Dissing Dr. Ergun Caner: The Monotonous Mission of Tom Ascol and James White

\ Ergun Caner presently is President and Dean of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary and serves also as Professor of Theology and Church History and Apologetics, having been at Liberty since 2003 (//link).  Earlier he taught at The Criswell College as well as served as pastor.  Caner holds three master’s degrees (MA, The Criswell College, MDiv & MTh from Southeastern Baptists Theological Seminary) and a doctor of theology from University of South Africa

I also mention Dr. Caner’s special interests lie in apologetics with a special love for sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ to Muslims since Dr. Caner’s upbringing was Muslim.  Born in Sweden, raised as a Turk, and hence, faithfully adhering to Islam as he’d been taught by his father, it was not until he was a teenager he came to trust Christ as his Savior.  Dr. Caner has written several books on Islamic faith and is widely recognized as an evangelical authority on the subject (//link). Well, I should say, recognized as an authority by many leaders in Christian circles and even by some in the mainstream media. But, of course, not by all, which is the exact reason for this post.

Particularly, two influential blogging Calvinists appear to have made it a life-mission to smear Ergun Caner’s life and ministry in the mud-hole of deception:  Tom Ascol,  Southern Baptist pastor and Executive Director of Founders Ministries, and James White, Primitive Baptist preacher and Reformed Baptist apologist from Phoenix, Az.

Background

In order to understand some of Ascol and White’s obsession with Caner, we must go back to 2006.  It was then that a debate was planned at Liberty University between James White and Tom Ascol on one side and Ergun Caner and his brother Dr. Emir Caner, then Dean of Southwestern College of the BIble (a school of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary) on the other.  Since, Dr. Emir Caner has moved to Georgia as President of Truett-McConnell College (//link). 

An intense exchange between them took place on Ascol’s blog, an exchange which did not fare well for the proposed debate.  In fact, Ascol’s blog thread—along with White’s questionable insistence that all correspondence between the Caners and himself be publicly posted on his blog—probably remain key components in the debate not coming to fruition. Ascol and White eventually backed out but insisted it was because the Caners ruthlessly sabotaged the process (at least that’s how I see it). 

From 2006 until now, there has been non-stop badgering of Ergun Caner, not so much on Ascol’s behalf—at least directly—but definitively by White against Caner, specifically charging Caner with cowardice for not debating him.  I challenge the reader to do a google on White’s site if you’d care to see just how often White dissed Dr. Caner for not debating him.  As a matter of fact, you’ll also experience White’s perpetual dissing of countless others for not “standing up” in “open debate” and “cross-examination.”   

Personally, I get the sense that if James White were alive during the days of James Arminius, that Arminianism would not exist today because James White would have so annihilated Arminius in open debate, that Arminius would have embarrassingly bowed out of his proposed reform.  At least that’s the sense I get when I read White boast of his many rhetorical victories and the cowards who will not face him in open exchange (more on White later).

Tom Ascol's Troubling Indictment of Ergun Caner

Let’s consider Ascol’s troubling words concerning Ergun Caner just last week. I was made aware of Ascol's horrible words by Pastor Tim Rogers (//link).  Southern Baptists are thankful for Tim's courage to post this information.  Founders Ministries has, since 1982, attempted to overlay, upon the Southern Baptist Convention, a strict, non-negotiable five-point Calvinism.  Tom Ascol has led the charge.

Admittedly, Ascol has attempted to cool the exchanges about his strict Calvinism being imposed church by church on the Southern Baptist Convention.  Nonetheless, he recorded one of the most despicable statements I have read on the internet about another brother.  And let me tell, you:  I’ve read some nasty stuff.  Ascol’s may be the most personally damaging I’ve read.

  Below is from Tom Ascol’s Facebook (via Twitter). 

