An Evening At The Improv with Ergun Caner...

James White posted this last Wednesday night. The clips are taken from Ergun Caner speaking at Stand for Truth Ministries, California Christian Apologetics Conference, September 22, 2006. You may need to watch in "full screen" to be able to read the comments.



Yes, it's more of the same. But, knowing what we now know about Ergun Caner, and seeing and hearing him say things we just know are not true, you have to ask yourself why Norman Geisler and others are saying things like, "...out of a couple thousand sermons, nearly twenty books, and hundreds of media interviews, the relatively few mistakes are trivial by comparison." Trivial, Dr. Geisler? Watch the video again, and ask yourself if Ergun Caner wasn't intending to mislead by his remarks.

A Difficult Confession

I have a horrible admission to make. It isn’t easy for me. This has been eating me up inside for weeks. I just can’t keep the cover-up going. All of the blogging about Ergun Caner, the audio clips, the YouTube videos – it’s all been highly coordinated and orchestrated. You see, it has all been a vast Calvinist conspiracy to bring down the biggest threat to Calvinism since Jacob Arminius himself; Dr. Ergun Mehmet Caner.

You see, we knew that Ergun Caner was just too good, too funny, and too persuasive to be allowed to continue. So we put together a crack team of computer graphics artists, quantum physicists, cartoonists, and bloggers and went to work.

Using pirated versions of James Cameron’s state-of-the-art 3-dimensional Computer Graphics Technology and precise physical measurements of Ergun Caner, obtained at great risk by commando teams using laser scanners as he slept on airplanes while flying from one anti-Calvinist conference to another, we painstakingly constructed a perfect digital model of Dr. Caner.

We also combed through hours of high-quality audio and created a digital library of every vocal sound uttered by Dr. Caner that has ever been recorded. Then, using highly advanced audio processors, we were able to combine those sounds into any word or phrase needed.

Next, we stole temporal displacement equipment from a top secret lab at MIT. This equipment was used in several ways.

First, using the projection mode of the temporal displacement equipment, we were able to project an absolutely perfect 3D image of Dr. Caner anywhere, and, more importantly, anywhen we chose. We were able to project this image of Dr. Caner back in time and make him stand behind any pulpit we chose and make him say whatever we wanted him to say. In this way, we built up a vast library of “authentic” audio and video recordings, all in plain sight, in front of thousands of witnesses.

Then we used other features of the temporal displacement equipment to change dates on legal documents filed in the Columbus, Ohio courthouse, as well as real estate records.

For my part, I’m sorry I was ever a part of this diabolical scheme. We have totally maligned an honorable man. For the record: Ergun Caner never claimed to have grown up in Turkey; he has never watched The Dukes of Hazard or Professional Wrestling; and he does not eat ham or babies.

(I think Norman Geisler is starting to figure it out, too. We never should have left that copy of The Potter’s Freedom on his desk in 1972…)

Index of Responses to Norman Geisler

Today, Norman Geisler expanded on his short Facebook defense of Ergun Caner with a lengthy piece at his website:

In Defense of Dr. Ergun Caner: A Response to His Critics, By Dr. Norman L. Geisler

James White has done a detailed 4 part analysis of Norm Geisler’s statement in defense of Ergun Caner:

Of Joseph Smith and Ergun Caner (Part 1)
Of Joseph Smith and Ergun Caner (Part 2)
Of Joseph Smith and Ergun Caner (Part 3)
Of Joseph Smith and Ergun Caner (Part 4)

TurretinFan has also responded to Geisler in 3 parts:

Responding to Norman Geisler’s Defense of Ergun Caner – Part 1
Responding to Norman Geisler’s Defense of Ergun Caner – Part 2
Wrapping Up Geisler’s Defense of Caner

While there is, predictably, a lot of overlap between the two series, each talks of things not mentioned by the other.

Historiography, Primary Source Material, and Norman Geisler

I love history.

I’ve always loved history. It fascinates me to discover what has happened in the past. In addition to my studies to prepare for Sundays, I’m often reading, for recreation and my own personal satisfaction, some sort of history.

But have you ever stopped and wondered just how we know what has happened in the past? I mean, how do we really know?

It is often said that, “History is written by the winners,” implying that all historical sources contain biased materials. This is true of many sources, but by no means all. Historians have, over the years, developed methodology and criteria for weighing source materials in their efforts to uncover the events of the past. This methodology and criteria is called Historiography.

Webster’s defines historiography as “the writing of history; especially: the writing of history based on the critical examination of sources, the selection of particulars from the authentic materials, and the synthesis of particulars into a narrative that will stand the test of critical methods.” Very basically, historiography encompasses the examination and evaluation of historical source material to determine it’s trustworthiness and usefulness in constructing the historical narrative.

Most people think of history as the study of the past, and, in a general sense, that is correct. But, more specifically, history is the study of the written records of the past. This is why times before written records are called “prehistoric.” The earliest records we have are clay tablets and inscriptions in stones. These are nice because they tend to last for a long time. For later periods, historians have records on papyrus, parchment and paper. For more modern historical periods, the types of records also extend to photographs, motion pictures, audio & video recordings, and electronic records of all types.

Archaeologists can tell you that a house once stood somewhere. They can tell you how big it was and how it was built. They might even be able to tell you what kind of food was cooked on the hearth. But archaeology isn’t able to tell you who lived in the house, what their names were, or why they even lived there in the first place. Written records, if they can be found, can tell you all of these things and more. Archaeology can help color in the picture that history draws, but archaeology isn’t history, and our knowledge of prehistory, while helpful and interesting, is, at best, very sketchy.

(Yes, I know that archaeologists find written records, but learning about what happened in the past from written records in history not archaeology, even if it is done by an archaeologist. A brain surgeon might fix your car, but that doesn’t make auto repair brain surgery. But I digress.)

