Tweet
Canner Whitt Debate
Posted in: Arminianism
About the Author
36 year old husband, father, pastor, singer, musician, reader, eater, rider, watcher, 36 year old husband, father, pastor, singer, musician, reader, eater, rider, watcher,
To add a bit more realism, Scott should have been wearing one of those Garth Brook headphone mics. And maybe a bandana on his head, a black tee-shirt and a sports coat.
Fred
That was great!
Kevin Greer does look like Dr. White there…and he sounds a little like Tom Ascol.
For those who “don’t get the joke”, go here and here and herefor context.
Funny stuff!
The video was pretty funny, but I think what it really needed was more COWBELL!!
Who is who on the video…?
I love the internal monologue.
Scott, did you have to wash yourself in the River Jordan 7 times to clean yourself of that filth?
I am just saying.
This has to be one of the funniest spoofs I have ever seen!
(For those who don’t know, the one in the hat is “Egun Canner” and the other guy is “Dr. Whitt”.) LOVE it LOVE it LOVE it!!!
~FlameGurl
James, do your friends think your funny?
Scott, be nice to James.
At least he was brave enough to come on the “Narrow Mind” and defend himself. I think he showed more guts than Caner.
A little background info.
Most of the Canner dialogue is direct quotes from Ergun’s comments at Founder’s or his sermon on Calvinism.
What is not an exact quote is obvious.
“glamor shots” “post debate interview”
Riveting debate. Intellectually stimulating.
Good work guys.
Scott, you misunderstood me. I meant in your pretending to be E. Caner. Did you have to clean yourself of pretending to be Caner.
The skit was hilarious. My wife and I laughed together.
I should have been more clear. Sorry bruther.
You’ll have to forgive me for being presumptuous. I am not used to you being on my side.
Actually, I was a little embarrassed after I was done editing the video. I was told the camera adds 10 lbs, but it must actually add about 45.
Thank you for filling our void made by the debate cancellation. I am now satisfied. Funny stuff.
Dear Friends,
While I could find this funny – I actually think its a bad joke in poor taste and am grieved by it.
Let me say upfront, I am a Calvinist and I do think Erguns Caner’s rhetoric has been ridiculous and that the whole situation is “laughable”. But, I don’t think it is an issue that should be made fun of – but only prayed about.
I don’t see this video as a harmless prank. Although you said, “No Christians were harmed in the making of this video” – do you think this helps to win our opponents to the truth?
Do we believe that the issues here have eternal ramifications? Do we believe that those who oppose the doctrines of grace may be, at best, ignorant and therefore affecting whole churches and peoples lives, and at worst, ensnared by the devil to do His will? These issues are grave and grevious, not comical.
Calvinists are being steadily maligned and misrepresented – why add fuel to the fire? Yes, we can say that we don’t care what they think; but – consider 1 Tim 4:16. Our hearers are saved not just by the truth we proclaim, but also by our example. Would this be a worthy example? (We can’t narrow the application of this text to our hearers in our congregations.)
While you said, “No depiction of actual persons or events is intended.” – come on…do you really think this will be received that way? Does this fall in the realm of speech that is godly and fitting of pastors and teachers? Where is the application of Eph 4:29-30. Would the founders approach the issue in like manner?
Now, before you defend yourselves on the basis of “freedom” (whether by conscience or Constitution) or before you think me to be a legalist who doesn’t believe in a “little fun”, or before you think me to be judging you in any way (I have I high respect for the FIDE-O group, but not this particular action) – please prayerfully consider what I’m saying.
I am simply applying the apologetic principle of 1 Peter 3:16. I.e. – those who slander us may be put to shame because they see our good behavior. So, let’s strive to be above reproach as Calvinists, in all things so that the truth isn’t refused because of our own doing.
Respectfully Submitted,
Quincy A. Jones
http://www.truthintheinnermost.blogspot.com
Quincy, you asked if these issues have eternal ramification. I was saved under the exact thinking that Ergun Caner believes so I know people can come to Christ through that, despite them being wrong is some areas of theology. While I am unsure if the Caner’s would return the sentiment I still consider them brothers in Christ, therefore this as an intramural debate. Which is why I can’t say as you did, that they are “ensnared by the devil to do his will”. For me to do so would raise this to another level, of which I would consider the Caner’s heretics and all of those who believe as he does to be doing Satan’s will. I do not believe that. I believe this situation is serious, and I have posted on that numerous times. Yet, I can see where you take offense to the video, because we are not even on the same page about what level this actually rises to.
As for the statement, “no depictions of actual person or events was intended…” that was obviously a joke. Anyone that watches this video knows who I am talking about. That was the whole point, along with “no Christians were harmed…” They were references to movie and television disclaimers, all part of the joke. I almost hate to have to actually explain that.
