The Southern Baptist Convention, Ergun Caner, and 1 John 5:1

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line. The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us.

Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence. Our host is dr. James white director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. This is a live program and we invite your participation.

If you'd like to talk with dr. White call now. It's 602 nine seven three four six zero two or toll-free across the United States. It's one eight seven seven seven five. Three three three four one and now with today's topic.

Here is James white. And welcome to the dividing line on a Tuesday morning. Here's the situation folks. We have an all-new setup here. Not only last week was it challenging doing this via Skype from London?

But now that I'm back here in sunny and beautiful Phoenix, Arizona. We are trying a number of new things today. So we're gonna have some whoopses back. We had a whoops one minute before we started we had a whoops.

But we're gonna have a few more whoopses just to bear with us today these things. Here's situation. First of all tweet deck is up and running in front of me. Dr Oakley 1689 is my Twitter address and if you have questions or comments.

Inviting all the Ergon canner fans who believe that it is inappropriate wrong evil of me. To dare to ask for honesty and integrity amongst Christian leaders now. I know I just poisoned the well didn't I but that's what I'm doing and it's shocking to me the Responses that I'm getting from people who really believe that evidently as long as you say Jesus, then you can say anything else along with that and Everything is fine.

If you would like to contact me via that means that's fine. We'll go that direction. We have a new way of contacting the dividing line today and a lot of you have been waiting for this and that is via Skype.

You can contact us at dividing dot line now. And my understanding is that that doesn't show us as being online. We'll fix that or not I'm not sure all depends learning curve here. But it's dividing dot line and you will be able to get through to us at that address just put in dividing dot line.

What will happen is if you hit the phone call button? Your phone call will be refused initially. I suppose you could just try texting initially and say I would like to get on the dividing line. Give your name and where you're from and.

Then rich will get back to you on that. And he will call you back when it's time to put you on the air. And I've noticed that the Skype voice quality is significantly higher than that which we have on the phone lines and.

So, of course, we have the regular phone lines. I hope they're working. Are they working good? It's it's very even have issues. They're having to change out a chip and you know when you upgrade a computer Bios has changed and all sorts of stuff.

Hours were spent yesterday trying to get this whole thing to work so that we can have multiple means by which you can contact us. And so on so forth. So eight seven, seven, seven, five, three, three, three, four.

One is the toll-free phone number. Eight, seven, seven, seven, five, three, three, three, four one. I could use a little more of myself in the headsets. All that has changed as well. That sounds a little bit better there.

That that helps a little bit, but we'll be doing a bunch of things. We already have our first Twitter question. What time is the dividing line today? Very good, it is on right now. Well handle the first question fairly easily.

Pride didn't offend too many people other than the person who probably Wrote in is now going. Oh, why did I ask that question? That's how you'll be able to get hold of us today so that's. That's where we get started there.

Few comments to get started and then I see we're gonna be having some questions about first John 5 -1 on the program today. Nothing surprising about that. However, but we'll be taking a look at that. We have been discussing it in the videos that we've been doing of late.

So You might find that to be an interesting discussion, but you can call in today on your questions. You can ask about the trip to London. The debates with the Muslims. You can ask about the open-air preaching on Friday evening.

No, that was not a picture of me doing the open-air preaching as a fellow by name Rob who heads up that group at Leicester Square. I was one of the people that forms the group around him that that attracts other people and then I was to start looking For Muslims to talk to and I did for about 90 minutes.

Talk with a number of Muslims in that particular context very different conversations. It was very interesting. Maybe we'll have time to talk about that. We can talk about the ministry in London the fact we want to go back again next year in February.

We're building some momentum there more and more people are getting excited about it that's that's come up we can talk about the Eric and Kenner situation and the infiltration of post-modernism and humanistic thinking into the church.

That is being seen in many of the responses that are being offered or the sad circle the wagons Southern Baptist mentality mentality that has been illustrated very very clearly in the responses that have been offered as well and We can discuss first John 5 1 we can discuss the issues around reformed theology.

Isn't it funny? I have dared to point out issues of basic simple integrity openness and transparency in Regards the claims that Eric and Kenner makes about himself about his debates. Made about his debates his bio page remains off of his website as of today.

I'm not sure exactly what that means, but it's been down for a number of days, but of course on that Bio page he had claimed to have done debates with religious leaders. Not just Mormon missionaries, but religious leaders of various sundry religious groups including Islam and I think the last rendition had 13 nations and 40 some odd states.

