The so-called Apology does not admit to lying. Instead it makes comments such as, "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." And again, "The truth is, I would be surprised if no discrepancies were discovered, given the hundreds of messages I have given during all that time!" And further: "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." And finally: "Criticism is many times helpful. In this particular instance, it has enabled me to correct the careless mistakes I addressed above. "
Additionally :
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.Dr. Caner never admits to intentionally misleading anyone in this apology, though he admits that he did not debate some Muslim scholar that he claimed he debated (we think he is referring to Shabir Ally, but it is hard to be sure). This so-called Apology mostly claims that he simply unintentionally mixed things up. In my opinion it is hard to believe that Dr. Caner mistakenly believed that he lived in Turkey, watched American TV there, and particularly gained misconceptions about America by watching the Dukes of Hazzard (for the reasons explained here). Sadly, many more such examples could be provided. In any event, Caner has withdrawn this so-called Apology from the web. I have provided the information and link according to the request that was made, but I don't encourage people to dwell on an Apology, so-called, that has been withdrawn (for whatever private reasons it may have been withdrawn).
-TurretinFan
Well,
ReplyDeletethat's an odd apology. My experience with lying and confessing it was a bit more tortured upon me emotionally. I don't lie very well. And I don't confess my sins very well either.
Maybe that's it? He is finding it hard to confess truthfully he is a liar?
As for the facts of his Turkey/Sweden/USA claims, I still am unsettled and unsure of what it is he is trying to portray by this firm portrayal?
Turks and Kurds are mostly, 90 plus Sunni and do not claim any connection with "Persian" Sunnis.
The Turks and Kurds I know personally are some of the sweetest, mild mannered folks, mostly if not completely nonviolent. They certainly can be fierce defending themselves, their rights and their homelands. It seems an exaggeration to portray himself as a Muslim trained terrorist from Turkey. It is indeed odd that the factual records place him mostly being raised in the United States, in Ohio, not Turkey. I have been to Ohio. I am puzzled where all the Muslim Terrorists are? God has brought more suffering on Ohio by weather than terrorists have. Hmmmmm?
Well, I only know in part!
Why am I supposed to care about the head of a fundy Anabaptist seminary?
ReplyDeleteWhy am I supposed to care about the head of a fundy Anabaptist seminary?
ReplyDeleteRandall,
I don't know from where you come, your religious affiliations (if any), nor anything about you for that matter. But Christians are compelled by Christ, who is Head of the Church, to care about others. This means we want the best for each person, even when that necessitates discipline. If you are a Christian, you should care that Christ's name is being blasphemed among the gentiles because of our sins. If you are not a Christian, then I suppose you shouldn't care at all.
Well written post. I appreciate your focus on facts rather than subjective issues.
ReplyDeleteRvdS:
ReplyDeleteI don't even know who you are, although I have a few guesses. If you ever come to the point where you are evangelizing Muslims, the claims of this famous ex-Muslim are likely to become more important, notwithstanding his non-WCF beliefs.
-TurretinFan
Thanks, Anonymous.
ReplyDeleteThere is another problem which is embedded in all of this. As made evident by James Dobson's recent replay of an interview with Caner, numerous publications and recording reissue the same prevarications over and over. What is the solution to that? The amending of his site, placing and removing apologies, redos of bios- all are minor concessions and of limited effect. What is really needed is for Caner to stop furher publication and use of the myriads of bogus materials that contain the 'mistakes' he made. Even if we accept that he was just being dumb, as he admitted in this weak apology, there remains the spread of his painted past. His 'mistakes' continue to pollute the landscape. If he were sincere, one would think that he would inform outlets and publishers that he no longer wishes to be affilliated with anything he now claims to be falsehoods contained in those embellished fictions.
ReplyDeleteS.T.: Someone has reported to me that Focus on the Family was contacted by Dr. Caner after the recent re-airing of the episode in question and asked not to air it any more. I don't have anything official to back that up - perhaps I just hope it is a true report.
ReplyDelete-TurretinFan
Well that would be a positive move on his part. For what end I am not sure, but positive regardless.