I find all history fascinating, but my particular interests lie in ancient and mediaeval history. And, the further you go back in time, the less and less sure you can be of all the details. Also, the further back in time you go the more and more the records you have are restricted to “important” things like kings and kingdoms and generals and battles and wars. Prior to the invention of the printing press in the 1400’s, all books and such had to be hand written, and so were rare and expensive. Also, nobody thought it was very important to record what Joe the Blacksmith did on a Tuesday afternoon in a small village in England in 1242. But people did record what the kings and queens and lords and ladies were doing. Especially important events like wars and plagues and the like.

Similar to a detective pouring over evidence and witness statements while trying to solve a crime, it is the job of the historian to pour through written records of historical events and try to construct a picture of what happened. Historiography is the science and methodology that they use to try to decide which records are trustworthy, which are not trustworthy, and just how much any of the records can be trusted, anyway. Basically, the historian asks, “Who says?” and “How does he know?”

“Who says?”

The historian must ask, “Who wrote this? Why was it written? What, if any, axe does the writer have to grind here?” A book written about Adolf Hitler by a Nazi officer may have some good information in it, but it is also going to have a different point of view then a book about Adolf Hitler by a survivor of Auschwitz. (Granted, those are two extremes, but you get the idea.)

“How does he know?”

The other thing the historian must do is determine what type of source he has to work with. Was the person in a position to know what really happened? Historians divided sources up into 3 categories based upon how far the records are from the historical events recorded: Primary Sources, Secondary Sources, and Tertiary Sources.

A primary source is written by someone who was in a position to know personally what happened. A primary source is eye-witness material, written by someone who was there when it happened. One of the things that made Ken Burns’ The Civil War so compelling was all the letters from actual soldiers that are read as part of the narration of the film. Those letters are what a historian would call primary source material. (Also, the photographs taken during the Civil War that were used in the film are also primary sources.)

A secondary source is a written record that has been compiled from primary sources. Historians look at all the primary records of an event or historical period and put them together into a more or less complete picture. A newspaper article or a police report based on witness interviews are examples of secondary sources. If you’ve ever been involved in something that made the newspaper, you probably have some idea of the unreliability of secondary sources.

A tertiary source is a written record that has been compiled from multiple secondary sources. Many popular histories fall into this category, where the author pulls material out of other history books and weaves together his narrative. Such works can be helpful, and are often enjoyable to read, but they are the least consistently reliable as far as historical accuracy is concerned. Generally, tertiary sources are to be avoided for serious research purposes.

One thing that is repeatedly pounded into history students in Introduction to Historiography class is the importance of primary sources to historical accuracy. The closer a source is to the events recorded, the more weight you can put on that sources’ account of those events. History books are written by people who have already done the research and reached their own conclusions. Their books are written to present the conclusions of the authors. History books are helpful, certainly, but the more important knowledge of history is to you, the more you want to rely of primary source documentation.

When you start taking college-level history courses, you don’t get as many of the nice, pre-packaged history books like you got in elementary and high schools. Instead, you often get stacks of narratives and accounts of events from people who were there. You are not reading the words written by some historical researcher, you are the historical researcher, reading the words of the people who lived and breathed the time, place, and happenings that you are studying. If you want to know what really happened, you need to go to the source materials yourself.

That is why I compiled The Caner File, so that interested parties could see and hear the claims that Ergun Caner had made and examine the primary source documents that refuted those claims. I studied history at the University of Montana back in the early 1990’s, and I learned that research that relied mainly on primary sources was the most reliable. History was my major, and, while I did not graduate, (for several reasons, chiefly financial,) I’d like to think that I did learn something useful.

Historiography, Primary Source Material, & Norman Geisler

Why am I bringing all this up? Because I read several things yesterday that I find very troubling.

About 10 or 11 o’clock yesterday morning, I was directed to the following statement posted on Norman Geisler’s Facebook page. Dr. Geisler is a well known Christian author, speaker, and teacher. He is the president of Veritas Theological Seminary. He wrote on his Facebook wall:

An extensive independent investigation has exonerated Dr. Ergun Caner of all the false charges made against him by extreme Muslims and others and has been retained as a Professor at Liberty University. In spite of a few misstatements (which we all make and he has corrected), nothing has diminished his testimony and orthodoxy as one of the great Christian voices of our time. I totally support him.

Dr. Geisler’s statement is troubling to me. Here he is, one of the leading Evidentialist apologists in the world, and he does not deal with any of the evidence. He does not say that he has examined the evidence himself, nor does he give his criteria for why he has rejected it. This is really a problem for an evidentialist, isn’t it?

Then, last evening, I read a twitter exchange between a presuppositional apologist & blogger, Joshua Whipps, known as “RazorsKiss,” and Dr. Leo Percer, a professor at Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary & Director of their PhD program in Theology and Apologetics. They were discussing Dr. Caner’s removal as President and Dean of LBTS, and Liberty’s statement about it. I’m not going to reconstruct the whole conversation, but, at one point, RazorsKiss tweeted to Dr Percer, “@leopercer You do understand that there is evidence to look to, and has been for months, correct? You have examined it?” To which, Dr. Percer replied, “@RazorsKiss I haven't seen it, I said I don't know.”

Again, we see an intelligent and educated man, a professor of apologetics, who has not even examined the evidence for himself. Dr. Percer has been a vocal defender of Dr. Caner’s ever since the allegations of lying became public and Liberty University announced their investigation. It seems, by his own admission, that he has never bothering to check the sources for himself.

Also troubling is this statement, released a couple of weeks ago, by popular apologist John Ankerberg on his website:

To Whom It May Concern:

I have known Ergun Caner for nearly a decade. I am disheartened by the recent attacks upon his integrity and character. I have interviewed Ergun for more than a dozen television shows and believe his personal testimony to be completely true. Otherwise, I would not have allowed him to broadcast his story to the millions of viewers that tune in to my program across the globe. Ergun and his brother, Emir, are men of God who have taken a valiant stand for the Lord, even costing them and their families their safety. For someone to attack Ergun’s selfless sacrifice, especially since they malign his character without any substantiation, is both unchristian and unbiblical. Count me among the many who will stand with Ergun Caner, knowing he stands for the Lord Jesus Christ.

