SITE NOTICE | MORE..Upload Sermons From Mobile! With the 4.0 release of our iPhone App, effective immediately, all broadcasters can now upload audio sermons to SermonAudio directly from their iOS device! Check it out! .. click for more info!
April 14, 2006 â€” This week Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., has been on a tour of key states like Iowa and New Hampshire, apparently laying the groundwork for a possible presidential campaign.
In 2000, McCain ran for president as a different kind of politician. "We're on a bus called the Straight Talk Express," he said at the time. "I gotta give you the straight talk."
Straight talk meant taking on powerful Christian conservatives such as the Rev. Jerry Falwell.
"Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan and Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right," McCain said in 2000.
Caner's statement is meaningless. Baptists have long disagreed (since the 17th century at least) about these doctrines; a responsible disputant should make clear exactly what he believes without using such vague terminology.
"For example, he began his sermon with words to the effect of "Why I am not a calvinist, specifically a hyper-calvinist". He has an inane position of not being a calvinist, not being an arminian (which of course he clearly is) but being a baptist (which is just an irrelevant a use of the word - it happens a lot)."
I don't remember him saying it that way. I remember him saying he was a Calvinist but not a HYPER Calvinist.
He specifically said over and over, The reason I would never be a HYPER Calvinist is because, ...."
I can tape the sermon and type those portions, or just go back and relisten to the sermon.
I heard him say he was a Calvinist but not a HYPER Calvinist.
His beef is with Limited Atonement, Double Predestination, and most likely also with Irresistible Grace.
His opposition to Limited Atonement is 100 percent, as per the sermon he preached.
The reason why he calls himself a Calvinist is because almost without a doubt he is OSAS all the way. This is pure Calvinism.
But I do remember he specifically said each time, HYPER Calvinist and I thought I heard him say he was a Calvinist, just not a HYPER Calvinist.
"The reason I will NEVER be a HYPER Calvinist..." is what he kept saying.
Caner attacked Calvinism thoughout that sermon, switching his terminology at whim between "Calvinism" and "Hyper-Calvinism" without reason or cause. It was tacky and crass "poisoning of the well" in preparation for his fake debate.
For example, he began his sermon with words to the effect of "Why I am not a calvinist, specifically a hyper-calvinist". He has an inane position of not being a calvinist, not being an arminian (which of course he clearly is) but being a baptist (which is just an irrelevant a use of the word - it happens a lot).
Of course, for a real example of a biblical obsession for Missions he had to resort to using the example of a Calvinist - but even in retelling the anecdote he managed to get his facts totally wrong - wrong place, emasculated quote, wrong theological context.
And your right, I'm sure all his errors were in his notes, that's WHY it would be better for him to borrow notes from someone who gets their facts right - e.g. Reformed BAPTIST Theological Review, Vol 1 No 1, p57-58. Based upon his conduct (of which he is proud) Caner is unfit for his office.
4/21/06 2:53 PM
OC, Free Will Ind. Baptist, KJO, post-trib rapture
33K -- Re the Illuminati and Masons, I wish I could joke about it, but truly they are everywhere. It's not chicken little to say that.
For example, we're being heavily chemtrail-sprayed here where I am. It's so in-your-face arrogant that the Illuminati gets away with it.
People just can't conceive of anyone having that much power and being that evil. So these *&%$#@ carry on their unspeakable deeds right under our noses, and over our heads.
And the population is oblivious, just blanks it out, finds excuses, and goes on as though nothing was wrong.
Meantime, GWB is so arrogant he flashes the Illuminati sign everywhere, and was flipping it off all through the Inauguration parade as though to say, Ha, we got them, SUCKERS!
And, no, it's not the Hook 'em hand signal for Texas U. Bush never went to that college, so why would he be flashing their hand signal? Plus the real hook 'em hand signal is with two hands facing out and put up to the head to signify the long horn, nothing like the Illuminati hand signal our nice leaders are flashing in public now with a smirk on their faces.
4/21/06 2:19 PM
OC, Free Will Ind. Baptist, KJO, post-trib rapture
33k -- If I was Jerry Falwell I wouldn't let James White on my campus.
And Caner is a good guy except for being a bit too Calvinistic for my taste.
After seeing how the Calvinists have been whitewashing Lucifer on this forum, advocating the word "Morning Star" be substituted for the word "Lucifer" --
and a few other things --
I say, go get 'em Pastor Caner!
Thanks for pointing me to Caner's sermon. I thought it was interesting that he said the most raging controversy in Christendom today is between Calvinism and free will, that it's really hot in the seminaries.
I agree. I suspect Lynchburg is well-named in this case. Quite a contrast to the many well-ordered Prot./Catholic debates during the Reformation, & the one at Marburg between Luther & Zwingli about Communion. The aristocratic sponsors were truly noble for that. And Dordt of course. Man, those were the days...
I admire James White's ability and confidence to be able to go to Liberty and contend for the faith once delivered to the saints, but unless Caner is willing to have a proper (i.e. moderated and on a specific proposition) debate then I fear White is wasting his time with this 'free-for-all'.
Also James White has cautioned people against travelling to Lynchburg as he cannot confirm that they will even be able to gain admittance. (Makes the FIFA World Cup ticket allocation look more than generous, but that's another story). It's a farce.
Perhaps it would be better not to bother allowing the circus to happen?