- Ergun Caner Faith and Family Interviews (summary of issues found in three two-part interviews)
- California Christian Apologetics Conference 2006 (summary of issues found in the partial video Dr. White provided)
- Fallwell on Ergun Caner (Documents Fallwell's impression of Ergun Caner)
- "Intellectual Pit Bull of the evangelical world" (Documents and questions Caner's claim to have that nickname via the "national media.")
- "Second Wife" vs. "Many Wives" or "Other Wives" (Documents Apparent Contradiction Regarding Ergun Caner's Father's number of wives)
- When was Emir Caner Disowned (Documents odd issue of when Emir Caner allegedly last saw his father before his final illness, compared to when Ergun last saw his father before his final illness.)
- Ergun Caner's Odd Description of the Kaaba (Documents Ergun Caner making an odd statement that apparently conflates the Kaaba and the Black Stone)
- "Debated ... Over Sixty Times" Claim Still on Liberty.edu (Documents lingering relic of Ergun Caner's debating claims.)
- Dr. James White on Iron Sharpens Iron (Dr. White discusses the Caner saga)
- Ergun Caner's Testimony - 28 Minute Video (Identifies a number of concerns regarding Dr. Caner's video testimony)
- Caner's Comments at Southwest Baptist Church - January 23, 2010 (Documents comments made by Dr. Caner in January 2010, regarding his autobiography)
- "An Ulima" and "Caliphats" Surrounding Caner's Father (Documents two hard-to-explain Arabic errors in Caner's comments)
- Ergun Caner - A Turkish Response (Documents a 2003 Turkish article reporting an interview with Ergun Caner.)
- Is there an Ergun Caner Failblog Entry? (Documents a wide spectrum of questionable, imprudent, or incorrect statements in a sermon presented at Calvary Chapel Old Bridge.)
- Ergun Caner and Pseudo-Arabic (Provides a video critique from Dr. White and Dr. White's Arabic tutor, regarding Caner's apparent attempt to use Arabic.)
- Pastor Lloyd Interviews Ergun Caner (Provides an identification of some issues presented in the interview.)
- Ergun Caner in Arabic-ish Gear (Provides a link to a humorous video in which Dr. Caner dresses like a genie. This is rendered a little less humorous by Caner's claims to have dressed "different" as a child in Ohio.)
- Ergun Caner Awards (Caner doesn't claim a lot of awards. This post aims to document/confirm those that can be confirmed.)
- Curious Caner Tidbits (Discusses selections extracted from Caner's books)
- Jerry Tackett Speaks? (Discusses comment allegedly from Jerry Tackett, the man who was influential in bringing Caner to Christ, according to many of Caner's testimonies)
- Caner Brothers - Raised by their Grandma (Discusses Caner's comments regarding being raised by his grandmother)
- Dr. Caner's Books (Discusses the Books that Caner has been affiliated with)
- Dr. Caner's Qualifications (Discusses Caner's experience as an author/pastor.)
- Turkey, Many Wives, and Many Half-brothers and -sisters (Discussion of sermon, "Don't Mess with the Book" documenting a number of questionable statements)
- Early Testimonies of the Caners - 2002 (Provides evidence of what the testimonies of the Caner brothers began to be in the year following 9/11)
- Haram Koran Handling (Examines the issue of Caner's father's devotion to Islam from one very particular angle.)
- Dr. Caner's Testimony before 9/11 (Provides Evidence of Testimony Attributed to Caner before 9/11)
- Caner's Old Biography Photos (Photos Previously Posted by Dr. Caner, with some criticism of their use by Dr. Caner)
- Ergun Caner's ThD Thesis / Dissertation (Supporting Evidence for Dr. Caner's claim to be a "Dr.")
- The Credentials Issue (Summarizing the Relevant Evidence)
- Ergun Caner on the Pastor's Perspective Compared to Other Testimonies/Evidence (Analysis of a number of the issues that arise when comparing Dr. Caner's testimony among multiple sources)
- One of Myriad Little Details - The Toledo Mosque (Including some analysis of a troubling, seemingly minor inconsistency.)
- Ergun Caner's Middle Name is What? (Including links to all known pre-9/11 Internet references to Dr. Caner.)
- Caner's Autobiography (video evidence unfortunately seems to be dead)
- Caner's Autobiography Per the AP (includes one additional photo)
- Who is Dr. Ergun Caner? (the most popular Caner-related post, no doubt due to the photos)
- Ergun Caner, Sri Lanka, and an Embellished Autobiography (illustrating some of the issues raised by Ergun Caner's comments)
- Dr. Caner's Debates, Dialogs, and Discussions (documenting the apparent extent of Dr. Caner's debate experience)
- Unveiling Unveiling Islam: References to the Hadith (a survey of citation to the Hadith in one of the Caner brothers' works)
- Inquiry Committee for Ergun Caner (reporting the formation of Liberty University's inquiry committee)
- Jamal Jivanjee's Memory (Commenting on the testimony of Mr. Jivanjee regarding his knowledge of the Caner family)
- Wishful Defense of Ergun Caner (Noting that some of Dr. Caner's supporters would like to ignore the allegations that Dr. Caner has been embellishing his autobiography in a variety of ways)
- Jamal Jivanjee's Testimony Regarding Ergun Caner (Proposing Some Further Questions for Mr. Jivanjee to help fill out his testimony.)
- Ergun Caner's So-called Apology (providing documentation of Dr. Caner's so-called apology, in which he did not admit to lying, and in fact claims: "I have never intentionally misled anyone.")