Sincerely,
Dr. John F. Ankerberg
President

Again we have an evidentialist who refuses to address the evidence. All of Dr. Caner's "factual statements that are self-contradictory" are simply dismissed out of hand. Dr. Ankerberg makes no effort to show why the evidence is wrong or misleading.

Now some would say that Doctors Geisler, Percer, and Ankerberg are primary sources themselves, as they all know Dr. Caner personally. However, none of them knew him during the time that is in dispute. We do not know exactly when Doctors Geisler and Percer met Dr. Caner, but neither of them claim to have known Dr. Caner prior to his conversion. In fact, Dr. Percer says explicitly that he was not a witness to any of the events in dispute. Dr. Ankerberg says quite clearly that he has known Dr. Caner less than 10 years, so his personal knowledge of Caner came after September 11, 2001; after “Michael ‘Butch’ Caner” had become “Ergun Mehmet Caner.”

In fact, Doctors Geisler, Percer, and Ankerberg all have vested interests in keeping Dr. Caner "in the clear" that go beyond friendship.

In his statement, Dr. Ankerberg says, "I have interviewed Ergun for more than a dozen television shows and believe his personal testimony to be completely true. Otherwise, I would not have allowed him to broadcast his story to the millions of viewers that tune in to my program across the globe." This clearly links his credibility with Dr. Caner's. If Dr. Caner's credibility is in doubt, that reflects on Dr. Ankerberg and his ministry as well.

In the case of Dr. Geisler, it should be noted that Dr. Caner teaches at Dr. Geisler's seminary. Once again, we see that their credibility is linked. And Dr. Percer teaches at the school where Dr. Caner is, at least until midnight tonight, the president and dean.

I find it utterly amazing that none of these men see the damage that they are doing to their own credibility by blindly supporting Ergun Caner without any regard for the evidence that abounds in this case.

In all the discussions I’ve had over the last few months regarding Ergun Caner, I’ve not spoken to, corresponded with, or read anything written by anyone who was defending Ergun Caner where they actually dealt with any of the evidence. My Daddy used to always tell me, “Son, if one person tells you that you’ve grown a tail, you can laugh; but if everyone is telling you that you’ve grown a tail, you’d better turn around and see if you have.”

Lynchburg, We Have A Problem...

The train wreck that is Ergun Caner continues.

(Other posts on this subject: Like Watching a Train Wreck & The Caner File)

On Friday, May 21, 2010, I received an e-mail from Basyle Tchividjian, Assistant Professor of Law at the Liberty University School of Law regarding the investigation into Ergun Caner's multiple and contradictory biographical assertions. Professor Tchividjian worked as a prosecutor for 7 years in Florida. He then worked in a private law practice, also in Florida, before joining the faculty at Liberty University School of Law.

Mr. Clyatt:

A colleague and I have been asked by the LU administration to investigate the various claims against Ergun Caner. I have reviewed your site and found it extremely helpful as you link the primary source to each allegation. The purpose of this note is to inquire whether you or anyone else for that matter has;

1. Made any contact with Jerry Tackett, the individual who allegedly led Ergun Caner to Christ. Do we know if he has verified Ergun’s conversion account?


2. Made any contact with Ergun’s brother, Erdem, and verified anything about their upbringing?


3. Confirmed Ergun’s claims regarding his post high school education?


4. Talked with anyone who knew Ergun during high school, college, or post-secondary school prior to 9-11?

Mr. Clyatt, we would appreciate if you could keep this email and the enclosed inquiries confidential. It is our objective to seek and obtain the truth during this investigation. Our God is too holy to allow us to do anything short of that objective. Much thanks.

Peace.

Basyle 'Boz' Tchividjian
Assistant Professor of Law
Liberty University School of Law

I sent the following reply to Professor Tchividjian on Saturday, May 22, 2010:

Mr. Tchividjian,

Thank you for your kind words regarding my blog; I tried to be accurate and thorough.

However, all I did was compile the research done by others. I’ve not attempted to contact Jerry Tackett or Mark Caner. Nor have I looked into Ergun Caner’s academic records. As you are no doubt aware, the bulk of the research was done by Jason Smathers and TurretinFan.

I will respect your wishes to keep this e-mail private until the investigation is complete. Know that I am praying for God to guard the integrity of all who are involved in this investigation, and for the truth to be honored.

God Bless,

~Squirrel
Gene Clyatt Jr.
A Squirrel in Babylon

Well, it seems that Liberty University has concluded their investigation into the Ergun Caner situation. With that conclusion, my agreement to keep Professor Tchividjian's e-mail confidential is also concluded. I am grateful that Professor Tchividjian found my compilation of information helpful. I agree with him that "Our God is too holy to allow us to do anything short of... seek[ing] and obtain[ing] the truth." I have no doubt that Professor Tchividjian and his colleague did just that.

I also have no doubt that Dr. Ron Godwin and the committee that he formed know exactly what the truth is in this matter. What they have done with this knowledge still kind of boggles my mind a bit.

Ergun Caner has been removed from the office of President and Dean of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary. He will, however, remain as a full professor, at least for the 2010/2011 school year.

Here's the full text of Liberty University's statement announcing their actions:

After a thorough and exhaustive review of Dr. Ergun Caner’s public statements, a committee consisting of four members of Liberty University’s Board of Trustees has concluded that Dr. Caner has made factual statements that are self-contradictory.

However, the committee found no evidence to suggest that Dr. Caner was not a Muslim who converted to Christianity as a teenager, but, instead, found discrepancies related to matters such as dates, names and places of residence.

Dr. Caner has cooperated with the board committee and has apologized for the discrepancies and misstatements that led to this review.