The past has been 11 and interestingly enough the number of states changed and went down. I'm not sure how that happens, but anyway Issues regarding the integrity of making those kind of claims when Your entire claim to fame is you are an apologist.

You are a former Muslim. You're an expert in these things. You're the head of the global apologetics program. You're trying to bring paying customers into your school and I believe that there is a Necessity for integrity.

No one so far has ever accused me of claiming to have debated someone. I have not debated not once. I Haven't heard anybody say oh, well you you've claimed to have debated Zulfikar Ali Shah. Well I did.

Because there were live people there. There's video tape recordings of The encounter. Well you've claimed to debate Shabir Ali. I have four times and Hope to again in the future. And we can start going down the list.

Well you claim to have debated in in Three different countries. Yeah, I have United States the United Kingdom and Australia. No one's raised any any issues along those lines at all. In fact the sad thing is the vast majority of people who have been Coming after me with fork and tongue over the past week or so Have done so very clearly without even taking the time to read what I have said or why I have expressed my concern about the Ernie Cantor situation.

Vast majority of have not read my books. They've not viewed the debates. Or they've been very selective in what they've looked at. There are some who have. But the vast majority have not. All they see is you're not supposed to say anything about anyone who claims to be a Christian.

Well folks I've never been that way. From the time this ministry started we dealt with things like the the word faith movement many many years ago and Always. The the first major groups we dealt with were who the Mormons Jehovah's Witnesses and Roman Catholics.

What do they all claim. They all claim to be Christians, and so if you're going to you know Attack us at least try to do so with with some understanding of where we have stood for over 25 years now. I Have made a firm Defense of the fact that there are many who make false profession of faith in Christ now just because I disagree with someone Doesn't mean that I'm saying they're not a Christian.

I'm very clear about which groups. I believe are not Christian and I am very clear about the issues surrounding. The difference between disagreeing with someone's theological formulations, I have never for example condemned Dave hunt to hell.

I've never sent Chuck Smith off to the flames of perdition. But so many people who are attacking this ministry right now refuse to allow us to define our own grounds of differentiation definition. Just because I have criticized someone like a Brian Broderson Doesn't mean that I have sent him off and put him in the same category as a Daniel Peterson from BYU or Dave Armstrong of Roman Catholicism.

We clearly make differentiation between these various groups and Just because I disagree with someone doesn't mean I'm sending them off to hell. And so we have labored over the years there are I don't know how many hundreds of thousands of bytes of information Sitting on our website that have been written over literally decades now.

That I think are very consistent in laying out what we think are the very definitional issues and. So I think it's extremely important To address these particular subjects and to do so carefully. Why have I done so in regards to?

Ergon Cantor. Well Here's this this just came in from Zachary B on Twitter. Since our primary witness as a church is through our unity John 17. Do you think it might be? Do more harm than good to constantly tell the world while you disagree with people who appear to also be followers of Jesus.

That's a very very good question. A Lot of people is oh see we shall be one in what? What's our unity and in truth? Did the Apostle Paul violate that interpretation of John chapter 17 by writing Galatians?

By anathematizing men who claim to be Christians. Did he feel he was somehow? violating this concept of unity. When he had to point out that there are those who are not Christians who claim to be. Why is the majority of New Testament books warning as false teachers if that is the way we are to understand John 17 that?

Unity is to be based upon allowing for this huge wide Contradictory definition of the Christian faith, then it would seem to follow. That the New Testament is an incoherent document that cannot give us any guidance whatsoever because the New Testament writers did not follow that interpretation.

By the way, I will take Twitter questions that are somewhat relevant to what I'm talking about. I just had a question on dispensationalism and covenantals now not not not not the topic today. Not even close.

You need to clarify something all right go ahead. Yeah, I don't want there to be any confusion. There are a number of people who are coming in through Skype. They're making that initial contact, and I don't want them to be confused.

I think some people are just getting on the contact list to get it listed and others may be intending to get in the queue and. So if you want to actually get into the queue and line up to call in on Skype.

You actually have to attempt to call me. They can't text you. It's a little confusing right now. I want to make sure okay that I'm not calling somebody who didn't right and get a good year at all. You know right so let's let's just make sure that I don't if I see that red button.

Then I'll do the don't answer thing and that that queues them up, okay, all right. Thank you, sir. I appreciate the fact that we are you know. Almost providing far too much access here. Which by the way is a tremendous contrast to Ergen Kanner who I have asked to answer these questions openly, but I?

