"The definition of revisionist history is often as simple as someone wanting it to be true. "
-- Ergun Caner, October 9th, 2006 [link]
I think I've mislabeled this blog in light of Dr. Caner's recent comments about Calvinists, because apparently we're jihadists [link], waging some kind of Calvinist Crusade on Arminianism, though we get stuck with the invective labels.
Although these statements were made in context of the debate that never quite came about, I'd like to point out that he's been prone to making a number of revisionist statements himself.
"... most of the Reformers and Puritans that these guys love so much would want them (as Baptists) dead." [link]
He's apparently a professor of Church History [link] (note: Google cache), and as such, ought to have studied the subjects and be able to teach accurately. Yet he makes statements that are simply untrue, and these statements are colored by his bias against Calvinism.
From his Facebook profile: "Ergun is looking at the picture of Balthazar Hubmaier, who was killed by the Reformers in 1528, for being an Anabaptist."[link]
He was killed by the Reformers? Contrary to Caner's ahistorical assertion, his arrest and extradition to Vienna, Austria was by order of Ferdinand. What twist of facts would make one believe that Ferdinand, a Roman Catholic, future Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, and principal figure of the Counter-Reformation, was himself a Reformer? What Caner asserts is opposite what historical evidence provides. [link 1] [link 2]
If these are the kinds of egregious errors he is submitting to either his class or the community abroad, how many more revisions of history is he making unchallenged? Having a debate *with cross-examination* to lay all the cards out on the table at once, and see on both sides which is representing history accurately, and which is editing the details, would have been an excellent way to challenge a group of Christians to consider their positions carefully and with full apprehension of all the facts before them. But in writing, one can churn out more mistakes than anyone has time to stop and refute.
"The definition of revisionist history is often as simple as someone wanting it to be true." I submit to any reader: Who wants to revise history itself, and who wants the facts to speak for themselves?
5 comments:
I'm not aware that your conspiracy is sactioned by the Truly Reformed Global Calvinist Cabal. Can you produce you baptism and confession of faith?
Maybe Criswell College has changed its degree programs over the last decade, but currently Criswell offers an MA in Systematic/Historical Theology, not an MA in History. These are not similar programs, with one being housed in a seminary and the other in a humanities department. Yet, Mr. Caner lists an MA in History from Criswell College on the Google view of his VITA referenced in this post. Most likely this is not an intentional mis-statement, but it is also not an example of scholarly precision. (As for Mr. Caner instead of Dr. Caner, I'm one of those traditionalists who reserves the prefix Dr. for medical doctors. As for Mr. O'Donnell the infamous moderator, the Liberty website indicates that his highest earned degree is a masters degree from Penn State.)
brigand got in on the interweb conspiracy?!?!!?!
*w00t*
CalvinDude
Dr. Caner and his kind trade on the ignorance of church history that is part of Baptist life. When was the last time a Baptist church near you taught church history or historical theology. Incidentally, the local PCA church and its two missions were teaching both topics in Sunday School here last year. Go figure.
He can make these appeals and not be questioned because most of us are ignorant of Baptist/church history. Likewise, he can get away with it because we are, in the RB community, jealous to guard our heritage coming from English Separatism/Puritanism and keeping Particular and General Baptist history separate. GB's do have a tenous relation to Continental Anabaptistry, but we PB's arose separately. So, we know our English (post)Reformation history, but we're shady on Anabaptist history. In fact, most in the Reformed community tend to focus more on the Magisterial Reformation than the Radical Reformation. We need a good Reformed Baptist or Presbyterian historian to offer up a good history of the Anabaptists to address this, so we have more material to rebut the likes of the Caners. Incidentally, this theory of history is what was taught at SEBTS by Emir Caner. This is at odds with what is taught @ SBTS. So, it seems, in the SBC, there is an underground battle being waged with respect to the origins of Baptists. The anti-Calvinists want desperately to prove that Baptists are/were not true Calvinists. If you go to the First Baptist Church of Woodstock GA website and listen to Dr. Vines 2 hour (rant) sermon a Calvinist and His Election, you'll find that he mentions the PB confessions but then says there is "no historical evidence" that any of these Baptists believe in the five points delivered @ Dort.
Great post. Just another tick on the board against Caner's scholarship.
Post a Comment