Note what Dr. Ascol, who wants to work toward peace and “building bridges” in our convention, has written about Ergun Caner:

Tom Ascol reading exposes on "fake former Muslims;" fascinating...and sad

Thu at 9:05am via Tweeter

And, in response to some friends wanting to know about whom Ascol was reading, one of whom inquired about a book which exposed a “fake former Muslim turned sarcastic seminary presidents apologists,” Ascol responded:

“Here is an article I read, with lots of links: http://mmmirele.blogspot.com/2009/07/ergun-mehmet-caner-ba-ma-mdiv-thm-dmin.html And here is James White's response to some baseless charges, that expose a "former Muslim" as well: http://aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=3765”

So let me get this straight: Tom Ascol is promoting the reading of an Islamic Attack site as proof Ergun Caner is a “fake Muslim”?  With no other inquiry whatsoever, with no attempt to gather any reasonable data, and with the life, integrity, and career of this young theological dean in the balance, Ascol cites the attack website as a “fascinating...and sad” expose that Ergun Caner’s life and ministry is a fraud?  Has Ascol never read where our Lord said to pray even for one’s enemies, not pound them into the dirt?

James White's Non-Stop Badgering of Dr. Ergun Caner

The other link Ascol gives is his good buddy, James White.  And, what evidence does the famed, self-described fearless apologist offer as clear, objective proof Dr. Caner is a "fake Muslim? Why, he gives the same type of evidence Ascol gave—the Muslim attack sites.

This may be one of the lowest, most outrageous incidents yet illustrating the viciousness of some strict Calvinists toward non-Calvinist brothers.

Let’s consider:

James White and His Critics 

Suppose someone wanted to criticize James White on a particular point.  For example, let’s say someone wanted to question the authenticity of James White’s so-called “academic” doctoral” degree (And, understand:  it perhaps needs to be questioned if White is going to insist on gloating about all his academic accomplishments).  So, if one wanted to question his doctoral degree’s worth, perhaps we could link to this , this ,  this, and this. I mean, why not?  White seems to have no reservation in citing Muslim hate sites as evidence to tarnish Caner, sites known to hate him.  And, surely none of the sites above could be considered that bad, could they?

Also, we could tap sites that have the same value in posting other people’s emails, a practice White regularly employs.  Indeed we easily found a site which likes to post White’s emails, some emails of which he failed to post on his own site.  Perhaps he got spanked a little too hard to post all the rebuttals his critics offered.  Whatever the case, from my reading, James White may be the whiniest kid on the block in many of the exchanges. The reader can be the judge (//link). 

Gosh, we could even get pictures of his seminary where he got his “academic” doctoral degree (hardly the kind of seminary most of the readers attended, however)—a tiny office the size of a dorm room.  Note on this same set of pictures posted by another critic of James White, White complains that the critic used Mormons as sources for the picture evidence (//link)  The irony is hilarious!  White does not appreciate using attack sources against him anymore than Caner appreciated White using attack sources.  Fair is fair, DR White! 

In attempting to put a critic in his place for not consulting him before posting some challenges to his “academic” doctoral degree, White had the audacity to whine: “Generally, most folks take the time to make sure of their facts before attacking someone's work, that's all. Again, possibly I follow a code of behavior that is old and passe? I mean, my e-mail address was well known to you. It would have been fairly easy, if, of course, you wanted the "whole story" (//link).

Hence, James White (and Tom Ascol)  may trample Caner in the mud by allegedly “exposing” him as a “fake Muslim” using an Islamic hate/attack site, but when a Mormon educator challenges the authenticity of White’s “academic” doctoral degree, White whines about breaking a “code of behavior.”     

Also, we could link to evidence which suggests James White was listed  in the handbook of the seminary from which he graduated (CES) as faculty holding an academic doctorate before he actually got the “academic” doctorate! (//link).  Could such a listing, if true, be viewed as fraud?  I don’t know.  I’d have to think about that before I made the accusation. One thing is for sure:  James White is pretty touchy about calling him “Dr.” White (//link).