Dr. Caner’s current contractual term as Dean of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary expires on June, 30, 2010.

Dr. Caner will no longer serve as Dean of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary.

The university has offered, and Dr. Caner has accepted, an employment contract for the 2010-2011 academic year. Dr. Caner will remain on the faculty of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary as a professor.

Right away, we see that Liberty University is trying to minimize Dr. Caner's position at the school. The statement says, "Dr. Caner will no longer serve as Dean of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary." Yet the biography at LBTS's website listed Dr. Caner as "President and Dean of the Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary and Graduate School."

Then there is the phrase, "Dr. Caner has cooperated with the board committee and has apologized for the discrepancies and misstatements that led to this review." It sounds an awful lot like Caner's statement of February 25, 2010, in which he said, "through two decades of ministry and hundreds of sermons there exist discrepancies in my testimony. In all honesty, I probably could have saved them a lot of time and trouble. The truth is, I would be surprised if no discrepancies were discovered, given the hundreds of messages I have given during all that time!"

This is nothing less than classically Clintonesque. “Misstatements” are things like saying “San Diego” when you meant to say “San Bernardino,” and “discrepancies” are saying something happened at 10 o’clock in the morning to one group and saying that the same event happened at 3 o’clock in the afternoon to another group. In other words, normal mistakes that any public speaker could make, and all public speakers do make, sooner or later. Dr. Caner's actions are something on a different order all together.

In February, Dr. Caner said, "I have never intentionally misled anyone." No, what Dr. Caner, did is called lying. He has deliberately, repeatedly, & knowingly told audiences things about himself & his upbringing that he knew were untrue. Whether he lied for financial gain or in an effort to obtain some sort of ego gratification is immaterial. Why he lied really does not matter. He lied, and the powers at Liberty University know that he lied. To say, "I have never intentionally misled anyone," is just another lie.

Instead of addressing Caner's lies head on, Liberty University has chosen to, once again, try to sweep the whole mess under the rug. Knowing that the evidence is too overwhelming to ignore completely, Liberty University has made a token gesture in an attempt to appease their critics. There doesn't seem to be any consideration at all among Liberty's leadership about trying to please a Holy God.

Let me address Liberty's leadership directly for a moment. Why all the obfuscation, Liberty University? Vague hints at “factual statements that are self-contradictory,” and unspecific references to clandestine apologies "for the discrepancies and misstatements that led to this review" in the face of the overwhelming mountain of documentation of Ergun Caner's interminable pattern of dishonesty before multiple church audiences over a period of almost 9 years seems inadequate. If you're trying to save face, it is backfiring. As James White said, "While I am thankful that Liberty has at least confessed that there is, in fact, an elephant in the room, when are they going to get around to explaining how he got there?"

And why extend Dr. Caner a professorship for a year? You can't have liars lead the school, but you think that it is okay for them to teach there? Is there a different standard of integrity for administrators then for faculty members? Or for students? Back in 2001, Notre Dame fired George O'Leary as football coach for falsifying his resume, and, just recently, Texas A&M senior vice president for administration Alexander Kemos resigned when his claims to have been a US Navy SEAL were shown to be false. Are your moral, ethical, and academic standards less then theirs? As I tweeted last Friday, “Retaining @ErgunCaner in a professorship damages LU's academic integrity (what they've got left...) What's he gonna teach? Lying 101?”

God’s standard is to do what is right, without favoritism or partiality. Deuteronomy 1:16-17 says, "Then I charged your judges at that time, saying, 'Hear the cases between your fellow countrymen, and judge righteously between a man and his fellow countryman, or the alien who is with him. You shall not show partiality in judgment; you shall hear the small and the great alike. You shall not fear man, for the judgment is God's. The case that is too hard for you, you shall bring to me, and I will hear it.'” Has Liberty’s judgment is this matter been righteous or impartial?

A lot of people have asked me, "What do you want to see happen?" That’s a good question, and it deserves an honest answer. The short answer is that I want to see “fruit in keeping with repentance.” (Matthew 3:8)

Here’s the long answer:

I would like to see:

1. A public statement from Dr. Caner in which he admits, without any prevarication, that he intentionally and repeatedly lied in order to inflate his testimony and embellish his conversion story (& an apology for the same.)


2. His immediate resignation from the faculty of Liberty University as a sign of contrition for having intentionally and repeatedly lied in order to inflate his testimony and embellish his conversion story.


3. A tour of all the churches to which he intentionally and repeatedly lied in order to inflate his testimony and embellish his conversion story to make public restitution by telling them the unvarnished truth this time.


4. An honest and forthright version of his testimony and the story of his upbringing in Ohio in a broken home. (The truth is actually a very compelling story, from what I’ve been able to put together from the bits and pieces I can find.)


5. I would like to see a statement from Ergun Caner's brother Emir Caner, president of Truett-McConnell College, explaining his role in aiding and abetting Ergun Caner's lies. (Over the years, they spoke at many of the same events. There is no way that Emir was ignorant of Ergun's penchant for lying.)

At this point, I think that it is highly unlikely that we will ever see any of that. There are two possibilities that I do see happening.

1. Dr. Caner, Liberty University, & everyone else involved completely refuse to say anything more on the subject. Liberty University’s academic integrity continues to erode, and Liberty University fades into insignificance as pastors stop recommending it and parents stop sending their children there to be educated.

Or

2. The public discussion of Dr. Caner’s lack of integrity and Liberty University’s lack of male anatomy in dealing with Dr. Caner’s lack of integrity continues, and the continued pressure that results causes Dr. Caner to resign for undisclosed "personal reasons” and Liberty University tries to ignore the whole thing.

I would like nothing better than to stop talking about Ergun Caner and Liberty University. I've listened to more Ergun Caner sermons than I ever wanted to, believe me! And I'm more than tired of the accusations of ulterior motives being ascribed to myself and others as to the "real reasons" we're "going after" Ergun Caner. Yes, I'd love to be done with it all, but, unfortunately, I don't think this train wreck is over just yet.

