The original charge was that he was NOT a Muslim. Then when the records proved that he was, the charge changed to a Devout Muslim. Once something is proven the charges have had a way of progressively growing and adjusting. Truth has never been the issue. An agenda is the issue.(as stated by him in a comment on this post) Peter Lumpkins is running with the same basic idea on his blog. Both Mr. Lumpkins and the author of the comment above are either unaware of the issues, or are trying to hide the truth.
The charges from the vast majority of Christian critics has never been that Dr. Ergun Caner was not a Muslim. There is indeed a question about how devout he was (based on a number of embarrassing errors he has made when it comes to discussing various aspects of Islam in his oral presentations), but that's not the main issue. The main issue has been Ergun Caner's various autobiographical embellishments, such as claiming he was born in Istanbul, Turkey (link to clip where he claims that) or that he grew up in Turkey (as reported here), and that he has debated Abdul Saleeb (a Christian pseudonym) and Shabir Ally, although the evidence that has been located places Dr. Ergun Caner in Sweden from birth to about age 3, and then in Ohio from then until his graduation from high school, and that Dr. Caner has never debated (except by email) any Muslim scholars (of course, this last item is a matter of there being an absence of evidence, but recourse to the usual sources has produced no results).
There may have been a few Christians who looked at the pattern of inconsistencies and asked themselves whether anything Dr. Caner said was true. However, the first issue raised by Dr. White was whether Dr. Caner had really done the debates he was claiming to have done. In a so-called Apology (link to discussion), Ergun Caner vaguely acknowledged the fact that he did not do the debates he had claimed while insisting that he had never intentionally misled anyone. Then, without warning, even that vague statement was removed from Dr. Caner's website.
Now, while certain SBC insiders try to hide their heads in the sand and imagine that the issues are going to disappear, the story of Caner's embellishments is getting picked up in an increasing number of news outlets:
Christian Right's Favorite Muslim Convert Exposed as Jihadi Fraud
Liberty directors support seminary president amid charges of misrepresentation
Bloggers Target Seminary President (Subtitle: Liberty's Ergun Caner accused of false statements in his testimony about converting from Islam.)
Is Religious Right’s Star Ex-Muslim a Serial Liar?
Some of us in the "Religious Right" (though this blog doesn't get political, it certainly is religious) can point out that we called Dr. Caner to repentance before these articles started being published. Folks who have been sticking their heads in the sand and thinking that because they have established that Caner was from a Muslim father they have addressed the problem are in for a wake up call as the issues surrounding Dr. Caner's record of describing himself comes under increasingly more detailed scrutiny.
Let's hope that those who consider Dr. Ergun Caner their friend will act like friends to him. If faint praise is the worst sort of insult, these faux defenses that say, in effect, "There, we've proved Dr. Caner was a Muslim, there's nothing further to address," are the worst sort of criticism - not only because they insult the intelligence of the readers, but because they encourage Dr. Caner to continue on his present course.