Former Muslim faces inquiry at Falwell's university
The future of a prominent Southern Baptist preacher who converted from Islam may depend on which version of his past is closer to the truth, the Associated Press reports.
Ergun Caner's supporters know him as a devout Muslim who discovered Jesus Christ at an Ohio church and became a popular leader at Liberty University, the Virginia evangelical school founded by the Rev. Jerry Falwell.
His critics have a different version: an opportunist who exaggerated vague boyhood memories in his Muslim family to paint himself as a one-time extremist while enriching himself and sowing tension between the world's two largest faiths.
Lately, his critics are easier to find than his friends. Prominent Evangelical leaders who in the past blurbed his books, promoted him as an expert and defended him against charges of inflammatory anti-Muslim remarks have been publicly silent since Liberty announced it would investigate the claims against Caner.
"Part of you is going, Haha, I told you so, and another part is saying, That's really sad," said Kelly Wentworth, executive director of the Atlanta-based American Islamic Fellowship, which works to strengthen bonds between Muslims and other religious believers.
Caner has been a polarizing figure since shortly after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, when he and his brother, Emir, emerged as leading Christian critics of Islam.
"Ergun and Emir Caner are trophies of God's grace," wrote Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, in the foreword to "Unveiling Islam" by the Caners. "Once devout followers of Allah, now of Jesus of Nazareth."
Land is one of several Evangelical leaders contacted by The Associated Press for this story who either did not respond or declined to comment.
Much of their credibility came from their personal history — their testimony, in evangelical Christian terminology. Ergun Caner claimed at various times in front of various audiences to have emigrated to the U.S. as a radical Muslim teenager from Turkey, until becoming a Christian at an Ohio church.
Bloggers — both Muslim and Christian — have chipped away at this story for months, producing video and audio evidence of Caner apparently contradicting himself, and posting court documents showing that Caner's family lived in Ohio starting when he was a small boy.
Neither Caner brother has responded to repeated requests for comment. Students at Lynchburg, Va.-based Liberty have rallied to his side, creating a Facebook group proclaiming their support.
"We know Dr. Caner to be a man of integrity," said Alane Moore, president of the seminary's student government.
"He's very down to earth. The same guy you see on stage at campus church on a Wednesday night is the same guy you'll see in the office and the same guy you'll see in Walmart," she said.
If the inquiry finds he fabricated sections of his past, though, that could change, according to author Kevin Roose.
"It's not as if he's accused of lying on his taxes or something totally immaterial to his work," said Roose, author of "The Unlikely Disciple," about the semester he spent at Liberty. "This is his testimony, and Christians take testimony very seriously. It's a story that authenticates you in your Christian journey."
On the surface, Caner seems unperturbed, occasionally posting humorous musings on summer classes to his Twitter account. But in the weeks before Liberty launched its inquiry, Caner and others were trying to remove material used by his blogger critics from the spotlight.
An April radio broadcast by Focus on the Family called "From Jihad to Jesus" featured a 2001 sermon in which Caner talked about having been raised in Turkey and trained to participate in a jihad against the West.
It has since been removed from the Focus site at Caner's request, a publicist there said.
Several videos of Caner posted to YouTube by a London-based Muslim student named Mohammad Khan, one of the earliest bloggers to zero in on Caner's biography, have been removed over copyright complaints by Liberty University's seminary and by John Ankerberg.
Ankerberg, a Chattanooga, Tenn.-based minister, hosts a TV show on which Caner has been a guest at least eight times, according to Caner's website. He did not respond to a request for comment.
Caner's longtime critics are not being as reticent.
"He's done enormous harm," said Charles Kimball, director of religious studies at the University of Oklahoma and former director of the Middle East Office for the National Council of Churches.
"To listen to someone like Caner, you'd think house meetings to decide what to blow up next are daily fare for all Muslims," Kimball, an ordained Baptist minister, said.
Muslim organizations say that's why these questions about Caner's past should have been raised years earlier.
"We've known for some time that his past is not what he's portraying," said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Washington, D.C.-based Muslim civil rights and advocacy group. "But the whole 'former Muslim' gig is quite profitable these days. It plays well to certain audiences."
The contradictions in Caner's story don't add up to a repudiation of his ministry, though, argues Hussein Wario, author of "Cracks in the Crescent" and a convert from Islam to Christianity.