- Ergun Caner Parody (noting the existence of the parody YouTube page)
- Tom Chantry on Stephen Ambrose, Ergun Caner, and the Credibility of the Gospel (providing link to an interesting and thought-provoking article from Tom Chantry)
- Compare and Contrast (Compare and contrasting the approaches of Paul the Apostle and Ergun Caner)
- Possum Kill, North Carolina (Defending Dr. Caner from the charge that he was "lying" about the hometown of his father-in-law.)(Updated, because of one troubling testimony.)
- Ergun Caner, Rick and Bubba, and Daisy Duke: How LBTS does Apologetics (Identification of Dr. Caner's impossible claim to have watched the Dukes of Hazzard while growing up in Turkey, as well as noting that LBTS has used this show as an example of how they do apologetics.)
- New Biography for Caner (Commenting on a new biography of Dr. Caner that was posted to the Liberty University website. That biography was subsequently replaced with essentially a mirror of the biography that appears on Dr. Caner's personal page.)
- Ergun Caner - Son of a Devout Muslim Father (Defending Dr. Caner as a real ex-Muslim)
- Caner Materials (links to a variety of materials relating to Dr. Caner)
- Ergun Caner: Raised by a Devout Muslim Father (defending Dr. Caner as a real ex-Muslim, even while noting some troubling inconsistencies in his testimony)
- Responding to "Fake Ex-Muslims" (Part 1)(Part 2)(Part 3)(Defending Dr. Caner as best I could from a variety of criticisms from the "Fake Ex-Muslims" website.)
- The Cost of What? (A Response to Tim Guthrie's odd post suggesting that, in effect, criticism of Dr. Caner was the result of Dr. Caner following Christ.)
- Ergun Caner vs. James White: Which is More like the Jerry Springer Show? (Providing link to Dr. White's video response to Dr. Caner's ignorant criticism of formal debates.)
Other than that, I only recall posting one video on the subject of Ergun Caner:(a 60 second response to one of Dr. Caner's comments on Romans 9)
-TurretinFan
38 comments:
Well, you button holed it again.
When you go back and read what actually happened, it was Rebekah who, while holding the boys in her womb, went to God and asked Him "what is going on in there" to which He replied in essence Romans 9:11. The only way one is going to come into this understanding of "election according to the Eternal Purpose of God" is by the same "Word of Faith" "put" in them too. It is not a word that naturally resides within.
It was this "Word of Faith" that she nutured as she raised her sons; kinda like Mary holding in her heart all the things she was seeing and hearing and being done to her son, Jesus.
When it came time, "in the fullness of time", Rebekah acted out the "belief" put in her and Jacob came under that "belief" because it was put in him and he then went in and deceived Isaac. Remember something now, Jacob wasn't deceived by God or his mother. He came under the Word of God and obeyed his mother!
The only work involved here was a husband and wife on the marriage bed bringing two sons into the predetermined world God created them to live in!
I would say that Rebekah, to me, is a type and shadow of the present day True Church who hold within our bosoms a "Word" of Faith, that mystery as Paul describes it in Galatians 2 or Colossians or or or!
It is because of this Word I pray constantly this Word:
1Ch 16:31 Let the heavens be glad, and let the earth rejoice, and let them say among the nations, "The LORD reigns!"
1Ch 16:32 Let the sea roar, and all that fills it; let the field exult, and everything in it!
1Ch 16:33 Then shall the trees of the forest sing for joy before the LORD, for he comes to judge the earth.
Hello Turretinfan,
I have just started looking through the index. I learn much when I see how you set the example of not going beyond the evidence; being careful in your judgement. I believe it takes considerable discipline.
God hated Esau. Is that hate identical to the hate we have of our own Father and Mother...even our own life... in being made a disciple of Jesus? Which is to say we love Him so much, by comparison, our love for our family and ourselves is hate?
Lastly, in the 60 second disposal, is that your voice? Or did you hire one?
Smiling
Gary
"God hated Esau. Is that hate identical to the hate we have of our own Father and Mother...even our own life... in being made a disciple of Jesus? Which is to say we love Him so much, by comparison, our love for our family and ourselves is hate?"
Perhaps so. One might point out that God did make a mighty nation of Esau - a nation that apparently survived until the time of the Jewish-Roman wars, although Esau's descendants were subjugated for a time by the Israelites.
The context, though, is the support for verse 6, about not all of Israel being of Israel - i.e. some being the children of God's promise and others not being the children of God's promise. It doesn't mean that God has no care for them (on the contrary, God has made a great nation from Ishmael, one that exists even to this day in Arabia) but that his special care and love is for those whom He chooses - not based on their merit or deserving - but simply on his will and purposes.
Indeed there are basically three examples:
God has mercy on Isaac (not Ishmael)
God has mercy on Jacob (not Esau)
God has mercy on the Israelites (not Pharaoh)
And no one has a right to complain if God hardens Pharaoh and shows mercy on the Israelites. He's the potter.
"Lastly, in the 60 second disposal, is that your voice? Or did you hire one?"
My voice.
-TurretinFan
TF,
If I might, I would add to what you opened up there to Gary's question.
Gary,
When you study the Greek words in those verses for the word "life" and then go to 1 John 3:14-17 and see the connections, you can get a sense of the "love" we are to love one another with in laying down our lives for one another, all the while "hating" our life and the lives of our mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, self and best friends.
Let me see if I can succinctly unfold it now?
We need to primarily focus on the word "eternal" and "life" in context with hating our life as Jesus taught us.
Jesus is a Spirit, Eternal, without beginning or end.