[There are a many others who have commented on this situation, some that I think are worthy of your attention are; James White, Carla Rolfe, Rosemarie, & Daniel Spratlin.]

Breaking News: Caner Removed As Dean of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary

Ergun Caner has been removed from his office at Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary. He will, however, remain as a professor, at least for the 2010/2011 school year. I'll have some thoughts on all this for you on Monday.

Meanwhile, here are some comments from readers left at the Liberty Student News article on Caner's "dismissal":

Revelation 21:8 out of the Liberty University Standard Verson (LUSV): "But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all persons who make factual statements that are self-contradictory, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."

* * *

If we confess our discrepancies and misstatements, God is faithful and just to forgive us our self-contradictory facts and let us keep our jobs.

* * *

On the day that Ergun Caner's career as Dean of Liberty's seminary comes to an end, he's busy "tweeting" things like "Donuts R holy." I think I see the problem.

* * *

He did not lie. He did not intentionally mislead any one.

He only misspoke.

He only made factual statements that are self-contradictory.

I am relieved to know that he didn't sin and can remain a professor of students.

* * *

It is obvious to me that no one in leadership ever sins. They have reached a state of sinless perfection. From this point on, they only misspeak, make mistakes, or make factual statements that are self-contradictory. They most certainly do not lie! That would be a sin. And sin they do not do!

These comments are from the student news website. I assume these are Liberty's students. It's enough to make you think, isn't it?

Must Read Stuff on Ergun Caner

TurretinFan has posted more documents for The Caner File over at Thoughts of Francis Turretin. If you are following this story, you need to read this.

Who Is Ergun Caner?

The Caner File

Note: Many of these links are now broken. For example, Dr. Caner's messages from 2007 are no longer available at the Ohio State Association of Free Will Baptist website. According to the Associated Press, "Since questions arose about contradictory statements, he changed the biographical information on his website and asked friendly organizations to remove damning clips from their websites. But the questions didn't go away, leading to the Liberty investigation." ~Squirrel

http://bit.ly/bX0B94<--- best chronology of the Caner saga I've seen thus far.Well done, Squirrel!

— James White (@DrOakley1689) May 11, 2010

This is the timeline that I’ve put together regarding the questions about Dr. Ergun Caner’s claims together with the evidence refuting them. I did this for my own edification, I’m posting it because I thought that others would find it useful. While it is rather lengthy, this is in no way an exhaustive treatment of the evidence available and I’ve tried to keep it very much in the spirit of Sgt. Joe Friday, “Just the facts, Squirrel.” Much of the information comes from the fine investigative work done by Jason Smathers, Turretinfan, and My Friend in Ireland. I have tried to link to everything I could find, but some links are broken, and some archived pages are no longer available.

November 3, 1966 – Ergun Caner is born in Stockholm, Sweden, to Acar and Monica Caner, who had been married on April 1st that same year. (Source: Acar’s and Monica’s separation agreement, Ergun Caner’s Facebook page (now a dead link))

July 16, 1968 – Ergun’s younger brother, Erdem (Mark), is born in Stockholm, Sweden. (No internet source)

Sometime in 1969 – The Caner family moves from Stockholm, Sweden, to Columbus, Ohio. (Source: Monica Caner’s sworn affidavit dated July 31, 1975.)

August 25, 1970 – Emir Caner is born in Columbus, Ohio. (Source: Emir Caner’s Official Biography.)

1975 – Ergun Caner’s parents separate. According to his brother, Emir, their mom had adopted the lifestyle of a hippy. The brothers live primarily with their mother. (Source: separation agreement, Monica Caner’s sworn affidavit dated July 31, 1975, Emir Caner sermon from September 20, 2009)

1978 – Acar and Monica Caner’s divorce is granted. Ergun and his brothers continue to live primarily with their mother. (Source: divorce decree)

1979 – The Dukes of Hazard goes on the air. (Source: International Movie Database)

1981 or 1982 – Ergun Caner professes Christ at Stelzer Road Baptist Church at 2235 Stelzer Road
Columbus, Ohio. (There is some confusion as to the exact date of Ergun’s profession of faith. In Unveiling Islam November 4, 1982 is listed as the date of Emir’s profession of faith, and it say that it was a year after Ergun’s, but Ergun claims November of 1982 as the date of his conversion in several lectures, like this one in Ohio in 2007.)

Between 1982 and 1999, Ergun Caner pursues his education and serves as pastor of several churches.

1999 – Baptist Press reports on “E. Michael Caner, senior pastor of Central Baptist Church, Aurora, Colo.” and his work in the wake of the Columbine High School shooting in Littleton Colorado. (Source: Baptist Press)

2000 – Ergun Caner writes for Baptist Press under the byline “E. Michael Caner” (Source: Baptist Press)

After September 11, 2001, Dr. Caner, now using the name “Ergun Mehmet Caner,” begins to speak about his Muslim past, making claims that are in clear contradiction to many of the facts documented above. Following are some examples. (Again, this is not an exhaustive list.)

2001 – Ergun Caner speaks at Prestonwood Baptist Church in Plano, Texas. (Source: Focus on the Family’s April 23, 2010 broadcast “From Jihad to Jesus”)
Claims made:

• Came to America in 1978


• Father was an Islamic Cleric


• Ergun spoke broken English in 1982


• Wore a turban in high school

2002 - Caner tells the Associated Press "...that he was born in Sweden to a Turkish father and Swedish mother, who brought the family to Ohio in 1969, when he was about 3 years old. He said he accepted Christ as a teenager at a Baptist church in Columbus, and then pursued ministry, getting a degree from Criswell College, a Baptist school in Dallas." (Source: Associated Press article dated May 17, 2010)

May 2002 - SBC Life reviews Islam Unveiled. Review contains this paragraph with debate claims: (Source: www.sbclife.org)

The heightened interest in Islam has drawn each of the Caner brothers into additional debate settings at mosques and universities, speaking in English, French, and Arabic with Muslim scholars. And they have been interviewed by the BBC, CNN, Moody Broadcasting Network, Salem Radio Network, and USA Radio. Talk show invitations have come from Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Marlon Maddux, and Zola Levitt.

