press agency like the Associated Press is not a silly thing. If we refuse to voice our concerns collectively then I think were part of the problem. If we allow for the cover up to blow over then we just aided the cover up and have given a false testimony of Christ to the world and to the faithful members under our care. I am not saying we should poison our members against other churches, but our churches should not be hearing one story from us and then another on the Convention website. We should all be giving the same story of the facts.

There a reason why I have “may change” in my signature. I have not been happy with the practices of the SBC for quite a while now. If it wasn’t for a few reformed people in the SBC, like the Founders, and in my church I would have left a long time ago and worshiped in a Presbyterian church, even though I would prefer not to, no offense to my paedobaptists brethren ( who may I add am willing to take communion with and do). 

I can go on for a while. I apologize if I upset some people on here, such was not my purpose. I do wish and pray that you can understand what I am trying to say.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jul 2, 2010)

This is going to stop. 

This is a thread about Ergun Caner. Not the SBC. I have many problems with the SBC. I have been an SBC member. No Discipline, No Accountability, and NO STANDARD seems to the principle in some SBC and other Churches. I have seen it in a lot of places. I have seen Discipline over exercised also. But they (the SBC) are the worlds largest missions organization. Even Billy Graham has ended up in the woods and off the road. So it isn't a thing that we shouldn't understand. 

No one here is calling another's ordination into a rebuttal except maybe Ergun Caner's. If someone is ordained in a defunct organization that is one thing. Pastor Shoen is not. So we would be better to call the truce. 

This is about Ergun Caner. IT IS Not About Ivan or any other SBC or IFB minster.


----------