Jesus came into this world and became fully man.
We are four parts, pneuma/spirit, psuche/soul, soma/body and sarx/flesh.
When Jesus came from Mary, those three parts, soul, body and flesh "housed" His Eternal Spirit.
So, at the verse:
Luk 14:26 "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.
That word there, "life" is:
ψυχή
psuchē
psoo-khay'
From G5594; breath, that is, (by implication) spirit, abstractly or concretely (the animal sentient principle only; thus distinguished on the one hand from G4151, which is the rational and immortal soul; and on the other from G2222, which is mere vitality, even of plants: these terms thus exactly correspond respectively to the Hebrew [H5315], [H7307] and [H2416]: - heart (+ -ily), life, mind, soul, + us, + you.
Now, to shed some light on the meaning there, consider these verses here:
1Jn 3:14 We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brothers. Whoever does not love abides in death.
1Jn 3:15 Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.
1Jn 3:16 By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brothers.
1Jn 3:17 But if anyone has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?
In verses 14 and 15, the Greek word for "life" is:
ζωή
zōē
dzo-ay'
From G2198; life (literally or figuratively): - life (-time). Compare G5590.
And in verse 16 the Greek word for "life" and "lives" is "psuche". See above for that definition.
And finally the Greek word in verse 17 that is relevant to understanding what Jesus is teaching us, "hate" our life/psuche, is the Greek word:
βίος
bios
bee'-os
A primary word; life, that is, (literally) the present state of existence; by implication the means of livelihood: - good, life, living.
Our worldly possessions sometimes conflict us with our Christian duty to lay our life/psuche, life/bios, down for our neighbor! It can be a struggle to do this emotionally at times!
The Apostle Paul zeroed in on this when he hinged everything around "covetousness" and loving one another with the Love of God not the natural, psuche love or philo love of man.
If you would look at these other verses where that word is used, "bios", you can get a sense that what Jesus is teaching us is to not look at another's personal likes and dislikes, feelings or emotions but accept them and love them and assist them with their "bios" needs when it is appropriate to do so.
Verses: Mark 12:44, the widow, all she had to "live/bios" on.
Luke 8:14, pleasures of this "life/bios".
Luke 8:43, "living/bios".
Luke 15:12, "property/living/bios".
Luke 15:30, "property/living/bios".
Luke 21:4, "living/bios".
1 Tim 2:2, "quiet life/bios".
2 Tim 2:4, affairs of this life/bios".
1 Peter 4:3, "living/life/bios".
1 John 2:16, "pride of life/bios".
Jesus had to "lay down His "psuche/life" for us, not His "Zoe/Life". We are to do the same.
Natamllc,
You said, “The Apostle Paul zeroed in on this when he hinged everything around "covetousness" and loving one another with the Love of God not the natural, psuche love or philo love of man.
If you would look at these other verses where that word is used, "bios", you can get a sense that what Jesus is teaching us is to not look at another's personal likes and dislikes, feelings or emotions but accept them and love them and assist them with their "bios" needs when it is appropriate to do so.”
Thank you for your time and attention to my question (and TurretinFan, thank you for the same.)
As I wrote the words [”we love Him so much, by comparison, our love for our family and ourselves is hate?"] I was remembering His command to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In the Good Samaritan parable Luke 10:25-37 Jesus illustrates agape in a relationship devoid of philo. I know my example here is extreme, but it is similar to a black man helping a kkk member who had been severely beaten and robbed, when the black man knows the victim is kkk. There is some utter disregard of the good Samaritan towards his own personal feelings as he delivers mercy ‘to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers.” And, the good Samaritan disregarded any and all of the personal feelings of the victim towards him. He hated all of it.
Do you think I have it right? If I do, perhaps the bracketed phrase up top would need some modification.
Gary
Let me qualify something in my above comment. Jesus is ultimately the only good Samaritan. But in my discussion above, I am thinking of a saved sinner acting as a good samaritan.
Gary
Gary,
hmmmmmm? I will proceed to respond but I tremble a bit knowing TF is probably watching over all this? I hope he finds time to respond.
In any event, I am brave and courageous so here goes!
"... [”we love Him so much, by comparison, our love for our family and ourselves is hate?"]....".
Remember that Jesus came to "fulfill" the Law which is according to the Apostle Paul, "holy, righteous and good".
We would do ourselves a service, mercifully, to obey the Law.
Here it is:
Lev 19:17 "You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason frankly with your neighbor, lest you incur sin because of him.
Lev 19:18 You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD.
One now needs a bit of help if not a lot of help reconciling the contradictions here.
Rhetorically I ask: "Ok Jesus, if you are so smart, which is it? Do I hate them or love them seeing Leviticus says"
Clearly we read Jesus saying to us to "hate" our family members and our friends as we hate ourselves.
Luk 14:26 "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.
Just to kinda put a grinder on the edge of the metal now, let me walk over to John's Gospel and point out something peculiar there about the "loves" of God and maybe it will help? At least I hope it will! :)
Joh 21:15 When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Feed my lambs."
Joh 21:16 He said to him a second time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Tend my sheep."
Joh 21:17 He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, "Do you love me?" and he said to him, "Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you." Jesus said to him, "Feed my sheep.
Joh 21:18 Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were young, you used to dress yourself and walk wherever you wanted, but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will dress you and carry you where you do not want to go."
When you go behind the scenes, so to speak, looking at the original text, in this case, the Greek, you see three things I want to note. There certainly are more than three things in the verses so I am not being exclusive or exhaustive in this as I try to put over some plain meaning of the text.