In fact, White routinely puts people in their respectful place who question him. Usually it's down at least a few notches lower than he is.  Contrasting the notorious Tex Marrs as being under the spiritual authority of no one, White reminds his readers:

"He [Tex Marrs] is a loner, not under the authority of a local church or elders, unaccountable to God-ordained authority. As for me (and the question is honestly asked, in light of what I just said), I am a member of the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church, under the authority of the eldership of that local assembly" (//link)

Interesting Elder White should bring that up. Surf over to White's church's eldership and one finds just what "under the authority of the eldership" means to James White.  The eldership appears to be a board of two:  James White and the pastor (//link).  With an arrangement like that, I can see how James White is definitively placed "under authority" of the "God-ordained" eldership of "that local assembly" alright. What do you think?

In addition, this whole idea of receiving a master of theology degree for writing a book is fascinating (//link).  I have written a book.  Could I get a degree for my writing it? 

Even more, supposedly White’s doctoral dissertation was also another book—The Forgotten Trinity. Dr. Caner surely took the wrong route.  He’s written I think close to twenty books, which apparently equals, in White’s educational tract, a whopping 20 “academic” degrees!

Not only so, apparently White’s “academic” doctorate is far superior to standard academic doctoral degrees.  At least that’s what I hear him arguing. Though it is a bit confusing attempting to wade through all the verbiage, the way I understand it is, James White’s book, The King James Only Controversy, was not written as a popularized version of his master of theology thesis—a common phenomenon in academic circles—rather The King James Only Controversy was his master of theology thesis. In other words, for writing the book, White received his master of theology degree which, of course, is highly uncommon in academic circles. 

But to hear White explain it, the uncommon practice of receiving a degree based on writing a book is far superior to the way virtually the entire academic world views it now. 

His reasoning? 

Since common academic practice only allows for perhaps “a half dozen” people to critically evaluate one's thesis, White contrasts such a woefully inadequate method by writing, “My Th.M. thesis has been read by multiplied thousands…” (//link).  Really?  The King James Only Controversy has been read by multiplied thousands?

I know I’m a fish out of water except down home on the country farm, but that sounds pretty amazing to me—multiplied thousands.  Multiplied thousands have read James White’s book, The King James Only Controversy (his master of theology thesis)?

Grab and pencil and do some scribbling: 

Even though White said multiplied thousands (plural), I want to be conservative.  So let’s do some figuring:  1,000 x 1,000 = 1,000,000. Has White’s The KJO Controversy sold a mil? I don't know. The first copyright was 1995. That's 15 years ago. So, 1,000,000 / 15 = 66,666 (ouch!) copies on average per year. Or, 66,666 / 365 = 182.6 copies sold per day, every day since 1995.  I’d say White’s theory, if true, is superior!

But wait!

White did not mean multiplied thousands had bought his thesis but explicitly stated multiplied thousands had read his thesis. O.K. Fine. How does White know multiplied thousands (at least one million people) have read his thesis since 1995?  Unless I am mistaken, there appears a wee bit of boastful stretching taking place here concerning the popularity of White’s thesis.  Is James White, therefore, a fraud?  I don’t know.  I’d have to think long and hard before I made an accusation like that. 

And, unfortunately for James White, we could read the absolute tail-paddling he received when he attempted to defend his “academic” degree (//link).  One has to laugh when he or she reads the fearless, unflinching warrior from Geneva getting the intellectual fool beat out of him by a Mormon educator (//link).  White, in fact, tucked his tail, and ran for cover, citing his well worn mantra in the apologetic world, that if, after reading all his books (or in some cases, his master and doctoral theses), listening to all his dozens of debates, and engaging his scholarly, original contributions to Christianity, “you wish to engage in ‘genuine dialogue,’ please let me know” (//link, link, link).

Enough on White’s problems concerning his “academic” doctoral degree. Let’s briefly (promise!) consider something else.

Since James White insists on calling Ergun Caner coward for not debating him, what does that make White when he refuses to debate somebody?  Apparently, after agreeing to debate a Muslim critic, James White backed out.  We know this is so because the Muslim says so himself on his website!