Haven't even got an email back, but we are making ourselves Available and open in that way. Now let me before we go to our calls. I write like I said we're lining them up here but I wanted to address a few things.

I want to address a few things about this issue of Criticizing a Christian leader. I Would like to see Ergen Kanner truly repent of what he has done. But there is a major problem. People have been saying look what he did he repented what why?

He said he was sorry. Why can't you just let it go well? Here's here's the problem. What did he repent of? He spoke of some misstatements. Where he said I have never intentionally misled anyways that means he is claiming that all of this was mere misstatements.

There was never any intentionality on the part of Ergen Kanner however when he gets to the Situation about sin. He says finally there is a legitimate complaint, which I must address namely Referencing a Muslim scholar that I have never met that's Shabir Ali and If I had not written to Ergen Kanner from London last week.

Having myself contacted Shabir Ali to verify the facts before I did. Would this have ever happened? He says listening to the audio. I honestly have no idea who I was referencing. But it certainly could not have been the man I referenced.

Now if you go back and listen to what he said I Have some serious problems here that I have asked honest questions about. I Am NOT for a moment questioning That every one of us can make misstatements.

I've done it and I could name the wrong person that I debated and I've given examples. I've updated I've debated Abdullah Kunda and Abdullah al-Andalusi now how many of you could very quickly differentiate between those two names.

Most of you can't even when I say it both were overseas so would it be understandable for me to say well, you know, Abdullah Kunda once said and Actually quote something from Abdullah al-Andalusi. That would be fully understandable.

Here's where the difference is folks. I've debated both of them. There's videotapes of both of those debates. Eric and Kenner didn't debate anybody in Nebraska. That's the difference my friends can't I Know that many of you can see this and some of you're going.

Yeah, we know but it's the people who are contacting me going. Oh my goodness. Why can't you just let this go because the issues have not been answered. Bring up the audio rich. I want to I want to make sure you hear what we're talking about.

Here is Eric and Kenner. Two times in 2007, this is twice. This is two different places. He's speaking. So this happened multiple times. How many times it happened? We don't know. Maybe it happened in classes.

Maybe it happened in other places. I don't know but here's Eric and Kenner.

Every debate Abdul Saliba not be at Ahmed Shabir Ali every debate I've had with these men. They always end at the same point. Show what if Jesus did die because the Quran teaches somebody died.

So what if Jesus did die. What's that matter to me. Radically redefined grace with Allah simply means he does not kill you. He allows you life and that's grace. There is no such thing as grace being unmerited favor given to one.

You can do for yourself. In Islam one of the number one lines that should be early the most was why does one man? Have to die for me. What does one man's death have to do with my life?

Okay, now may I say something. What he's talking what he's talking about is true. And in fact Shabir Ali has raised those points in debates with me because I debated him on the crucifixion in Seattle and We actually debated the subject.

So what he's saying is true. Here's my greatest concern here he says true things, but he joins them with exaggeration and falsehood and Folks that is incredibly offensive to me because this is the area I work in I'm the one that has to talk to these people.

Me and Sam Shamoon and David wouldn't a bill could actually the people are actually doing these debates. We have to talk to these people and Those of you who are saying you should just keep your mouth shut.

Do you not understand what it's like to be on the front lines? How can I walk up to Shabir Ali and shake his hand once again and look him in the eye. If I will not point out that there are people who are misrepresenting the Christian faith and even saying true things.

I would rather that Ergon Kanner was some wild-eyed Benny Hinn type guy, but he's saying true things about Islam. But then to pad his resume he exaggerates he makes things up as he goes along. That's the problem my friends.

Look, I know that my critics like Peter Lumpkins and and Pastor Rogers and stuff. They don't bother to look at this stuff. But those of you who know me, you know that I spent is here last year 2008. I forget exactly what it was sometime within the past year and a half or so.

I Spent a fair amount of time Putting together an entire series of videos responding to a man by name of Yusuf Estes. Now Yusuf Estes is well known amongst Muslims in the United States and Why is he well known.

Well, he's on the Dean show all the time. Why is he on the Dean show? Why is he looked to as a leader. Because he claims to be a former Christian and People who once were a part of another religious faith are automatically granted some kind of expertise in That faith when they address the subject people believe what they have to say and the Muslims believe what Yusuf Estes has to say.

The problem is you've used of Estes is grossly ignorant of Christianity. Grossly ignorant of Christianity. And I did I believe if I'm recalling correctly, there's a there's a playlist on on my youtube site.