First, you should know that the word "love" used by Jesus is this word in verses 15 and 16:
ἀγαπάω
agapaō
ag-ap-ah'-o
Perhaps from ἄγαν agan (much; or compare [H5689]); to love (in a social or moral sense): - (be-) love (-ed). Compare G5368.
Second, you should know that the word "love" used by Jesus changes in verse 17:
φιλέω
phileō
fil-eh'-o
From G5384; to be a friend to (fond of [an individual or an object]), that is, have affection for (denoting personal attachment, as a matter of sentiment or feeling; while G25 is wider, embracing especially the judgment and the deliberate assent of the will as a matter of principle, duty and propriety: the two thus stand related very much as G2309 and G1014, or as G2372 and G3563 respectively; the former being chiefly of the heart and the latter of the head); specifically to kiss (as a mark of tenderness): - kiss, love.
Third, you should know that Peter, when he answers Jesus' each time, is using "only" the Greek Word "phileo".
So, what can you conclude by that?
Well, I submit Christ is asking "three" questions and Peter is only answering with only "one" answer.
What is so significant about that?
Well, first, when you go to the Law of Love as is taught in Leviticus cited above, consider the "distinction" the Holy Spirit makes: "....You shall not hate your brother in your heart,....".
Because Jesus is both "God" incarnate and "man" fully man, He can speak from both hearts, the heart of His Eternal Spirit and from the heart of His manhood, His "flesh"/sarx.
Peter, at that time in his Christian experience could only speak from a heart of flesh, "a heart of stone", because he was not as yet "born again" of the "Holy Spirit".
When you study the life of Peter, you can get a glimpse into your own "humanity". When you study the Scriptures, all of them which Peter has a hand in, you see something. You see this tough, "thick" "dull" hearted man "until" Acts Chapter two! Thereafter, Peter never uses that word, "phileo" again. Every other time through the book of Acts and his Epistles, he uses other words for the English word love. All those words have a connection to the Holy Spirit.
Now, consider, in my view, the best way to see and understand my point by reading a most famous series of verses the Apostle Paul had written from the book of Romans, here:
Rom 5:3 More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance,
Rom 5:4 and endurance produces character, and character produces hope,
Rom 5:5 and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.
Rom 5:6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.
Rom 5:7 For one will scarcely die for a righteous person--though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die--
Rom 5:8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
Also, from the famous Old Testament Prophet Ezekiel, next post::::>
Eze 36:22 "Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord GOD: It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations to which you came.
Eze 36:23 And I will vindicate the holiness of my great name, which has been profaned among the nations, and which you have profaned among them. And the nations will know that I am the LORD, declares the Lord GOD, when through you I vindicate my holiness before their eyes.
Eze 36:24 I will take you from the nations and gather you from all the countries and bring you into your own land.
Eze 36:25 I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you.
Eze 36:26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.
Eze 36:27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.
Eze 36:28 You shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers, and you shall be my people, and I will be your God.
Eze 36:29 And I will deliver you from all your uncleannesses. And I will summon the grain and make it abundant and lay no famine upon you.
Eze 36:30 I will make the fruit of the tree and the increase of the field abundant, that you may never again suffer the disgrace of famine among the nations.
Eze 36:31 Then you will remember your evil ways, and your deeds that were not good, and you will loathe yourselves for your iniquities and your abominations.
Eze 36:32 It is not for your sake that I will act, declares the Lord GOD; let that be known to you. Be ashamed and confounded for your ways, O house of Israel.
Remember, God is Love.
Remember, God "hates" the world, the flesh and the devils!
Remember the purpose of the Law is to teach us something about our "human" nature.
What is that?
That we are sinners and sinful from the beginning of our natural life to its death. That we are evil from start to finish. And there is no hope for us without God's Divine Nature, by His great Mercy, we are "being born again" to a "Living Hope" through the Resurrection of the Jesus Christ. This is the "New Covenant" Jeremiah prophesied would come; and as has been cited above, Ezekiel explains to us just "how" God intents for this to happen; and Peter examples for us by the Historical Record the Holy Spirit makes of his life in the Scriptures, for our learning and admonition upon whom the ends of the ages has come.
If you "looked up" those verses I directed you to in my first response after TF's comments, above these comments, you would have gone to 1 John 2:16. Now, let me cite that verse "in a light" that might help you come to grips with just what Jesus was getting at when He taught, then, and is teaching us even today by the Spirit, that we are to "hate" and not "love" with natural phileo love, but, by His Grace, so that we can by it, His Grace, "divinely Love" and "divinely hate" our people in the flesh:
1Jn 2:15 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
1Jn 2:16 For all that is in the world--the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions--is not from the Father but is from the world.
1Jn 2:17 And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever.
Finally, just one more citation and some concluding remarks:::>
Rom 7:1 Or do you not know, brothers--for I am speaking to those who know the law--that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives?
Rom 7:2 For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage.
Rom 7:3 Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress.
Rom 7:4 Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God.
Rom 7:5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death.
Rom 7:6 But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.
Here, again, borrowing from the Apostle Paul, when we read those words, Paul helps us come to grips with the reality of our most "sinful" nature that "loves" the things of this world and in fact, he establishes this "truth", we can't do anything but love this world as we hopefully understand by that question and answer series between Jesus and Peter cited from at the end of John's Gospel above?
When we read down through Romans chapter 7 we come to a most mature and amazing admission by one of God's greatest and finest "Disciples", Paul the Apostle.
He makes some startling admissions about himself and us too:
Rom 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin.
Rom 7:15 For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate.