You see, according to White’s “code of behavior,” there’s no reason to suspect Muslim attack sites’ objectivity, and therefore “evidence” cannot be disregarded on that basis.  At least, that was his reasoning when he “exposed” Dr. Caner as a “fake Muslim” using a source which carries demonstrable hate for Dr. Caner. Hence, the reader should read carefully how “Dr.” White backed out of a debate with a Muslim apologist:

“Oh! So what is this? Now... I’m invited to call in the show? But James White, this is not what you conveyed to me. You made is crystal clear to your viewers who requested that you debate me that you will NOT debate me. So when your own viewers (not me) call you a coward and a phoney, what else are they suppose to think?… I then suggested some kind of informal debate, and James White made it clear, NO. I then suggested a casual discussion, with just a few ground rules, and then James White decided that I needed to be put in my place” (//link).

“Dr.” White insists Dr. Ergun Caner is a coward because he refuses to debate him.  What does that make White for refusing to debate this sincere Muslim apologist? 

Even more, read carefully how the Muslim apologist felt treated by “Dr.” White—surely less than a human being.  According to the authoritative report from this Muslim website, James White’s words are shocking and, if I may add, horribly sub-Christian:

‘You see Nadir, you are not up to par with me, for I am superior, Because you are not up to par with me, you are just like a regular Joe Shmoe caller who calls in AND THAT IS HOW YOU WILL BE TREATED. Joe Shmoes DO NOT get to establish any ground rules. NONE. Get it?  But no worries, I’ll be equitable with you….But Nadir, if you do decide to call, keep one thing in mind: “You are inviting yourself on my show”’ (//link)

One is silenced when reading the utter display of treating another human being with such carnal bloat.  Assuming, of course, White said the words to the Muslim apologist.  Nevertheless, why would anyone doubt the Muslim apologist’s words?

Finally, everyone knows James White will not debate Bob Ross (//link).  Does that make White a coward?  Well, as we’ve seen above, it may make others cowards but not James White.  He gets around it easily enough with Mr. Ross.  In fact, White dismisses Mr. Ross as a “marked man.”  In other words, the reason for no debate is Ross’s alleged personal issue rather than White’s cowardice. As we say in West Georgia, how marvelously peachy!

In conclusion, I’m quite sure James White stands with loaded guns, ready to pop off his six-shooter toward the sources I gave, arguing much of it cannot be trusted. Yet we must, in White and Ascol’s world, recall the sources above stand as fully objective sources to employ.  Hence, as we say on the old farm, that pig won’t slop. 

If the sources I offered do not demonstrate White either/both a coward and/or lacking a “real” doctoral degree, then why would Ascol and White's attempt to demonstrate Ergun Caner a fraud from sources hardly considered objectively conclusive count for anything?

Conclusion

Here’s what I think ought to happen:

A) Tom Ascol owes Dr. Caner, without qualification, a public apology for his despicable insinuation, as well as a full public retraction of his damaging words.  There is simply no excuse for carelessly sewing unguarded personal indictments against a brother in Christ—especially when those indictments come from a less than reputable source. If Ascol does want to live peaceably with all Southern Baptists, he needs to start by loving his neighbor as himself.  In this case, Dr. Ergun Caner is his neighbor. Will Dr. Ascol both apologize and retract?  Sadly, I do not think he will.  I hope with all my hoping I am wrong.

B) James White simply needs to get over himself and his apparent disdain for all things Ergun Caner.  In fact, the Caners, I think, have been wise to shun association with White and his ministry.  Why?  Simple. If James White’s blog is any indication of his apologetics, no Christian could remain spiritually healthy in such a horribly divisive environment.  One does not read long before it’s a “Quit lying about me! I’m not the one lying, you are!” type of “apologetic” exchange (and yes, unfortunately I have those links too). 

No thanks, “Dr” White.  You and your community are much too cantankerous for me. 

In fact, I’d bet a week’s worth of starbucks I speak the view of most grassroots Southern Baptists. 

Therefore, Drs. Caners--beware. James White's community is not for you.  Stand your ground.  Stay away.

Indeed all Christians beware...stand your ground...stay away. There's more to gospelizing than pretending one's preaching when one is only debating.