2004 – Biography from erguncaner.com: (Source: www.archive.org)

He has been called the “Intellectual Pit Bull of the evangelical world” by the national media. He debated Michael Moore in a nationally syndicated column entitled “Hatriotism.”
He has spoken on over fifty university and college campuses, debating Hindi, Buddhist, Muslim and Bah’ai scholars. He has been interviewed on virtually every national media outlet, and has been castigated by the Washington Post and the LA Times. He has addressed the Southern Baptist Convention Pastors’ Conference twice, and has given keynote addresses at seven major denominational meetings. He has spoken to over fifty thousand college and high school students in major concerts. Recently, he was called the “leading young voice for cultural apologetics and world religions” by the PAX network.

In the war on terror, he understands both sides...because he has been on both sides. Dr. Ergun Mehmet Caner is Full Professor of Theology and Church History at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia. Dr. Caner was raised the son of an Islamic leader. In 1982, he converted to the Christian faith after emigrating to this country. As a consequence of this conversion, he was disowned by his family. Caner has three Masters Degrees and two Doctorates, the Doctor of Theology coming from the University of South Africa. Along with his brother, Dr. Emir Caner (Professor of History and Anabaptist Studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary) Ergun is author of eleven books, including the new best seller CHRISTIAN JIHAD (Kregel 2004). CHRISTIAN JIHAD has been endorsed by Beth Moore and Ann Coulter, and examines the recent war in light of thirteen hundred years of Islamic-Christian conflict. His previous books on Islam have sold almost 200,000 copies. UNVEILING ISLAM won the Gold Medallion Award from the Evangelical Christian Publishers Association. Since the September 11th bombing, Caner has appeared on such national television shows as Fox News, various CNN shows, MSNBC, the 700 Club, Zola Levitt, John Ankerberg and others. He and his wife, Jill, have two sons.

2005, May 8th - The Washington Post publishes a profile of Ergun Caner, which says, in part, "Caner's star rocketed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, when he became a controversial in-house expert on Islam for the evangelical Christian community" & "Caner said he believes that his popularity among Christians is largely attributable to his Islamic heritage" & "Caner was raised in Turkey and Sweden in an Islamic family before moving as a teenager to Ohio..."

2006 – Ergun Caner speaks at an unidentified conference in the Seattle area.
Claims made:

• Does debates with Muslims on college campuses


• Grew up in Turkey, near the Turkish-Iraqi border


• Learned about America by watching The Dukes of Hazard on Turkish television


• Came to the United States in 1978


• Wore typically Arabic clothing in high school


• Has done 48 debates with Muslims, Hindu, & Bah’ai

February 2007 – Ergun Caner speaks to the Ohio State Association of Free Will Baptists Men’s Retreat:
Claims made:

• Has a Ph.D


• Came to America in 1978


• Wore Islamic clothing in high school

2009 – Biography from erguncaner.com: (Source: www.archive.org)

Ergun Mehmet Caner (B.A., M.A., M.Div., Th.M., D.Min., Ph.D.) is president of the Liberty Theological Seminary at the Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia. Raised as the son of a Muslim leader in Turkey, Caner became a Christian shortly before entering college. Serving under his Chancellor and President, Jerry Falwell Jr., Caner led the Seminary to triple in growth since his installation in 2005. A public speaker and apologist, Caner has debated Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus and other religious leaders in thirteen countries and thirty-five states. The author of seventeen books, Caner lives in Lynchburg with his wife Jill and two sons, Braxton and Drake.

October 15, 2009 – Dr. James White asks for help in locating examples of Dr. Caner’s debates. This caused some people to take a closer look at Dr. Ergun Caner’s claims. More questions begin to be asked.


February 25, 2010 – Dr. Caner releases the following statement: (Source: SBC Today

Recently a concerted effort has been made by a small group of professing believers, joined with a particular Muslim that posts videos, questioning my conversion, and the conversion of my brothers. And, what saddens my heart immensely is, this small band of professing Christians have now cited the Muslim’s videos as reason to attack my testimony as well. Indeed, the Muslims have used clips that attempt to show that through two decades of ministry and hundreds of sermons there exist discrepancies in my testimony. In all honesty, I probably could have saved them a lot of time and trouble. The truth is, I would be surprised if no discrepancies were discovered, given the hundreds of messages I have given during all that time!

Nonetheless, while normally it is wise to ignore these types of attacks, the Muslim’s videos- now surprisingly being cited by professing Christians- have sadly produced such ardor that I feel the need to speak to the issue. This has been done repeatedly to Muslim converts, but in this instance, I bear some responsibility to clarify.

MY TESTIMONY:
I was born in Sweden, with a Turkish father and our mother who was a Turkish citizen.
I was born and raised a Sunni Muslim, just like my brothers.
I was led to Christ at the Stelzer Road Baptist Church in Columbus, Ohio, just like my brothers.

MISSTATEMENTS:
Now, on to the other issues:
Every minister has made pulpit mistakes. Being called a “liar,” however, is a serious charge, especially when it is made by Christians. That would indicate that (1) the accusers can know the motives of the accused person’s heart, and (2) the accused person intentionally misled people.

I have never intentionally misled anyone. I am sure I have made many mistakes in the pulpit in the past 20-plus years, and I am sure I will make some in the future. For those times where I misspoke, said it wrong, scrambled words, or was just outright confusing, I apologize and will strive to do better.