Rom 7:16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good.
Rom 7:17 So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.
Rom 7:18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out.
Rom 7:19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing.
Rom 7:20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.
Rom 7:21 So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand.
Rom 7:22 For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being,
Rom 7:23 but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members.
Rom 7:24 Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?
So, as we see with Peter at Acts 2; Jeremiah's prophesy that a New Covenant was going to be enacted based on better promises, one has asserts; Ezekiel teaches us how this is to come about; Paul teaching about us going through some rudimentary trials and tribulations which purposes the shedding of the "Love" of God in our hearts; John making distinctions about love and hate, Paul states in Romans 8:
Rom 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.
Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death.
Rom 8:3 For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh,
Rom 8:4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
Which, hopefully, when you take time to comprehend it, as I have laid it out, probably not so clearly, you should now be able to resolve your question that you asked above based on that verse, Luk 14:26.
Was that helpful or did I just make things worse?
OOPs, I need to make a majorly slight correction.
I don't know how I did it, maybe the devil made me do it, but, the Ezekiel passages got misplaced and inadvertantly I pasted the verses from Romans.
Here's Zek's:
Eze 36:22 "Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord GOD: It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations to which you came.
Eze 36:23 And I will vindicate the holiness of my great name, which has been profaned among the nations, and which you have profaned among them. And the nations will know that I am the LORD, declares the Lord GOD, when through you I vindicate my holiness before their eyes.
Eze 36:24 I will take you from the nations and gather you from all the countries and bring you into your own land.
Eze 36:25 I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you.
Eze 36:26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.
Eze 36:27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.
Eze 36:28 You shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers, and you shall be my people, and I will be your God.
Natamllc,
"No man can serve two masters. Right? He'll love one and hate the other. It doesn't mean that he has a psychological hatred toward the one; it simply means that in effect, de facto, if you have two that you love and they come into conflict, somebody is gonna be treated one way and somebody is gonna be treated another way. It is a de facto hatred in the sense that if God says this is what I expect of you, this is what I want from you, and your family says we don't want that, we want this, you do what God says, you, therefore, have expressed love to God and you have treated your family as if you hated them because you have no regard for what they ask when it comes into conflict with what God demands. It is nothing more than that. It is not counter-commanding us to hate the people that Scripture commands us to love. And the best way, maybe, to clear that up is in Matthew 10:37, which I read earlier, which spins it on a positive note. "He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me." It's about loving more and loving less. That's essentially what that love/hate concept is conveying. This is a call, then, to unshared love with Christ, to love no one the way you love Him." (John MacArthur on Luke 14:26-33)
God did not prefer Esau. I am not to prefer myself, my family, or my possessions. God preferred Isaac. I am to prefer Christ. He is The Priority. The statement: "we love Him so much, by comparison, our love for our family and ourselves is hate"...holds.
The good Samaritan disregarded the psychology (the prejudice between pure blood Jews and mixed blood Samaritans) and preferred and perfumed agape love. It is perfectly consistent.
Perfumed? Well.. why not!!! But 'performed' is what I would have written, and did mean.
OOps, oopS? I don't know about this whole new technological age. I posted my comments and went back and thought one of them removed the Ezekiel portion. Now this morning I come back and see they were sequentially as I posted them the first time?
Grrrrrr, oh, won't Heaven be grand? No problems like this?
Ok, Gary,
hmmmmmm? "de facto", well, maybe?
My point was just the opposition, that is, it does mean we have psychological hatred towards the one.
We have now, those of us who are "born again", two "psychologies" you might say?
My old man, that Adamic nature is only "wired" for psychological hatred and that is wrong and sinful and evil and no good when it comes to the Gospel.
We are taught to be "daily" everything in a new way with regard to the "unchanging" Nature of Christ and the Eternal Kingdom.
The Old Testament locates the Holy Spirit in the created world and also foreshadows the re-location of the Holy Spirit in the New, Who has been here from the beginning, Genesis 1:2.
The New Testament looks back at where and how and why the Holy Spirit worked among men.
Do you suppose the Bible blinds our reasonings to that fact? No, but what the Bible does is focus us on a particular old "tree" among many "trees" of the "forest".
That purpose is so that all the "True Trees" of God's, making up His New Forest/Kingdom on earth, can find their places; and where is your place, then? Your place is in the Tree of Life. Jesus told Nicodemus "you must be born again". Peter wrote about it too in a wonderful way, 1 Peter 1:3-5.
Well, it is in fact now a new psychological hatred for the Old Adamic nature 100% of the time in 100% of "all" humanity, even a hatred for ourselves, that we have been given as a free Gift. One only experiences that "revelation" fully when the Holy Spirit is "re-located" into our heart/pneuma and mind/psuche.
There is something I will paste here from a book, "Justification, Understanding the Classic Reformed Doctrine, by Dr. J.V. Fesko, page 287:
Dr. Fesko writes: "...We see the redemptive historical and eschatological elements surface when Paul says "now" (nyn)/Greek, which is a temporal indicator that a new age of redemptive history is present. We also know that we are in the midst of the eschatological age because (1) we are now in the wake of the life, death and resurrection of Christ, the eschatological Adam;....".
The shift for me came as I began "dying" daily to my old psychological hatred toward everyone, Saint/sinner and sinner, all.
Now that I have been fitted within and without with a brand new daily generated Life in Christ, because, before, the Holy Spirit was speaking "to me"; now, He has re-located Himself in me so that He can speak to me through others who have similiarly been born again and in that same fashion He can speak to others through me. This is God's good work for us, Eph. 2:10!