With that, I am…

Peter

UPDATE: This was an interesting thread.  For the most part, about all that was established from those defending the Ascol/White demolition team against all things Ergun Carner was, the relentless defenders accused me of hypocrisy.  Of course, James White was not viewed as being hypocritical when he employed Muslim hate-site “evidence” against Dr. Caner. Indeed White argued one cannot dispute the “evidence” just because it originates from hate-sites.  And, I suppose strictly speaking, he may have a point.  On the other hand, when a White critic used “evidence” he had picked up from a site hardly friendly toward White, White accosted his critic for using “evidence” picked up from an unfriendly source. Why was I hypocrising but White not hypocrising? 

For the record, the reader must read carefully what I stated and did not state concerning the links in the original post.  In point of fact, I never once validated or defended using the links I used.  Nor would I.  I simply placed the scenario in the form of a supposition, demonstrating how it’s hardly acceptable to employ, as definitive research, the use of unfriendly and/or ‘hate-sites.”  Neither Caner nor White nor anybody else desires the use of ‘hate-sites’ as definitive for either their beliefs or behavior.  White’s defenders should think long and hard about that before they parade around accusing others of hypocrisy.

Finally, an interesting post went up at a James White defender’s site that may or may not be worth your time.  The boy accused me of purposely deleting his comment.  James White is the first one to log on and commend him, while dissing me as so constantly “twisting” and distorting” other people’s words, that he wondered how I could look in the mirror (note White’s response about me. Is this all these guys know?  A you-sir-are-a-liar approach?) Those who frequent this blog know my record.  I will leave it there for you to decide. 

Actually, I logged onto his site and gave a detailed explanation about his “devastating” comment he alleges I deleted. I did not delete it.  It was flagged by a filter in typepad for a word he used and therefore pitched it in spam.  What is ridiculously funny, my own blog  pitched my comment on the same thread into the spam bucket for using the very same word!  Instead of having a good laugh about it, his response (like his mentor above) was, you-sir-are-a-liar. 

Well there you have it. There is simply no getting along with some of these guys star-gazed by James White.  He has taught them well, I suppose.

I did satirically toy around with the dude a bit, I admit.  However, what’s a person to do on a site which reveals as its purpose, “AOMinions is a satire site, and all content should be taken in that vein”?

It’s fairly funny if you care to look--"Just in Case It's Deleted" by RazorKiss. Warning:  it gets pretty ridiculous...

Comments

[TurretinFan]

That was a remarkably hypocritical post. When I say hypocritical, I mean doing things that you blame someone else for.

And just to be clear, I am referring to you doing to Dr. White what you are accusing him of doing to Caner.

And just to be even more clear, I'm posting this message publicly so that you may be called to public repentance of your public sin of hypocrisy.

[Micah]

Maybe Lumpkins can provide evidence of Ergun's self-proclaimed many debates?

[Lane Chaplin]

Mr. Lumpkins, you need to publicly repent of your hypocrisy. You need to realize that we won't be asked to give an account to your wing of the SBC on the last day. We will have to give an account to the Truth who had no hypocrisy so if you're not counting on your wing of the SBC to be your mediator, I think you should reconsider your words. You won't have the safety net of other people's agreement then that you have now. Something to consider.

Something else to consider would be a remedial book on logical fallacies.

[Shamgar]

Wow, I'm absolutely disgusted by this. I mean I literally feel ill. I think I need to go take a shower.

Further, perhaps I'm blind, but I completely missed where Dr White is allegedly linking to this site that seems to be the crux of your post. (While simultaneously completely ignoring the the issue Dr White is trying to raise regarding the incongruity between Dr Caner's claims and the historical record.) It seems like Dr White is questioning whether Dr Caner has spoken the truth, not whether or not he was a former muslim....

[peter]

Dear TurretinFan

Welcome.

Of course I'm a hypocrite, my dear disciple of White. Why? Well because you've pronounced it--and that in the face of my well-documented sources! Not to mention my explicit assertion that the scenario was suppositional in nature.

Alas. what else could you say, however? Know I feel deeply your dilemma. If you attacked my sources, why, you'd be going against your beloved mentor who's already laid that puppy to rest. But not to say anything at all, well, you'd hurt his feelings. Heck, you may even be kicked out of the JWFC (i.e. James White Fan Club for the uninitiated).