DEBATES:
A second question raised concerns debates. One gentleman believes it is misleading to call my interaction with people from other faiths and world religions “debates.” Since his definition of debate is limited to moderated, formal debates, that is his prerogative. He can call them whatever he wishes. My podcasts are readily available online through this website. If he finds them less than satisfying or helpful, then he does not have to listen to them. I do not offer them for his approval or his attention. Please feel free to look elsewhere. God has been gracious to call many Christians to practice evangelism and apologetics in a variety of ways.

The truth is, several evangelical apologists employ the “formal” debate template and are very effective in their presentations. Norman Geisler, Gary Habermas and William Lane Craig come to mind. Nevertheless, I will continue to do exactly as I have done. In fact, in order to attempt a measure of peace, I am more than happy to call my engagements “interviews,” or even “dialogues.” Since this is historically my method of choice, I shall continue to offer these podcasts here, for the edification of those who care to listen.

However, I would caution all evangelicals that no single method meets consensus. Nor is there only one exclusively biblical model. Certainly there is much good to be found in formal debates, and I also believe that there is enough room for all types of interaction. In fact I believe there is great value to be found in all forms, including conversational and informal methods.

Finally, there is a legitimate complaint which I must address, namely, referencing a Muslim scholar that I have never met. Listening to the audio, I honestly 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 the forgiveness of all those who heard it. 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 used names. I shall be more careful.

OTHER ACCUSATIONS:
As for the countless other volleys aimed at discrediting the work I do, I am unsure how to respond. If my pronunciation of Arabic phrases is not correct, then I apologize. The language of my lineage is Turkish, not Arabic. Even Arabic dialects differ regionally, such as Jordanian and Egyptian. Indeed, 80% of the Muslim world does not speak Arabic, so I doubt anyone will be fully satisfied at this juncture. I must add, however, the misguided attempt by Muslim apologists to discredit converts to Christianity is not limited to me; in fact it seems to be standard operating procedure. I do not believe I can do anything to stop these attacks. All I can do is continue to teach as I have for years, and continue to serve the Lord with the best I can give.

A FINAL WORD ABOUT THIS CURRENT SITUATION:
Criticism is many times helpful. In this particular instance, it has enabled me to correct the careless mistakes I addressed above. Nonetheless, I want to be clear about this current situation. This constant stream of criticism, blogging and berating is not acceptable between believers. I am as guilty as anyone else in instigating such things over the years, but these personal attacks are too much. I shall not participate in this anymore. This is absolutely of no interest to me.

So, may the Lord judge between us.

To all who are reading this, I want you to know– I am a clear example of a person who is constantly in need of God’s grace. Because Jesus Christ died on the Cross for the world, that includes all of us. He died to forgive my sin, and resurrected to give me life. He did the same for you. When I repented of my sin, and put my faith in Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior, He gave me new life. He can do the same for you. We are all sinners, and in need of forgiveness. If you will trust Jesus Christ and turn from your sin, you can find forgiveness and freedom from all the guilt that is upon you. Jesus loves you.
-Ergun Caner

February 26, 2010 - Fred Butler makes the first comparison between Ergun Caner and Mike Warnke that I'm aware of.


February 26, 2010 - @ErgunCaner blocks @Shinar_Squirrel from following him on Twitter.

March 12, 2010 – The February 25, 2010 statement is removed from erguncaner.com (Source: James White’s blog.)

March 29, 2010 – Jason Smathers publishes Ergun Caner’s Secret Biography, & provides the hard evidence about when Ergun Caner came to America.

April 14, 2010 – the following biography goes up at erguncaner.com: (Source: erguncaner.com)

Ergun Caner is the President and Dean of the Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary and Graduate School in Lynchburg, Virginia. Raised as a devout Sunni Muslim along with his two brothers, Caner converted in high school. After his conversion, he pursued his call to the ministry and education. He has a Masters degree from The Criswell College, a Master of Divinity and a Master of Theology from Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, and a Doctor of Theology from the University of South Africa. He has written numerous books with his brother, Dr. Emir Caner, who is the President of Truett-McConnell College, a Baptist college in Georgia

April 19, 2010 – A Squirrel in Babylon publishes Like Watching a Train Wreck; @XIANITY tweets a link to it, bringing a great deal of attention to this blog.

April 23, 2010 – A Squirrel in Babylon is interviewed by Christianity Today for an upcoming article about Ergun Caner’s embellishment of his life’s story.

April 28, 2010 – People for the American Way’s Right Wing Watch publishes an article about Ergun Caner.

May 3, 2010 – Christianity Today publishes their article on Ergun Caner.

May 4, 2010 – A Squirrel in Babylon publishes a response to the Christianity Today article.

May 5, 2010 – Associated Baptist Press publishes an article on Ergun Caner.

May 10, 2010 – Liberty University announces that a committee is being formed to investigate allegations of dishonesty and wrongdoing on the part of Dr. Ergun Caner, President of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary.

It is now in the hands of Dr. Ron Godwin and the committee that he has formed. Please join me in prayer that they will follow the evidence wherever it leads them and that they may reach an unbiased and fair conclusion. Let us pray also for Dr. Caner, that he may come to repentance, and for God’s Grace upon Dr. Caner and his family.

UPDATE - June 25, 2010 - Ergun Caner removed from office of President and Dean of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary but retains full professorship for the 2010/2011 school year. Liberty University issues the following statement (Source: The Lynchburg News & Advance):

After a thorough and exhaustive review of Dr. Ergun Caner’s public statements, a committee consisting of four members of Liberty University’s Board of Trustees has concluded that Dr. Caner has made factual statements that are self-contradictory.

However, the committee found no evidence to suggest that Dr. Caner was not a Muslim who converted to Christianity as a teenager, but, instead, found discrepancies related to matters such as dates, names and places of residence.

Dr. Caner has cooperated with the board committee and has apologized for the discrepancies and misstatements that led to this review.