Here's an interesting twist or idea on some verses:::> continued
Eph 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
Eph 2:14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility
Eph 2:15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,
Eph 2:16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.
Eph 2:17 And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near.
Eph 2:18 For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father.
Eph 2:19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God,
Eph 2:20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone,
Eph 2:21 in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord.
Eph 2:22 In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.
While I now have "access" to God "through" Christ by "One Spirit", how do suppose God now has access to us? Is it not through that "One Spirit" because of Christ?
We come to God by One Spirit. God comes to us now uniquely through the same Holy Spirit through Christ.
Here is another one of Paul's ways of saying it:
Col 1:19 For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell,
Col 1:20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.
Do you see it? Here we see Paul saying that God Our Heavenly Father can now "make Peace" with us through the Blood of Christ!
How do we make Peace with God, but through the Blood of Christ, too! It works both ways now because the Holy Spirit is re-located to dwell in our hearts through Christ and He changes our minds/psuche daily so that we can rightly "hate" and rightly "love" with God's hate and love all mankind.
Some have taken this concept of Truth and made it way more catholic.
John warns us of this, here:
2Jn 1:3 Grace, mercy, and peace will be with us, from God the Father and from Jesus Christ the Father's Son, in truth and love.
2Jn 1:4 I rejoiced greatly to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as we were commanded by the Father.
2Jn 1:5 And now I ask you, dear lady--not as though I were writing you a new commandment, but the one we have had from the beginning--that we love one another.
2Jn 1:6 And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, so that you should walk in it.
2Jn 1:7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist.
2Jn 1:8 Watch yourselves, so that you may not lose what we have worked for, but may win a full reward.
2Jn 1:9 Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.
2Jn 1:10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting,
2Jn 1:11 for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
Our great debates primarily now are with those who add to or take something away from Truth.
This blog produced by TF is a safe place to have your iron sharpened to the Truth and the error that works among us and in fact fills the air every day! Grrrrr
Look up, for Christ is indeed coming to judge the earth again!:
Heb 9:27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment,
Heb 9:28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.
So I encourage you to pray:
1Ch 16:31 Let the heavens be glad, and let the earth rejoice, and let them say among the nations, "The LORD reigns!"
1Ch 16:32 Let the sea roar, and all that fills it; let the field exult, and everything in it!
1Ch 16:33 Then shall the trees of the forest sing for joy before the LORD, for he comes to judge the earth.
This is as good a spot to ask this question as any.
I have Googled and Binged without finding an answer.
Who called Caner the "Intellectual Pit Bull of the Evangelical World" and is there record of the debate with Michael Moore (Hatriotism)?
All I could find about the debate was an article Caner had written. I found no evidence of dialog between the two men.
Lightwalker,
I do not know who called Mr. Caner the "Intellectual Pit Bull of the Evangelical World."
However, I do know who was described this way by Lee Strobel in his book The Case For Christ copyright 1998. And he teaches at Liberty University / Seminary: Gary Habermas, Ph.D, D.D. Here is the relevant quote from page 304: "Habermas--bearded, staight talking, rough-hewn--is also a fighter, an acedemic pit bull who looks more like a night club bouncer than an ivory tower intellectual. Armed with razor-sharp arguments and historical evidence to back them up, he's not afraid to come out swinging."
Mr. Habermas has engaged in several real debates. The book mentions a couple. One with Michael Martin, a professor from Boston University (who said Habermas presented him with the most sophisticated defense of the resurrection to date); and one with atheist Anthony Flew. 4 of the 5 debate judges gave to nod to Habermas, 1 called a draw. Habermas' dissertation was on the resurrection and he has written 7 books dealing with Jesus rising from the dead. That's all from Strobel's book.
And I read a comment that suggested Habermas said he knew of no debates the Mr. Caner had done. But that seemed to be a rumor to me.
Nevertheless, I have often wondered what he must be thinking about all of this...and maybe saying behind closed doors to his fellow brothers and teachers there at Liberty University/ Seminary.
That's it.
Gary
I think it was Liberty/Caner himself who billed him as the pit bull of evangelicalism.
I'd like to point out that in 2004 someone believes they spotted some issues with both Caners' Islamic scholarship.
I just had a look at the videos, and it's obvious that despite their PhDs, these two men have not experienced Islam as it exists in its local context. Yes they grew up in a Muslim household but they don't have true grasp of how Muslims think, or how life functions in the Muslim world.
In the second video, at around the 10th minute, Ergun Caner recites the 'shahada', or 'confession of faith' as: "bismillah ar rahman irraheem, muhammad allah ar rahman irraheem". The translation shows up on the screen to be: "There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah". However, this translation is hugely incorrect. In fact, Caner did not recite the shahada at all, but put together something which doesn't really make any sense. The first part of the phrase he read means "In the name of Allah, the compassionate, the merciful". The second part is not even a complete sentence, but might be translated as "Mohammed --- ... Allah, the compassionate the merciful".
Considering that they claim to have grown up in a very devout Muslim family, and that they claim to be knowledgable about Islam, it is highly surprising that they can not recite the single most important statement in Islamic doctrine.
In any case, the fact that these two former Muslims have become respectful Christians should be enough for us to stop bombing muslims. Instead, we should be sending out missions to preach to Muslims, so that they might follow suit. The love of Jesus is stronger than American bombs.
Gary, if you are reading this, is that it?
Don't you want to put more out there with regard to what I have put over? Did I miss it, in your view? I would be grateful to you for some feed back one way or the other!
Changing the subject slightly, now.