Fret not, TurretinFan. I forgive you. We remain friends forever.

With that, I am...
Peter

P.S. Know I do feel sorry for dear old Tom. In your passion to speak up for "Dr." White, you left Ascol to wash right down the dish drain...

[peter]

Well, now here here shamgar. Read carefully what I have stated and what I have not stated.

With that, I am...
Peter

[peter]

Dear Micah

I didn't mention any debates--except the many "Dr" White boasts. I simply raised questions about sources, the validity of them, and whether White's critics are accurate or not. If you come back, stick with issues I raised not ones I did not raise.

With that, I am...
Peter

[peter]

Dear Lane,

Unfortunately for me, no one on this thread is agreeing with me. Hence, I think my 'safety net' has abandoned me. What do you think?

With that, I am...
Peter

As for lessons on logic, let's do, let's do. But some other time (I prefer Copi's text).

[TurretinFan]

Mr. Lumpkins,

You wrote: "Fret not, TurretinFan. I forgive you. We remain friends forever."

You and I aren't friends. We're not even acquaintances. I'm here to call you to repentance for your very public sin, not to be your buddy. If your entire response is to be mockery, so be it.

-TurretinFan

[Tom Parker]

Peter:

It does not look like this blog item is going to be very popular for you.

Prediction--this debate shall continue.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[William Birch]

TurretinFan,

And I suppose you've called out James White and Tom Ascol as well, to repent of their very "public sin"? Is that so?

[peter]

Dear TurrentinFan,

Well, I never! I am insulted, TurrentinFan. How could you?

As for mockery, I must plead innocent! I say, innocent!

With that, I am...
Peter

[peter]

Tom,

On very few occasions, we have agreed. Know we have just made history: I agree with you 110%.

With that, I am...
Peter

[William Birch]

Peter,

Great post. I appreciate you calling out White and Ascol. I have promoted this post on my blog.

I don't suppose all of your critics here are Calvinists, are they? (TurretinFan and Lane Chaplin notably). Shamgar doesn't provide a link.

[Wes Kenney]

Peter,

Thanks for this post. I hate for the opinion to be unanimously against you in these comments, confident though I am in your ability to handle it just fine. Be assured of my gratitude; I'm proud to stand with you.

[TurretinFan]

Mr. Birch:

You seem confused. Perhaps you've mistakenly taken for granted that Lumpkins' mockery has factual grounding.

- TurretinFan

[Chris Poe]

How can someone be friends with an anonymous blogger/commenter?

[peter]

Dear TurrentinFan,

That's a personal question. You yourself said you are not my friend. And, since I decline to answer personal questions from non-friends, I decline to answer your question.

With that, I am...
Peter

[Ed Goodman]

Peter, thanks for the post. Cantankerous public behavior is indeed shameful, from all who engage in such misguided antics.

Let's be honest. Caner has a biblical position, and so does White as well as Ascol. Now, how about these guys embracing the call of Ephesians 4:3 instead of publicly trying to prove their positions?

If James White were to go to http://www.arminianperspectives.wordpress.com/ and debate Ben, the theologian/apologist who started that website, he wouldn't get too far before seeing that this staunch Arminian possesses a solid biblical basis for his beliefs.

The foundational question is this: at what point do we sacrifice complete doctrinal conformity for the sake of cooperative mission and unity? Even Wade Burleson, the controversial pastor from Enid, Oklahoma, will tell you that tertiary issues shouldn't cause division and disunity. So we must determine how to divide primary (essential) doctrines from secondary and tertiary doctrines. Apparently White considers all doctrine primary.

What a shame when he could be rejoicing with Caner over the glorious work of Jesus Christ.

[Lane Chaplin]

Mr. Lumpkins,

I appreciate Copi's book as well. I've recommended it to others in the past and will continue to do so. I especially admire his treatment of the straw-man fallacy.

[peter]

Here here, TurrentinFan. There'll be no mocking of the sources on this site. Period. If you persist, you will be flagged.