As for defending myself, I have no plans to do so. I am sorry this offended you, but its intent was for a laugh. Not everyone will think it’s funny. I don’t know yet if James White or the Caner’s think its funny, and really if anyone has any say as to how appropriate this video is or is not it would be them
Quincy, thanks for voicing your concerns. I appreciate your Fide-O readership and even the spirit in which you submitted your disapproval of this video. I am thankful that you tried to base your discernment on any Scriptures that could possibly support your viewpoint. As I respectfully disagree with you, I do hope that you eventually find that there is no harm intended or actually done when Christians laugh together. I like the spoof of parodies. Such has been done about Fide-O, and we get a good laugh out of it. I have found that the Ascols, Caner’s and Dr. White all have a great sense of humor. It may be that more video’s like this could be helpful to defuse the tension that so many of our intramural debates have. Then again, some may be offended. Who knows?
Scott & Jason,
Thanks for the responses, Jason I appreciate your spirit as well (Scott – you need some work.
. I think it’s important that I’m not misunderstood. I don’t really think you read my post in context to really understand what I was trying to say and you missed my point. Among other things: For one, you spoke to me as if I was personally offended; two – you responded as if I said Caner was ensnared by the devil and a heretic; and, three – you denigrated me to a legalist as if I had a problem with Christians joking and having a good time. I think now I’m really offended…sike…just joking. (really I am joking, anyhoo…) As you read – please take my statements in context.
1) Jason – I am not personally offended by this video. I am more concerned with the overarching perception of who we are as Calvinists and whether or not this kind of parody is appropriate in this case. I’m not against satire – but in this instance, all things considered, I believe it is harmful to our cause.
2) Scott – I was saved in an Arminian church as well. A church that, a little more than 10 years ago, was an expositional, word centered church. Now has gone the route of seeker movement and probably has many unregenerate people believing they are Christians. So, yes, these issues have eternal ramifications. The Seeker movement is by-in-large an Arminian expression (you do have pseudoCalvinists who are in the movement – but they do ministry like Arminians).
But, you took my quote from 2 Tim 2:24 out of context. I never said Ergun Caner is an unbeliever or heretic. However, our opponents are not just Ergun Caner. And, I said that, “at worst” – those who oppose the doctrines of grace (biblical truth)are ensnared by the devil. (This could lead into a discussion about the meaning of that text as to whether or not that is specifically referring to an unbeliever or could it refer to both a believer and an unbeliever; also, what false doctrines would be considered doctrines of demons.) No matter, lets discuss another text – 2 Cor 11:3-4 – is it not Satan who Paul was afraid would lead the Corinthians minds astray from faithful devotion to Christ and that through false teaching? Or maybe 2 Cor 10:3-5? I guess you have to ask yourself if Arminianism is just another plausible position? Or is it a false teaching or, said in another way, a speculation that is set against the knowledge of God? Yes, intramural debate it may be – but it is a serious spiritual battle nonetheless for the authority and truth of Scripture. Is Arminianism harmful or is it not? Can it lead to Open Theism and Universal Atonement or can it not? Can it lead to a pseudo-psycho-feel good seeker sensitive gospel or can it not? Pardon my sarcasm, but, for all that bark – sounds like you may need some bite; while you say I’ve raised this to high a level, maybe you do need to raise the bar a bit my brother and recognize what war you’re really fighting. My point is that this is a serious spiritual battle within the walls of the church but to be carried out in the spirit of 2 Tim 2:24 (i.e., correcting the opponent with gentleness and respect).
3) Jason & Scott –I’m not talking about having a sense of humor; I never said that there is a problem with Christians “laughing together”. I knew you would try to peg me as a legalist who is opposed to “fun”. (You’d have to know me.) But, I’m talking about whether or not in this context if it is appropriate to poke fun at Caner the way you guys did. I’m just saying, with the possibility that others could see it as insulting – because you are insulting Caner’s rhetoric – we need to think twice about such jab. You never answered my question about Ephesians 4:29; brothers a put down is a put down and would fly in the face of this passage. When it comes to the Word of God and defending it – we are not called to be Jay Lenos – but Spurgeons and MacArthurs.
Truth accords with godliness – even in our humor. Again, I’m not offended, just trying to set an example that is above reproach.
Eph 4:15,
Q
Oh btw, while I’m randomly proof texting…let me feed you some others:
Respect what is right in the sight of all men.
Let no one seek his own good, but that of his neighbor.
Give no offense either to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God; just as I also please all men in all things, (not seeking my own profit but the profit of the many, so that they may be saved.
So then we pursue the things which make for peace and the building up of one another.
Let love be without hypocrisy
“I do believe, in my heart, that there may be as much holiness in a laugh as in a cry; and that, sometimes, to laugh is the better thing of the two, for I may weep, and be murmuring, and repining, and thinking all sorts of bitter thoughts against God; while, at another time, I may laugh the laugh of sarcasm against sin, and so evince a holy earnestness in the defense of the truth.