As for Ergun Caner, there has been something the Lord has reminded me of, no, rather, maybe it's the Holy Spirit who has been putting in my mind some verses about him and the Liberty University Staff and their students and some alumni.
1Co 1:2 To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours:
and
Tit 1:9 He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.
Tit 1:10 For there are many who are insubordinate, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision party.
Tit 1:11 They must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for shameful gain what they ought not to teach.
Tit 1:12 One of the Cretans, a prophet of their own, said, "Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons."
and
2Jn 1:3 Grace, mercy, and peace will be with us, from God the Father and from Jesus Christ the Father's Son, in truth and love.
2Jn 1:4 I rejoiced greatly to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as we were commanded by the Father.
What this shows us is, in the Church here on earth we have within Her sinners of various stripes and colors, so to speak.
The Corinthian Church, identified as God's Church and each member as a "Saint", had some fairly extreme issues to cope with and dispose of by the Authorities of the Church under the direction of the Holy Spirit.
With the Church in Crete and those John was mentoring, lying seemed to be an issue with them within their particular Ecclesial Body. In fact, you could say that the Church at Crete by Titus' exhortation seem to have recovered from the sin of lying while those John was ministering to, "of the Lady", some walked in Truth and some did not? Did that make them any less Saints?
I don't think so.
What it did do, though, for me, at least, is disqualify those who persisted in that sin of lying, embellishing and being deceitful from being overseers and leaders given a Charge of souls by the Holy Spirit.
One has to wonder just how much of the Work and Fruit of the Holy Spirit is present at Liberty University when a man of such high qualification, is, by his own words, confusing us with contradictions and discrepancies?
What is it then about this institution? What does it say about the "Authorities" of Liberty University or the students, that there are some coming to the defense of Dr. Caner, both from faculty and the Student Body and from the Alumni wanting to ignore the plain Truth of the matter Dr. Caner brought about?
It frightens me to ponder that.
Natamllc,
I am still stinking about what you said. When I asked about God hating Esau, and compared that hating my family, and myself (luke 14:26-27) I was checking for an identical kind of hate. That necessitates though, seeing if God's love for Isaac is identical to our love for Christ that is greater than our love for our family, and ourself (Matt.10:37). The idea of Priority works in this regard. Christ has the priority in my life, and that means I turn away from worldly priorities every time they conflict with His.
I knew before I asked the question to TurretinFan that I hated my sin nature, and my family members sin nature. But that doesn't hang together in the above connection that I was looking for. God hated Esau's sin nature, but loved Isaac's? You see, it doesn't work. Priority of love does, and doesn't focus on the sin nature as it's target or object. Before they had done anything good or bad, God preferred Isaac.
The Father promised the Son a bride. He chose the bride. He created the world and made man. Christ saved and sanctified the bride with His blood. The Holy Spirit brings the bride to life (in Christ) and indwells and fills the bride. The Son marries the bride, and submits all to the Father.
That's history in six sentences. Can you keep your answers a little shorter, Natamllc?
Smiling
Gary
Gary,
before you were given the Gift of the Holy Spirit, what kind of love or hate did you love or hate with?
Gary,
".... God hated Esau's sin nature, but loved Isaac's?...".
Are you making a distinction now between father and son?
In any event, whether or not you are speaking of Isaac or Jacob, God hated all of them equally.
There is none righteous. The only way out of this dilemma is the chastisement Christ born for us!
Yet, here's the issue, is it not, not everyone who is of Israel is Israel? All Israel came from Abraham and Isaac. All of Ishmael's line, who are in the world today came from Abraham and clearly God loved and loves Ishmael's line. Right now on the world stage I think it would be easy to conclude God's consternation for both those boys seeing how they are fighting with one another! :)
I know people from both bloodlines, Isaac's and Ishmael's who are clearly "Spirit" Filled Born Again Christians who love Jesus! hmmmmmm?? The Scripture speaks to them equally as they speak to us too!
Rom 9:1 I am speaking the truth in Christ--I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit--
Rom 9:2 that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart.
Rom 9:3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh.
Rom 9:4 They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises.
Rom 9:5 To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.
Rom 9:6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel,
Rom 9:7 and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but "Through Isaac shall your offspring be named."
and
Eph 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places,
Eph 1:4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love
Eph 1:5 he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will,
Eph 1:6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.
I don't remember who the writer was at Triablogue but one pointed out to me after posting a comment to their article that Jacob is still around while there isn't any trace of the Edomites:::>
Mal 1:1 The oracle of the word of the LORD to Israel by Malachi.
Mal 1:2 "I have loved you," says the LORD. But you say, "How have you loved us?" "Is not Esau Jacob's brother?" declares the LORD. "Yet I have loved Jacob
Mal 1:3 but Esau I have hated. I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert."
That was a bit of a digression from your question.
Anyway, may we continue along this line? And of course any comment about Dr. Caner and his fiasco would be of interest too?
Natamllc,
Please forgive me. I should not have said Isaac, and should have said Jacob.
From a heart that was desperately wicked and decietful above all things, I loved with a spirtually dead love, and I hated with a spiritually dead hate, before I was born again.
Have a good weekend.
Gary
Natamllc,
I want you to do something for me, because I believe you are trying to show me something. Put it together in a thesis paragraph, so I can see what you're trying to say that way.
The greek language has at least 4 different kinds of love: agape, phiia, storge, and eros.
I did not pray for, or forgive my enemies before I was saved.
Gary
not phiia, philia.
g
Gary,
ok, but not just yet.