With that, I am...
Peter

[William Birch]

Turretin,

Lumpkins' FINDINGS have factual grounding.

God bless.

[Chris Poe]

You Reformed guys might want to review WLC Q.144 and especially Q.145 (and the accompanying proof texts) and tell me how what Tom Ascol did on FB wasn't a violation of the Ninth Commandment.

Peter, I hope you will keep the comments open here instead of running for the hills like Tim Rogers did when it got a little hot.

[peter]

Ed,

A very good word. I've worked in my ministry with various denominations and we were able to do some great, godly things together even though our doctrinal beliefs had tangible limits. Hence, though there remains limits to what we can do, we nonetheless can accept others as brothers in Jesus Christ.

With that, I am...
Peter

[TurretinFan]

Poe:

Why don't you explain why you think it was a violation of the Ninth Commandment. Is your claim that Ascol said something that wasn't true? Or that he said sometime true in a way that was inappropriate? Or what exactly?

Lumpkins:

I'm not mocking your sources, nor did I ask you any personal questions.

Birch:

No, they don't.

- TurretinFan

[volfan007]

When I read the comments from the Founders type Calvinists on this thread, and the ones over at SBC Today, after Tim wrote his post on this issue; I'm reminded again why I'm so turned off from this branch of Calvinists.

I dealt with the same thing back in my seminary days, and afterwards, when dealing with the Founders friendly Calvinist people. It's sad to see.

Thanks, Peter, for bringing truth and reason to the issues that get so muddied up in the blog world. Thank you.

David

[Tom Parker]

Peter:

You said--:"No thanks, “Dr” White. You and your community are much too cantankerous for me"

You are kidding--right?

[peter]

Chris,

Thanks. In fairness to Tim, he may have been simply overwhelmed with the volume of that thread. One has to make a judgment call at times: allowing a thread to be literally hijacked by a dominate commenter or lopping it off.

I can tell you this: if I have a thread that I judge gets "out of control" so to speak, I won't blink, hesitate, or stutter--I'll shut it down in a west Georgia minute. Why? Because every person who logs on is a guest. Period.

Sometimes the wedding gets crashed. That's life.

And, if I look like a coward running for the hills, well...I can think of worse things to appear like... :^)

Grace.

With that, I am...
Peter

[TurretinFan]

Lumpkins:

I didn't ask you any personal questions, and I didn't mock your sources.

Birch:

No, they don't.

Poe:

I can't very well defend Ascol when no clear accusation against him has been made. Is the claim that he said something untrue? Or that he said something true that should have been kept secret? Or what?

- TurretinFan

[TurretinFan]

Sorry for the duplicate post.

[travstar]

Leave Britney alone!

[Chris Poe]

Mr anon. (That's be "Turretin")

I rather tend to doubt that Dr. Ascol's reference to "sad" was aimed at the Muslims, do you?

[William Birch]

TurretinFan,

You have yet to inform us as to whether you have called for Ascol's and White's public repentance. I'm curious.

[Chris Poe]

In response to Douglas' comment, (which has disappeared?) I'll paste a tweet I made earlier:

"Given the actions of some Xtian bloggers, it seems their mission is 2 defend their fav. leader from all enemies foreign & domestic."

This applies to both sides, who too rarely can countenance any criticism of their favorites whatsoever.

For some, it seems Dr. Caner etc. can do no wrong. For others, every action of Drs. White, Ascol, etc. is unimpeachable.

[Scott Slayton]

Chris,
Well said. Many of the posts and comments concerning the Caner brothers and James White have a real "I am of Paul" and "I am of Apollos" feel to them.

[peter]

Chris,

I told TurrentinFan to cool it. I meant it. Hence, Smarty mouth is gone for now. If he emails me and assures me he is now calmed down enough to continue, I will invite him back to the party. Pretty simple.

With that, I am...
Peter

P.S. The first one who accuses me of censorship will also be disinvited.

[peter]

BTW, Chris, straddling the fence works sometimes. Sometimes not. Supposing it to work here, at least from my side of the swamp, makes no sense.