I do not know why ridicule is to be given up to Satan as a weapon to be used against us, and not to be employed by us as a weapon against him. I will venture to affirm that the Reformation owed almost as much to the sense of the ridiculous in human nature as to anything else, and that those humorous squibs and caricatures, that were issued by the friends of Luther, did more to open the eyes of Germany to the abominations of the priesthood than the more solid and ponderous arguments against Romanism.
I know no reason why we should not, on suitable occasions, try the same style of reasoning.
“It is a dangerous weapon,” it will be said, “and many men will cut their fingers with it.” Well, that is their own lookout; but I do not know why we should be so particular about their cutting their fingers if they can, at the same time, cut the throat of sin, and do serious damage to the great adversary of souls.”
Charles Haddon Spurgeon
Touche – ok, so, maybe I don’t know as much about Spurgeon as I thought and should’ve left Spurgeon out of my post.
But, that doesn’t mean that everything he says agrees with Scripture or whether or not he would agree with your parody..
E.g., “I know no reason why we should not, on suitable occasions, try the same style of reasoning.”
My question is – with the current climate within in the SBC – is this a “suitable occasion” for your parody? If you would just read my post in context – you would understand that is heart of my question.
Thanks for the clarification.
And if I may add based on this part of the CH quote:
“but I do not know why we should be so particular about their cutting their fingers if they can, at the same time, cut the throat of sin, and do serious damage to the great adversary of souls.”
His intention in the quote is to “cut the throat of sin, and do serious damage to the gread advesary of souls”. The ridicule here is in the context of spiritual battle – not court jesting. Let me ask you – how does your parody do so (i.e., cut the throat of sin and do serious damage to the advesary of our soouls”???
Scott, I like the part about the Southwest Airlines sponsorship! I wonder how many people bought tickets to the “great debate that never happened”?
I don’t know, but there were several.
qa,
The parody demonstrates that Arminianism is a man made doctrine that has no scriptural justification only an emotional appeal.
When people see how stupid Arminianism is from this video they will repent and thereby we shall be victorious in doing serious damage to the adversary of our soul, ie Satan the originator of all lies.
Gene,
I agree with you; I actually do think the video demonstrates (from our vantage point) the ridiculousness of the arminian argument. But, will people repent? Maybe.
The real question you have to ask yourselves is: Was that truly your intent in making this video? And is this clearly communicated to our opponents? Or was this made to give us Calvinists a good laugh at all this with no care of its offense or how it may affect our witness?
Am I not being clear? What I am concerned with is the perception of the intent of the parody; i.e., what it communicates to our opponents. And clearly the intention of Spurgeon’s quote – which I assume was used in defense of this parody – was not communicated in the presentation of your parody.
I would give you skate if there was some serious narrative with the production that said something to the effect of:
“We hope that you were amused by this, we believe that by being able to laugh at recent events, it my help to defuse the tention that has been created by the debate about Calvinism in Baptist Life. This parody is not intended to insult, but to demonstrate that Arminianism is a man made doctrine that has no scriptural justification only an emotional appeal.
“We hope that this video can be used by God to create a more reasoned dialogue regarding Calvinism so that God’s people can see that Its doctrines are truly founded upon reasoned biblical arguments and not emotional appeal.”
So without something like that brothers – unfortunately – all you have is Lenoesque put downs that leave your intentions up for speculation and our cause, in all probability, harmed. Which, in my estimation, is a worse tool in the hands of Satan.
In all sincerity, I do appreciate the opportunity to share my thoughts and your (Scott, Jason, & Gene’s) willingness to engage me.
Jude 2,
Q
It is good to see Quincy’s sensitivity on this subject. It is both encouraging and sharpening. I have truly benifited from all of the scripture he has obviously spent time meditating on.
Thanks for the posts gentlemen.
“When people see how stupid Arminianism is from this video they will repent and thereby we shall be victorious in doing serious damage to the adversary of our soul, ie Satan the originator of all lies.”–Gene
Scripture isn’t enough to teach the truth and open a heart by the Holy Spirit (Ps. 119)?
Heb 4:12 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
Heb 4:13 And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account.
1Pe 1:23 since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God;
2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.
The only thing that is perfect and true and that changes a heart IS the Scriptures, not a silly video.
If TULIP is biblical and stands by itself, then teach it directly. No video and no man can change a mind or heart. That IS what some Arminians think, and that IS what many Calvinists do, as shown here.
I’m finding more and more that the Calvinists are some of the most man-centered people in Christianity, sadly. It grieves me to say this and it has bothered me for quite some time as the Lord has been showing me this. I truly hope professing Christians will rather aim to please God and not seek out to appease, please, or get the praise of, man (and I include myself here).
I think we can start by really acting on the truth we all say we believe, that God IS totally and absolutely soverein in ALL things, including salvation. Let’s also act as if we really believe the Bible IS sufficient for all things pertaining to life’s issues and godliness.
Pray I do this too.