-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary
- Thread starter mjohnson7
- Start date
His is?
Well, whoever replaces him will be a lot better qualified on a lot of fronts than Ergun Caner.Agreed on both fronts! Caner was not a seminary president & was an embarrassment. As a LU alum I would cringe when hearing the things he said at times. When you stand him next to an Al Mohler or Ligon Duncan, he crumbles.
Dr. Towns is a fine, godly, gentleman. I don't agree with him on everything, but he's been a positive force at LU. My hope is that they choose an academic with strong leadership qualities that would distance them from the more seeker friendly path they've been on. Though I doubt that direction changes.
Dr. Towns is a fine, godly, gentleman. I don't agree with him on everything, but he's been a positive force at LU. My hope is that they choose an academic with strong leadership qualities that would distance them from the more seeker friendly path they've been on. Though I doubt that direction changes.
I didn't mind Caner that much - enjoyed his lectures (but thought some statements were unfounded). I actually think that both Caner and his opponents were prone to exaggeration. His placement, IMHO, was a poor decision by Liberty. Funny how he still comes up in these discussions.
Well the search for a dean has begun and hopefully it will be someone good. As a Liberty U alum who has deep ties to the school and (mother) church, moving Towns out should have happened two years ago. He's a very nice man who was very important to the church and school. However, he has hurt the seminary with his presence.
I don't know who they will get. The environment at Liberty is not conducive to someone good taking the school seriously, although if you throw enough money at someone...
I'd bet it will be someone from Dr Patterson's crew. Dr Mohler has been dispatching his inner circle and lieutenants throughout the SBC over the past five years. Since Liberty wants nothing to do with that kind of theology, I wouldn't be surprised if they ask Dr Patterson for his recommendations.
However, whoever it is they are facing a massive uphill battle. The seminary has lost too many quality faculty and the upper administration is a nightmare to work with and for. Outside of that, physical institutional hurdles abound, a lack of a sophisticated on-campus student population, and limited resources (even though the seminary provides millions through the online side.) Caner was effective while he was at Liberty. While how he left ultimately destroyed any good he accomplished, what he did accomplish was pretty impressive. All that has been undone with his actions and behavior.
They need someone who has the ability to be popular with students, faculty, and outside donors. I just don't know who that would be that fits their theological mold.
Jerry Jr is certainly a different leader than his dad, but there is still an expectation of certain, shall we say, fundamentalist agreement for the leader of that segment of the school. Most reputable folks who would be worth pursuing wouldn't match up theologically.
At this point, its wait and see. I just don't see how a candidate looks at this seminary, its physical presence, its barriers, and the institutional problems and agrees to it.
Until certain things change, its a bad gig.
You minimize Caner's words too much. He was merely "prone to exaggeration"? Come on. He was a serial liar --still is as a matter of fact,and is denying any culpability. He is disgraceful and should not be in any pulpit.
I’m a minimalist.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd like to know in what way he was "effective" in your view.
It's not a matter of how he left,but why he was told to pack in the first place.
What good did he accomplish? How does lying accomplish good? He was and is a fraud. He brings dishonor to the Name of Christ.
I'm glad you at least acknowledged that much.
So the "good he accomplished" was being popular with students and played nicey-nice with donors?
So his sin was not that big of a deal in other words.
Good..............
LOL!
According to PJ, Liberty has the expectation that they would want fundamentalist agreement for the leader of that segment of the school. He was speaking of the next Dean of the Seminary.
It was a big enough deal to be dealt with as it was. I don’t doubt his “former Muslim” beliefs, but I think he embellished his past as time went on. More of an issue, I believe, was the capitalization on American fear of Islam. If 9/11 never happened, Ergun Caner would have never held the prominence he once held.
Most alarming, however, are his opponents. His doctrine and theology were not challenged as much as his character (right or wrong) and some still can’t get over it. Imagine the character and spirit of someone who still thinks “Caner” when they hear “Liberty.”
The only reason why some think Caners deal was so huge was because he was so outspoken against Calvinism and he needed to be destroyed because of that.
I tend to agree. I recall, in his lectures he was supportive of the Calvinist (just not their doctrine). People's motive often boils down to character.
What's the word I'm looking for?... Oh yes, hogwash. You have not budged an inch in years about the wickednes of Ergun Caner. You and others sadly are in denial. Would you allow him to preach from your pulpit knowing how much lying he has done over the years? He has brought disgrace on the Name of Christ. Muslims have the perfect right to take issue with the absolutely false claims he has made for a dozen years.
If you want someone to represent the Arminian side of things Caner should not be your man. He has huge integrity issues.
Besides that, he doesn't know the Bible that well for a former Seminary President. He was shameful in his "pulpit talks." Before we even get to his vapid theology --his stunts were pathetic.
He wasn't damaging Calvinism. Of course he was damaging himself and his followers.
He started a number of programs, hired some good faculty members, and set the seminary on a course for growth and development. He effectively navigated the political waters between the upper level administration, seminary, and faculty.
Listen, you don't have to like someone to acknowledge they have worth, or had, and did contribute in their role somewhere. Personally, I've never cared for the tactics and style which Dr Caner has used to accomplish some aspects of his ministry. That said, I do think he was doing better things for the seminary and it is in a better place than it would have been if he had not been there.
Rippon said:
I have little respect for the current work that Dr Caner is doing and, if he and I were to have a private conversation, I would speak to these things. His use of tactics of antagonism to harm those who disagreed theologically is unbiblical. As he used his platform to discredit the cause of Christ and bear false witness he was in sin. However, it isn't my place to call everything the man has done as failing and rubbish.
Where I am involved with ministry, specifically in our Muslim outreach, we took a big hit when all this stuff came out about Dr Caner. It hurt some of our efforts and pushed some possible converts away. That hurts beyond anything he could have ever done to offend me. I have no patience for men who refuse to acknowledge their sin and past failures that have become massively public.
Rippon said:
You are far from this situation and this school. Your statement here demonstrates as much. Those who know also know that there was more to his time than entertaining students at chapel or campus church. I don't know why you require such a litany of vitriol whenever someone's name is brought up, but it is a consistent issue. If you've got an ongoing issue with someone, you should bring it up with them at some point. If they don't give you a hearing than that's a different place, but you, as a Christian, still are obliged to respect the person and at least act civilly.
So his more than a decade's worth of a lying streak in the pulpit without any repentance is no big deal. The Caner deal has only been a big concern in that Ergun is such a threat to Calvinism...right RM.
In the words of Tom Vols "So this idea that this is somehow related to Calvinism is just bunk." (5/24/2010)
That's surprising because he was quite open about the errors of Calvinism. (He was more blunt than that.)
Have you ever heard his infamous "sermon" on Romans 9? Not to be believed. It was both sad and humorous. I had a non-Calvinist friend listen to it with me and he was disgusted by it.
I recall him being vocal about Calvinism - just not the Calvinist. He was not attacking the character or the person, but the doctrine that he believed flawed. That was what I recall. I have not heard the sermon.