I believe it was eight videos I did. Demonstrating that Yusuf Estes has no earthly idea what he's talking about. Now this is what I'm talking about if I'm going to point the finger at Yusuf Estes say look just because you claim to be a Former Christian does not make you an expert.

Here's where you're wrong here. Here's where you're wrong there how can I with integrity look at myself in the mirror in the morning and refuse out of partisan loyalty. To point out that Ergen Kanner has pulled the same stunts in.

In padding his resume and claiming to have done things he never did and Folks that the people that have provided this documentation have told me there's more coming. This is the tip of the iceberg and as some of the things that I have been told are going to be documented to me.

And I've asked for documentation. I've asked to hear it with my own ears and Notice Ergen Kanner did not say that any of these had been altered. He did suggest to someone that context has been taken out.

But he never has said that these things have been altered. This is him talking. Once that stuff comes out. I'm gonna be asking those questions as well, and I simply submit to any Christian. How can you claim to follow him who is the truth and close your eyes these things?

I do not understand it. What has been the response from the Peter Lumpkins is of the world and. And others to attack me personally. Attack my scholarship attack where I went to school. Attack me for being a hyper Calvinist all that stuff.

That's what they've decided to do not attack what I've written they can't provide any counter examples whatsoever. Where there's a parallel? Between anything I've ever claimed and what Ergen Kanner has done because every time I've claimed to debate somebody guess what I did and You can look at it and you can listen to it and whether they want to admit it or not I did pretty well in the debate because I Prepare for my debates.

That's one of the things really bothers me about this. And that's one of the things I jumped on about Shabir Ali. I spent months of my life preparing to debate Shabir Ali so that the people of God would be edified and some guy comes along who has never even met the man and Puffs his resume.

By claiming to have debated him in Nebraska, I bet you Shabir's never been to a brat in Nebraska. Where in the world you set up an Islamic debate in Nebraska for crying out loud? I mean come on and So I asked some honest questions.

You want to when when I wrote to Ergen Kanner his first response to me was I misspoke really? Okay, Ergen, here's some questions. Who did you debate in Nebraska that you confused with Shabir Ali? And when did you debate them because you put specific words in Shabir's mouth?

You don't do that by a mere misstatement. Who'd you debate? He's never answered. But folks, there's something even more embarrassing here. He says he debated Abdul Salib. Abdul Salib is a Christian. Abdul Salib means servant of the cross or the crucified one.

No Muslim would ever have that name it's a pseudonym and So we've asked him. When did you when did you debate Abdul Salib? Are you claiming to have converted him when he was a Muslim and now you're just using his pseudonym?

When did the state the date take place when these are simple questions folks? And if the statement is well, I just misspoke is true. Then there should be easy answers to simple questions. But you see that's the problem.

Because going back to a statement He says I actually have no idea who I was referencing but it certainly could not have been the man I referenced for this unintentional. But nevertheless horrible mistake.

I repent for saying his name and I ask for forgiveness of all those who heard it. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute repent for a misstatement. You can apologize for making a simple mistake, but repentance is for something that's sinful.

He says sin is sin and if I am dumb enough to say something like that I should be man enough to deal with it and aim to never make such a grievous error again. This applies to any time when I wrongly use names.

I shall be more careful Dr. Kanter. Multiple times. Using names of men you've never met. You see if it was a mere misstatement. There's nothing to repent of. If he actually made it up then you shouldn't be repenting of something.

You're an unintentional mistake. You repent of that which is intentional that not that which is unintentional. Repentance that means you're going one way you turn the other way. Does that make sense? Does people understand where the problem is here?

So what's happening is his followers now? Who seemed to be extremely enamored with him as an individual? Go well, that's enough and I keep saying what did he repent for? What about all these other issues have been raised?

What about all these other questions, well, I've been told just just to go on with my work and ignore these things. You can't do that in the situation you're in. Now I want to get to Lee in a second, but I want to read there is a gentleman.

I posted his email on The blog Last night, I believe and When he first contacted me He was rather Unhappy with with me and I used his email as an example of this kind of attitude that people have and He says quote, mr. White as a Southern Baptist, I'm very angry with you with what you are doing right now.

Dr. Eric Cantor is an incredible scholar and man of God. Why do you incessantly attack him all the time? I Personally benefited from dr. Cantor's ministry and believe he is an intellectual giant who is doing a great service to the SBC.

Please stop attacking fellow Christians and stick to debating Mormons and Muslims. So I point out that this gentleman clearly isn't dealing with what I've said in my statements and what my concerns really are.