Let me be sure we are thinking straight, apples and not apples/me oranges/you?
You are fimilar with the terms synergistic and monergistic?
Which are you?
Also, what is your impression of Dr. Caner and the index TF has provided for us? When you go through each point in this thread, what ipression do you come away with regarding Dr. Caner, is he monergistic or synergistic?
Natamllc,
I am ending this discussion with you. Thank you for your input.
Gary
From Alpha and Omega,
Norman Geisler Comments on the Caner Saga...
http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=3927
I cannot say how sad it is to read what Mr. Geisler said.
Gary
Geisler waves his hands like a typical partisan. Notice that he gives no concrete details that would show any knowledge of any of the salient facts.
Speaking of evangelical scandals and Liberty University in the same breath, readers can Google “Appendix F: Thou Shalt Not Steal” (line-by-line proof that THE Jerry Falwell’s 1981 “Fundamentalist Phenomenon” book was a huge plagiarism of George Dollar’s 1973 “History of Fundamentalism in America”!). Also Google “Thomas Ice (Bloopers).” Ice is a prof at LU whose “Ph.D” was “obtained” from a tiny Texas school that was fined by the state of Texas for illegally issuing degrees! When “Dr.” Ice reproduced in 1989 Margaret Macdonald’s short “pre-tribulation rapture” revelation of 1830 (Margaret originated this 180-year-old escapist endtime view which had made millionaires of Lindsey, LaHaye etc.!), he somehow left out 49 words when copying it - the same 49 words LaHaye left out in the same sections when a book of his reproduced it three years later! (LaHaye has been one of LU’s biggest donors.) Ice, BTW, also had the same distinctive copying errors Lindsey had when he had reproduced MM’s revelation in his 1983 book! Since Liberty University is one of the top promoters of the same fringe-British-originated pretrib rapture fantasy, interested readers can also Google “Famous Rapture Watchers,” “Pretrib Rapture Diehards,” “Pretrib Rapture Secrecy,” “Letter from Mrs. Billy Graham,” and “Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty” (documented plagiarism and other dishonesty since 1830 by some of the best known names in evangelicalism) - all uncovered by the author of the bestselling book “The Rapture Plot.” (Evangelicals should take some tranquilizers before reading the above!)
(yes, I saw & read the above web bit recently - - Mary)
Ergun Caner, Ex Muslim Evangelical Leader, Exposed as Fake (from the Huffington Post by Walid Zatar)
..."In one speech, Caner told a crowd that outside the mosque in Kabul there was a sign that read, "Do not teach the women to read and write." The story may or may not be true, but Caner, to give authority to the tale, told the crowd what was written in the native tongue: "bahasha uwtara muwtara seeteeroh." That's neither Dari nor Arabic nor Urdu nor Turkish nor Pashtu. It is an entirely made up language."
What will the unapprised Geisler say when he is finally confronted with so much evidence like this? He needs to read. And so does Elmer Towns.
Gary
Gary
I expect that the response will go much like this, "I am so sorry that Dr. Caner said the things that he did that were not exactly so. He clearly got 'carried away' during his sermons and did not know how to take the words back once they were said. If you examine his life and witness over the years you will see that the statements that he made did not really impact his testimony in any significant way. He has accepted the discipline that Liberty University has imposed and it will likely enhance his leadership of their Seminary.
When I supported him, I had not taken the time to examine the documentation of the issues. This was because of the motivations and lack of credibility of his accusers. The fact that their attacks had some small basis in fact does nothing to cause me to read the documentation now. I am not interested in this unimportant issue and will not further comment on it.”
The obvious fact that Dr. Caner has based his recent career on the response that we all felt to the 9/11 attacks is really depressing. Before that decision, he was a competent (apparently) minister with an interesting testimony. After that event and his decision to restructure his testimony, he stood out from the crowd in many ways and he was willing to milk that for all it was worth. Over the last few years, it seems to me that he has been content to rarely “trot out” his untrue history. Maybe he decided it was time to let it go away. If so, he was certainly correct. Unfortunately, the Internet “never forgets.”
The letters of support that have been posted all sound like what I would write for a friend who was caught in the hen house with a bag of chickens and is trying to avoid any consequences. They are long on vague support and really short on specifics. Should “they” ever come after me, I hope that I will have a friend or two who are willing to ignore the facts and support me anyhow. However, I have a bunch of rational friends so I might be disappointed.
Bennett Willis
The single most noticeable thing to me in this whole situation is the deafening silence we are getting from Emir Caner. If MY brother were in Ergun's situation, and I knew for a fact that he was being railroaded, and that I could quite easily verify at least some of the points at issue, then I would be screaming my guts out to vindicate my brother until my vocal chords axploded.
But from Emir, we are getting--silence.
Emir realizes that his personal and professional reputation in on the line here as well as Ergun's. Due to their close relationaship, whatever happens to Ergun will also smack Emir right in the face.
While I am in the mood for speculation—what do you suppose the conversation between Ergun and Emir after the 2001 sermons when Ergun proclaimed his jihadist activities? Maybe it went something like this.
“Ergun, what are you saying? You know that what you said is not so!”
“Emir, you should have seen their faces! They ate it up. The congregation needed to hear that Muslims can be converted—even if they were committed ones.”
“But you know this is not true of us. This will catch up with you. And what am I supposed to do?”
“Well little brother, you can come along for the ride or you can embarrass us both. Which do you want to do? You need to make up your mind right now!”
And the rest is history.
Tom
"say it ain't so Joe"!
As for the silence, that is a most plausible silence I have heard so far!
Post a Comment