Now I must confess my bias against Norman Geisler. Although I have several books in my library by Dr. Geisler and have been blessed by his works, his anti-reformed book and articles has simply turned me off. He simply does not have the ability to interact with Reformed Theology. He has stated things about Reformed theology that he would not bring himself to say against Roman Catholicism. So with that I move on.
To Whom It May Concern:
“I am familiar with the slanderous charges that have been made against Dr. Ergun Caner generated by some Muslim groups and other extremists. I have looked into the matter, talking with Ergun and other principal parties at Liberty, and am convinced that the charges are libelous. I am also convinced that whatever ambiguous or misstatement that may have been made, Dr. Caner has done nothing heretical, immoral, or illegal. I stand with him against these vicious attacks. He has taken a strong stand on important issues that stir up controversy, but to my knowledge has done nothing unorthodox or malicious. I urge all to consider him innocent unless proven guilty. He has welcomed an inquiry from the Liberty authorities. Let’s await their findings. Christians have a bad habit of shooting their wounded. Let’s pray for and encourage our brother.”
Sincerely in Christ,
Dr. Norman L. Geisler
The above letter was published on a website for all to read. His letter begs some questions. He states,
I am familiar with the slanderous charges that have been made against Dr. Ergun Caner generated by some Muslim groups and other extremists.Since he is now entering the fray, to what slanderous charges is he referring? Just one would be nice. Was this letter only meant for the leaders at Liberty and not for the general public since he makes no such attempt to explain what he means?
I am also convinced that whatever ambiguous or misstatement that may have been made, Dr. Caner has done nothing heretical, immoral, or illegal.If Dr. Geisler is so familiar with the situation, then to what ambiguous statements is he referring? What charges of heresy is he referring?
I must confess, that this letter only seems to have been posted by Lumpkins because he knows Dr. Geisler carries a lot of weight in the Conservative Evangelical world. In other words, it seems to be, "We now have THE Dr. Norman Geisler on our side, therefore Ergun Caner need not answer the simple questions Dr. James White and others have asked.
The entire situation is bizarre. If Ergun Caner is who he claims to be, then telling the truth about oneself and explaining the contradictions via the questions that have been asked should be a no-brainer. It is more telling that he refuses. Perhaps it is even more telling that Dr. Geisler has been brought into a situation as mere ammunition. It seems he sees Caner as being "wounded" and therefore its time to fire back by calling everyone who disagrees with him as being "extremist". Now how does Dr. Geisler get to be above it all while doing the very thing he is denouncing?