Perry and I have had our disagreements, but I appreciate his diligence in this regard. (Also see this post: https://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2017/05/11/a-hankadox-intermezzo/)
Long story short, the fangirl apologetics sites like Orthodox Bridge are going to have egg on their faces when this stuff comes to light. OB doesn’t know anything about epistemology or metaphysics; they do not go beyond standard pop questions like “Oh yeah, wise guy, how do you know which books of the canon belong?”
Perry is a caliber above me. I don’t deny that. I have learned much from him, both in content and in debating style. I just want to quote some of his words and more or less endorse them: (sorry for the formatting. Most of these quotes are from Perry but wordpress didn’t quote them)
What is more, all the calls to the BAM show are screened. Hank gets those questions that he can answer and b y and large those he can’t are screened out. This is why, if you listen to the BAM show long enough, you hear the same questions over and over again with little diversity. And this is why the show tends to stay at a very low level of apologetic sophistication.
The Lutherans. LOL.
And of course, Hank has no real field experience talking to cultic or aberrant groups on his own (let alone taking on university professors). When you have a JW at your door or you are taking on three JW elders and an overseer by yourself for four hours straight, you don’t get to screen out questions. (I once went over 9 hours with JW apologist Greg Stafford when I lived in Garden Grove, CA. My Lutheran neighbors used to sit out on their lawn chairs in the front yard to listen whenever the JW’s came around.)
This next quote is the cream of the crop:
Just ask yourself, do you really think Hank could answer questions and hold a sustained conversation about the Kalaam argument in relation to whether actual infinities are possible or not? How about the technical details of New Testament Greek? Or maybe questions on the communicatio idiomatum in Chalcedonian Christology compared with say Assyrian Christology? How about Gettier Counter examples or Contextualism in Epistemology? How about the principle of Double Effect? Uhuh, exactly. While I have my theological issues with Bill Craig, Hank is no Bill Craig.
The next quote echoes something Kevin Johnson told me. I like to do book reviews but I try to keep them relatively short.
But because Hank thinks of education as memorizing and arranging discrete facts, he tends to use language like an undergraduate to embellish the delivery. If you have ever graded undergraduate papers, you know of what I speak. Undergraduates do not understand that the purpose of technical language is not only precision, but to say more with less
Haven’t you heard? Hank Hanegraaff has become Orthodox! Well, yes I have heard. The noise produced by the collective freak out at one end of the theological spectrum from the Pauper and Pooper blog representing the bottom of the barrel of Protestantism and the unquestioning adulation of Orthodox fangirls and bloggers rushing headlong to his defense is rather difficult to miss. But I sit here poised to wish a pox on both houses, as it were. As most of you know, I am Orthodox and have been for about 17 years. And as a few of you may know, I worked for the Christian Research Institute (CRI) from 1990-1992. (That’s yours truly, bottom left, right next to Hank!) So I have a somewhat unique perspective to offer on the whole affair. In the posts that follow I explain why this is probably not a good thing for anyone, maybe not even…
View original post 8,989 more words