Wario points out that no one has questioned some core elements of Caner's story: namely, that his father was a Turkish Muslim active in his local mosque, and that Caner was a Muslim until he converted as a teenager.
"There are enough discrepancies in Dr. Caner's stories to raise doubts, but not enough to dismiss him as a fraud," Wario said.
Comments
One of the great things about Natural Law is that it transcends religions, and it even transcends identifiable intellectual historical trends. The fact that it comes down to belief in Jesus Christ does not take away the fact that it is Natural, that is Natural Law. That is why I don't find what the man in this article has done offensive. He has clearly been answering to a higher law and not been too worried by petty strictures. St. Thomas often mixed up a lot of Arabic and Christian philosophy and was none too worried about the petty distinctions, like whether his words were the words of another, because his words are truth. Thus, the supposedly mixed up guy is really Thomist, and does not know it. I am so sure of this, that I would like to hire this man for my Projected American Principles, Inc. A key criterion I have for hiring is not worrying about principles, when defending principles. That is because we have higher principles. I hope Ergun Caner sends me a resume.
Posted by: Robert Georgeous | June 7, 2010 7:07 PM
God's laws always take precedence over anything natural, because He created all natural things.
Posted by: Clay | June 8, 2010 9:03 AM
Clay,
I know of your sincerity of belief as evidenced on this site. But I want to help you understand, as I do my students, that everything in Natural Law in fact coincides with an intellectual view which through divine grace happens to coincide with Roman Catholic belief. This is how we conservative Catholics are able to be so ecumenical and tolerant of other beliefs, including other Christians. It is not that other Christian beliefs do not show a love of Christ, but they have not been shown the fullness of truth that comes with accepting the metaphysics of Thomas Aquinas. You see, Clay, St. Thomas was not just another smart man in history, he really summarized the very commonsense view of life that coincides with the totality of Scripture and Tradition that is Roman Catholic belief. This is why those who always talk about the Inquisition are just creating a straw man. Those days are long gone. What we need now is re-education camps for those who are not Catholic. If I am successful with my Projected American Principles, Inc. generally, and we get a decent person back in the White House so I can get a seat on an important board, this is what I propose. I am a very popular teacher, and I know that through force of argument, and by subtly letting the student that you as the grader hold the key to their future employability, you can really influence people in a good way. Our society is so far from Natural Law and Truth now that we need to re-educate a whole generation. I have some of my staff at Projected American Principles, Inc., especially a young guy named Tom, working to find a catchy way to bring people back to Natural Law. You see, Clay, it is important that people accept the role of the Church to order all of society, even for people who do not agree with the Church. That is the Church's role. And by having lots of fun pictures of the Pope, and detailed description of my every activity in a blog, we can accomplish this
Of course you may be wondering, Clay, how this jibes with freedom of religion, and what some people call the separation of Church and State. Fortunately, we have people working on that too. One of my great friends is Fr. Robert Saucelicko of the Lord Acton Foundation for Revived Medieval Polity. Fr. Saucelicko has been brilliantly defending the thesis, originally put forth by Lord Acton that we need a revival of the structure of medieval governance. But also that this medieval governance coincides with American freedoms. It is not easy to see how, I know Clay at first, but Fr. Saucelicko is brilliant at defending it. The views of Lord Acton potentially can help us in the Thrid World because Lord Acton defended slavery as well as being a potential good.
Anyways, I know that this has all been very complicated Clay, and I thank you for reading and considering it. You may also wish to read some of my many books n Natural Law. They might seem complicated at first, but I will tell you a little secret. They are really all about the same thing. There is a sort of simple conservative point I make throughout my books, a point a lot of rich conservatives want to see made. So once you understand that all the hard stuff does not look so hard. It only seems like complicated and close scholarship. Fortunately, when you have a very conservative point to make editors will bend over backwards to allow a lot of high-brow padding. But you have to read the books pretty closely to get that. I am just letting you know so that you will read them and not be intimidated and come into the fullness of inspiration and light that comes from understanding Natural Law.
Thanks, Clay.
Robert Georgeous, Projected American Principles, Inc.
Posted by: Robert Georgeous | June 8, 2010 11:09 AM
I dont disagree with everything you say, but the bible is all we need. To go on about this and that is to appear prideful. The best thing to do is to study the bible with a group and have discussions about what it means to each person and to pray together. Anyone who writes a book for people to read is saying that he or she is the authority, and no matter who writes the book, it can get away from what God wants us to do, regardless of how much the person feels they are God inspired. Thanks.