Dr. Caner’s current contractual term as Dean of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary expires on June, 30, 2010.

Dr. Caner will no longer serve as Dean of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary.

The university has offered, and Dr. Caner has accepted, an employment contract for the 2010-2011 academic year. Dr. Caner will remain on the faculty of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary as a professor.

Further your arboreal rodent sayeth naught.

If It Was A Song, CT's Article Would Be Off Key

I’ve been wondering for a while just how long it would take before national media outlets got around to the Ergun Caner story. It’s the kind of story many reporters dream of, with Lies and Corruption in High Places. It fits most all the templates established since Watergate. The more that becomes known about Ergun Caner, the more enticing the story must look to a good reporter.

I’d been watching the story pick up steam for several months in the blogosphere, and, two weeks ago, after finally writing about it myself, I received a request from John W. Kennedy of Christianity Today for an interview, which I granted. As you can imagine, I’m not at all accustomed to getting calls from the press, but my interview with Mr. Kennedy was quite pleasant and professional.

Well, yesterday, Mr. Kennedy’s article for Christianity Today’s was posted on line. I’ve read it carefully, and I have a few thoughts and a few questions.

First, he did quote me accurately & I thank him. I stand by what I said. But I must say that I find the whole focus of the article to be very much “off target,” beginning with the title itself.

The article is titled “Bloggers Target Seminary President” when it really should be “Seminary President’s Dishonesty Exposed”. The actions of bloggers in uncovering Caner’s… um… embellishments, while interesting, is totally secondary. It might have made a good sidebar to the main article, but it isn’t the main thing here. The whole tone of the article – “Well, look at that! People are asking questions! I wonder why?” – is off the mark.

CT’s article also makes it sound as if a bunch of Calvinists were going after Caner because he opposes Calvinist doctrine. This is an attempt to deflect away from the real issue, which is Caner's record of dishonesty. If the charges are true, the theological position of the person bringing the charges is irrelevant. It is just a red herring. In regards to myself, sure I disagree with Caner's stance on Calvinism, but there are a lot of other publically known pastors, preachers, and teachers, with whom I have theological differences, but whose integrity I have absolutely no reason to question. The real story should be about Dr. Caner’s nine-year penchant for bending the truth about his past.

Mr. Kennedy completely fails to deal with any of the evidence which has been gathered and documented that shows Dr. Caner’s pattern of falsehood. I know that Mr. Kennedy spoke with Jason Smathers; both Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Smathers told me so. Why is none of the evidence that Mr. Smathers collected discussed in the piece? It’s not like these are wild, unsubstantiated rumors, Mr. Smathers has gathered court records and other documents that directly contradict the timeline presented in Dr. Caner's readily available speeches on audio and video.

As the left-wing atheistic People for the American Way put it, “These are no vague or reckless charges, but carefully documented exposés that draw from Caner’s sermons, speeches, and online videos, and other public records.” If worldlings (c.f. 1 John 2:15)can understand what this story is really about, why doesn’t Christianity Today “get it?”

While both Ergun & Emir Caner declined to speak to Christianity Today (maybe the first time ever that Ergun Caner has turned down a request for an interview by a national media outlet), we now have official statements from Liberty University, in the person of Dr. Elmer Towns.

Dr. Towns, age 77, was co-founder, along with Jerry Falwell, of Liberty University back in 1971, and now serves as Vice President of Liberty University & Dean of Liberty’s School of Religion. According to Christianity Today, Dr. Towns and the Board of Directors of Liberty University “are satisfied that Caner has done nothing theologically inappropriate.” Theologically inappropriate? What in tarnation does that mean?

"It's not an ethical issue, it's not a moral issue," Christianity Today quotes Dr. Towns as saying. "We give faculty a certain amount of theological leverage. The arguments of the bloggers would not stand up in court." Repeatedly lying over a period of nine years is not an ethical or moral issue? A pattern of distorting the truth is simply “theological leverage?” Wow! I shudder to think how far someone might have to go before Dr. Towns would classify his actions as unethical or immoral!

And, as far as the evidence that has been gathered “not stand(ing) up in court,” I think that it fully accords to established rules of evidence and easily meets the standard of “preponderance of the evidence” required in civil court, and would, in my decidedly unlawyerly opinion, also meet the standard of “Beyond a Reasonable Doubt” required in criminal cases.

Further, Christianity Today reports that Dr. Towns believes that these are just attacks against Caner because of his opposition to the “Camel Method” of evangelizing Muslims. That doesn’t stand up to even the most cursory of examinations. Dr. Caner made his publicized remarks about the “Camel Method” in February of this year, yet James White was asking for help locating recordings of Ergun Caner’s debates over four months prior, back in October of 2009. Also, Dr. White has stated that he pretty much agrees with Dr. Caner’s opinion of the “Camel Method.”

Dr. Town’s statements, as reported by Christianity Today, raise new questions as to just how in touch Liberty University’s leadership really is with what is going on, and Liberty University’s academic integrity is now even more in doubt.

I have no doubt that Dr. Caner and Liberty University want this to just all go away. Who wouldn’t? But it isn’t going to go away. The situation continues, and needs to be dealt with honestly, forthrightly, and soon.

Postscript:
Because it was mentioned in the article, I want to briefly discuss the proposed resolution to the Southern Baptist Convention that I brought up quoted here. I exchanged e-mails with the author of the proposed draft resolution. He told me that he has been advised by good and Godly leaders in the SBC, not necessarily friends of Ergun Caner's, not to pursue such a resolution. As the CT article stated, "But in recent years, the SBC Committee on Resolutions has ruled as out of order nearly all efforts against individuals." So, don't look for anything to come to the floor at the Convention regarding this matter. (And I just caught this... I didn't tell CT that a blogger had written the draft, that is an assumption on Mr. Kennedy's part.)
Also:
James White, Fred Butler, & Tom Chantry all weighed in on the Christianity Today article yesterday.