It's not a matter of attacking anybody this is not an attack. This is this is a matter of integrity folks, this is simple simple truthfulness and Evidently, we're not allowed to do that in the SBC. I sort of learned that back in 2004 I learned the political aspects of the SBC back in 2004 when I dared to Accurately and in a scholarly fashion disagree with Mark Seifert a Southern Seminary the fireworks the circling the wagons the politics.

I Had one Southern Baptist editor tell me he would never work with me again because I had attacked a fellow Southern Baptist professor. And then he admitted later. He had never read a single word. I had written on the subject.

I learned a lot That there are people who are willing to take actions merely based upon well I've been told you did something notice when I was contacted and told that Ergin Cantor claimed of debate Shabir Ali.

I asked for proof and When I got the proof, what did I do? I? contacted Shabir Ali and Only once I had the audio proof and confirmed it with Shabir Ali that I contact Ergin Cantor boy. It would be nice if Peter Lumpkins and his ilk Had half the integrity to do that.

So this particular gentleman named Mark and I have gone back and forth a number of times and he demanded to call him to the program today. To respond to my personal attacks, he is very emotional he is emotionally driven and his argumentation changes from point to point and I gave him the phone number gave him the Skype said feel free to call in but I'm going to utilize your call as an example.

Because it's painfully obvious to me even from what you've just said in your emails. You haven't even read my response to Ergin Cantor. And once I pointed that out to him five minutes before the program he emailed and said that he was not going to be on the program.

In fact, he said I am sorry. I'm going to pass on coming on your show. You are just setting me up to attack and ridicule me on the air. I Would like you to address two things whoever one is the accusation that you have an obnoxious personality.

Does not the scriptures say that an elder must be hospitable first Timothy three? Well, this is not a gentleman who's ever been to my church and so he doesn't have really any grounds to talk about my Obnoxious personality there are people who are post modernists do not like non post modernists and in fact while post modernists dislike modernists, they dislike pre modernist even more and evidently from this man's perspective if you believe that there is absolute truth and That there should be integrity in the Christian ministry.

You have an obnoxious personality. He says in this email exchange you have insulted me and attacked me personally. I think you should follow the example of Francis Schaeffer who is very respectful and congenial with those he disagreed with in other words since Identified him as emotionally driven his arguments were irrational.

That's those are attacks. He refuses to differentiate between the observation. Drawn from his own words and personal attacks. They're all the same thing and that's a postmodern concept because in postmodernism Everything is a reason to be offended.

He said he was deeply offended by my comments. Oh, well, what if I said, well, I'm deeply offended by yours. Yeah. What does that accomplish? Accomplishes absolutely nothing. I'm not a post modernist.

Yes, I mean I'm offended by his attacks, but I don't care that's not the point. I'm irrelevant folks. I'm just to do some incredible things. The Lord's given me great blessings. Wonderful opportunity to speak his truth, but if I get over by run over by a truck tomorrow, it doesn't matter.

The kingdom will go on. It's only people who are really stuck on themselves that are get easily offended. I'm just not that easily offended evidently mark is. He says I've firsthand experienced your lack of social grace and then on at least two occasions after your debates I've observed you up close and personal and I've seen firsthand that you have a lack of patience for those who may disagree with you.

Mark how about some examples? Which debates as I think it was at the one Biola and give me examples because there are lots of people stand around after Biola. Listening to me to talk to people and if you think that telling someone that they're wrong about something is impatience.

Well, okay, but I think your problem mark is with Paul and the Apostles more than it is with me. Postmodernists find pre modernists to be offensive. Has nothing to do with whether you're being kind to someone in fact mark I would say that the kindest thing you can say and is this amazing?

This guy is defending Ergen Kanner. Ergen Kanner who has at one point in video said he was born in Istanbul. Which he was not and then he called himself a name, which is worse than the n-word and He's defending Ergen Kanner.

I wonder if he wrote to Ergen Kanner and called him to account for that. I wonder if There's consistency. I wonder how you became an elder of that small reformed Baptist Church out there in Phoenix. Since I almost everyone that I know who has met you in person have went away with a distinct impression that you are unloving.

Uninterested and detached from the people who ask you questions or apologetics events. Now who's who's who's engaging in ad hominem here if I identify his postmodernism I'm attacking him, but oh, I'm sure that in Mark's mind.

He's not attacking me. Now people who've never met me they may be going yeah, that's what I've heard too. But the people who've actually had me at their churches and their events are probably going. Wow.