With that, I am...
Peter

[Chris Poe]

Peter,

I'm not looking to straddle the fence. I basically try to call 'em like I see 'em. No doubt that will lead to some saying "Who's side are you on, buddy?"

[Squirrel]

-"P.S. The first one who accuses me of censorship will also be disinvited."-

Ok, that's just too funny!

~Squirrel

[sermonfire]

I've read many watchblogger's blogs.

I've even participated in some horrible blog posts of my own that were full of hypocritical hatred, my spiritual life has (at times) been a roller coaster.

but this is one of the most hateful and hypocritical blog post I've ever read. you broke the top 10 for sure.

you think about that for a second.

is that really what you want to accomplish on your blog?

really?

this?

I might be back I might not be.

[J. Dale Weaver, M. Div.]

Peter:

Excellent article! Absolutely necessary! Unbelievably sad.

Hope you are well -- it's been a while since I've spoken with you, but I did want to tell you that I appreciated your book -- very good case! I will also note that I have been quite busy with my teaching, so I have paid less attention to the likes of White and his ilk.

Saddest about this episode you "expose" here is not White -- I have long expected this uncharitable, unChristian nonsense from he and his kind -- but from Tom Ascol's promotion of such garbage! Having exchanged emails with Ascol on a couple of occasions, I found him to be a bit more reasonable than this. Reading his posts at times left me doubting that -- but this positively destroys my former impressions of him.

I suppose the bottom line remains that, if a "theological movement" or a "historical/religious system" has to resort to such unreliable sources, dishonest means and unbiblical tactics to achieve their goals and "win" their debates, just how "Christian" can they be?

Blessings,

J. Dale Weaver, M. Div.

[Shamgar]

Peter, you said:

The other link Ascol gives is his good buddy, James White. And, what evidence does the famed, self-described fearless apologist offer as clear, objective proof Dr. Caner is a "fake Muslim? Why, he gives the same type of evidence Ascol gave—the Muslim attack sites.

I asked you to demonstrate where (particularly in the link you referenced, though if it's somewhere else I'd be interested in seeing that too) Dr White used "Muslim attack sites" as evidence?

In response, you said:
Well, now here here shamgar. Read carefully what I have stated and what I have not stated.

So...I've read AND quoted what you have stated, can you answer my question?

[Shamgar]

Actually, not only did I ask that, I asked where Dr White even claimed he was a fake muslim. That still doesn't seem to be Dr White's point at all.

[Matt Svoboda]

To all,

I know this post is going to unpopular, but it seems to me that all 4 of the men involved have acted childish towards one another. The only person I really like of the four is Ascol... Im not a big fan of the Caners or White, but Ascol I do appreciate. With that being said, it seems to me that all 4 of the men have acted like me and my 2 brothers when we were 11,13,15, immature, overly-competitive, and had no love and grace towards one another.

"It wasn't me mom... He threw the first stone!"

P.S. I havent kept up with this feuding extremely closely, but it seems that while all 4 men are at some fault, I do not think White or Ascol was represented correctly in this particular blog post.

[peter]

Chris,

It's nice to know we've both chosen the right side!!!
:^)

David,
Thanks, brother.

And to Wes, I appreciate your support.

With that, I am...
Peter

[Dr. James Galyon]

I agree with Chris - many seem to reflect an "I am of Paul / I am of Apollos" mentality. I blogged on this today. I don't think any Reformed folks should throw Dr. Caner under the bus. I don't think non-Calvinists should circle the wagons and protect him at all costs, either.

[Matt Svoboda]

Chris Poe,

I echo your thoughts... It seems that to some people their "leader" can just do no wrong."

In my mind, all 4 of the men mentioned here, Caners, White, Ascol, could have handled themselves better throughout this at least at some point.

My suggestions- call each other- repent- shut up- or all of the above.

[peter]

Dear Sermonfire,

Why no!

With that, I am...
Peter

[travstar]

Al Gore should never have invented the Internet.

[Matt Svoboda]

sermonfire,

As I said before, I do think all the men involved are at some fault...

With that being said, I agree with you that this post does seem quite hypocritical.