ReplyDeleteCheck this: Proven innocent
I've responded to that link here: (proven ... what we already knew).
ReplyDeletehttp://sbctoday.com/2010/02/25/statement-from-dr-ergun-caner/
ReplyDeleteErgun Caner's explanation on his background:
"I was born in Sweden, with a Turkish father and our mother who was a Turkish citizen."
The claim that he makes that his mother was a Turkish citizen, yet does not specifically state her nationality as Swedish raises questions.
According to Swedish immigrant law before 1975, immigrants did not seem to be granted citizenship and were in the second tier of society referred to as immigrants who could not attain citizenship in Sweden. (Neither could their children).One would conclude that Acar Caner still kept his citizenship as Turkish. He would have had to have a Turkish passport to migrate to America with his family.
Turkish citizenship does not seem to be automatically granted at marriage to a citizen. There is a provision for foreign women who marry Turkish citizens:
"According to Turkish Citizenship Law, marrying a foreigner does not influence the citizenship of the husband. Foreigner wife marrying a Turkish husband has the right to choose her own citizenship. But in some exceptions such as “having no citizenship”, the foreigner automatically shall gain the Turkish citizenship due to the principle of “having at least one citizenship”.There is no condition as resigning from the other citizenship for the wife who has married a Turkish citizen. Therefore, the Turkish Laws allow the wife to hold both of the citizenships implicitly."
http://www.mymerhaba.com/Turkish-Nationality-in-Turkey-202.html
So both the Caner parents could have been Turkish citizens, yet would not need to have a Turkish passport for the mother to travel.
She could be a Turkish citizen on paper (dual-citizenship) and not lose her Swedish citizenship and passport.Through her, both the issues (Ergun and Erdem) would have been Swedish citizens, but not the father.
I have a question here since in those years it was very hard for Turks to be allowed to immigrate to the US.
The exceptions were for those fleeing communism (my parents fled communist countries to Turkey and still needed to wait several years, if they were lucky, to be granted permanent residency status.)
So we have a situation that the father is a Turkish citizen, (citizenship not revoked for non-military service which would have been compulsory.): with a Turkish passport and a mother who would have to had a Swedish passport to expedite the process.
Ergun Caner's claims that "my mother had Turkish citizenship" is laughable since she would never had use for it in the first place. (see the conditions in the link above).
He obfuscated the issue in bringing this up to somehow IMPLY that she was a Muslim convert because she had "Turkish citizenship".
Basically, we have only the Caner bro's "words" that their mother was a convert, even of the Sufi variety as Emir claimed, which is another can of worms because to convert to this would have been more tendentious. Which school of Sufiism? Where did she "convert" to have the said lessons in that school of Sufiism? Otherwise, did he mean to say that she READ Sufiism? Go to any store and get the Penguin books on the various forms and decide which kind you want to be, but who would be teaching you the chants, symbols, the ceremonies?
I am amazed at the levels of prevarication that is inherent in these claims.
Folks better download that copy on SBC Today of his so called apology, before it also disappears.
ReplyDeleteI think Chris Rosebrough had a perfect take on Liberty's actions.
(listen from 24:50 to 35:15)
http://podcast.fightingforthefaith.com/fftf/F4F062810.mp3
Essentially saying they will dismiss him eventually, quietly, but only took him down a notch to toss a bone to the mean old calvinists and other mean and nasty good for nothing bloggers. They are so afraid to admit Reformed people and/or bloggers could possibly be right about something that they won't do what is right simply because mostly Calvinists and Muslims brought up the charge and forced them to deal with it. He seemed to say he thinks it's all political maneuvering. I tend to agree. I hope I'm wrong and they will do what is right regardless, but... I'm terribly skeptical.
> Strong Tower said...
ReplyDelete>Well that would be a positive move on his part. For
>what end I am not sure, but positive regardless.
I don't see it as positive at all. He had them remove it so no one could listen and verify his lies anymore. Again, call me skeptical... I'm only going based on his behavior so "far of duck and cover, blow smoke, obfuscate, and attack those who have confronted you about your sin."