Where's where's this guy coming from? Then he says secondly and more importantly while we're on the subject of padding one's resume. Please address your alleged PhDs from Columbia Evangelical Seminary.

Is that an accredited seminary or is it like LBU or Robert Moore and others have cut corners and received academic credentials? That they in fact do not deserve. Are you in fact a PhD scholar from an accredited seminary university, or did you get your so-called PhD from a degree mill?

Please address your obnoxious personality in your academic credentials. Okay. I think I know why Mark didn't call in today. What do you think? I think most people can see that the term obnoxious personality can go both directions.

But notice the personal attack here first of all I don't claim a PhD. It's a PhD. Since 1998 our website has had a full discussion of the accreditation situation with CES. I have always said that I have to defend the validity of my scholarship by what I do.

I Defended this in my statement recently, which he clearly did not bother to even read remember. Here's a man Commenting and he hasn't even bothered to read what I've written. So you remember I mentioned back in 2004 this editor Who told me he'd never work with me again, and when I asked him, please point, please testify.

Show me where I did something wrong. The response was why I didn't read it. This amazes me because I can very honestly say it offends me because folks I do my homework. Before I say someone has said something I invest my time in Trying to be accurate for the glory of God.

Why don't other people like Mark do that. I wonder I've been wide open with the path that I took to do my doctoral studies and if you can take what I've produced in apologetics my debates with Bart Ehrman and John Dominic Crossan and Marcus Borg and John Shelby Spong and Shabbir Ali and the wide variety of people I have engaged the books that I have produced on a scholarly level and Since I claim a PhD in apologetics if you can look at that and say no.

No, that's that's well below the standard for a PhD in apologetics and fine make your case. No one's ever even tried and everybody who calls CES a degree mill. I challenge you I dare you I demand. Go buy a degree.

Ain't gonna happen. In fact, the vast majority of you would not pass the first class. Because the first class taught by Rick Walston. It's about how to write. And it's one of the toughest classes I've had.

Many people who've tried couldn't get past it. That's why no one since 1998 when I graduated has ever Come up and said, oh look, I just got a degree from there and I just bought it. You can't it's not possible.

It takes years and it takes work and folks I will put the work of one of my current students at CES in his papers up against anyone in any accredited seminary. Anywhere without even batting an eye. Thankfully a lot of people are starting to discover That it's not what you pay.

It's what you do that determines your scholarship. So thank you mark for your kind and gracious emails. Talking about how I am so obnoxious. It's a sad thing mark, but as I said to you you have spent so deeply influenced by post-modernism.

That you don't even realize it. All right much more that could be said. Let's. I don't know how this is coming through. Can since you said who do we need to go to first? You need to tell me I have no way of knowing.

But you said someone was unhappy. So let's get the unhappy people out of the way first. All right, Lee in Fort Worth, how are you doing sir? Hi doing good. Well, I go to a Southern Baptist seminary. I'm a member of Southern Baptist Church.

But I'm also a Calvinist and I'm just looking in on your your situation and following your ministry and Do you think that by attacking? Dr. Kaner? I'm you're making some some pretty good accusations here then in a century you're attacking the Integrity to Southern Baptist Convention because they've elevated him to be the president of one of their leading seminaries.

Liberty University comes and he speaks at Southwestern Southeastern different seminaries and also he speaks at the convention, you know at the Southern Baptist Convention pretty much every year him his brother.

So basically when you when you attack Dr. Kaner, you're pretty much undermining the credibility of the Southern Baptist Convention for up because obviously Al Mohler and Paige Patterson and Different Southern Baptist scholars don't have these enormous problems that you do.

So in a sense, you're basically saying that they're elevating a guy that's discredited himself. He's basically lying and that either the Southern Baptist Convention is turning their backs on them or not doing their homework.

So there's an issue here because this is one of the leading You know apologists in the Southern Baptist Convention that speaks at all their you know, major conferences speaks at a different seminaries.

Yeah, you're saying that this guy's basically a liar.

Lee what makes someone a person that defends the faith. Okay, and with whom has Eric and Kaner engaged in that activity in a public venue?

Does that I mean according to your standard of you know, former formal academic debates, you know I'm not gonna say that he has. Obviously he's. You know, I'm not okay Lee.

Can I can I explain to. Can I ask you to explain me in his bio page, which is now down? He claims to have engaged the leaders of multiple world religions in debates in 13 countries and about 40 states.

The natural meaning of language Would lead you to conclude that you could actually ask to listen to these encounters. Isn't that the case?