Posted by: Clay | June 8, 2010 12:07 PM
I think it would be illuminating to participate in a bible study with Robert Georgeous and The American Papussed.
Posted by: Camille Quelquejeu | June 8, 2010 12:35 PM
You are good guy Clay, and a sincere believer. You are right about the centrality of Scripture. But the beauty of Scripture is only brought more alive by the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church. Also, I have always known that I have been on the right track because wealthy conservatives who have very conservative opinions need the services that only an intellectual like myself could offer with scholarly embellishment. It is God's work for sure. Because if Pro-Marriage and Pro-Family believers want to contribute money and influence prestigious University presses to accept a conservative then I am honored to fulfill that role. It is a great niche. The great thing about Natural Law, and one of the reasons I recommend it to you, is that it allows you to defend very old-fashioned opinions, which you couldn't say socially anymore unless they are buried in a swath of scholarly footnotes. There are so few people who read books closely nowadays, even at University presses, that this service to the Faith will likely pass unnoticed. Nowadays, Clay, having your real intentions pass unnoticed is the only way we can enact our agenda without people claiming we are violating our civil liberties. I think you will agree that it is necessary to Christianize the notion of civil liberties. Just as we must never tire of making known that true freedom is accepting that you are not free, but you are free to do what God wants, which the Church makes clear to you.
Thanks again for the interest Clay.
Robert Georgeous, Projected American Principles, Inc.
Posted by: Robert Georgeous | June 8, 2010 1:00 PM
Camille,
Funny you should mention that. We are planning just such a thing. Taking as our inspiration the "Theology on Tap" concept that has been successful around the country, we are looking for an elegant watering-hole to host what we are going to call "Dewars and Douay-Rheims". Hope you will join us!
Thanks, Robert Georgeous, Projected American Principles, Inc.
Posted by: Robert Georgeous | June 8, 2010 1:21 PM
Hey Georgeous! How about the Hippo!
It's just a few blocks from the Cathedral and I hear Saint Augustine hangs out there.
Posted by: Dana | June 8, 2010 1:51 PM
What a delightful suggestion, Dana, and quite suitable for a Counter-Reformation.
I like your idea, Robert. It's always nice to have some Chalonnaise with one's Challoner.
Posted by: Camille Quelquejeu | June 8, 2010 1:59 PM
Camille,
When I play my banjo, which by the way confirms that I am regular guy who just happens to do high-brow philosophy, I always drink Pinot Grigio.
If not assume I can get a Jello Shot in the shape of a cross or something at the Hippo. See you there.
Robert Georgeous, Projected American Pricniples, Inc.
Posted by: Robert Georgeous | June 8, 2010 2:22 PM
I am truly disappointed in Dr. Caner and LU's initial response. Elmer Towns is an embarrassment to the university for stating that Dr. Caner did not do anything immoral or unethical.
Dr. Caner did apologize on the internet, but then nullified it by saying he never intentionally misled anyone.
But the evidence from his own mouth says differently. Watching him speak from the videos on the internet and listening to audio tapes of sermons proves that he has said the following:
I was born in Istanbul, Turkey. He was not.
I was raised near the Turkey/Iran border. He was not.
I came to America in 1978. He did not.
I came to America through Brooklyn at age 13. He did not.
I was trained to do what the terrorists did on 9/11. He was not.
I was in the Islamic Youth Jihad until age 15. He was not.
I learned English by watching the Dukes of Hazard. He did not.
I spoke broken English. He did not.
I debated a specific Muslim in Nebraska. He did not.
I have debated Muslim leaders. He has not.
I have debated religious leaders of other religions. He has not.
His falsehoods revolve around three areas: when he came to America, where and how he was raised, and who he debated. This is not complicated. He has intentionally misled others in these three areas. The true facts are as follows:
He was born in Sweden in 1966.
He came to America before 1970.
He was raised in Columbus, Ohio.
He was educated in America.
He spoke fluent English.
His mother was Lutheran.
His father was Muslim.
His parents divorced when he was nine.
He was raised Muslim.
His father was active in a mosque.
He came to Christ around age 15.
His father disowned him.
He attended evangelical colleges and seminaries.
He had evangelistic encounters with people from other religions.
LU has taken action. They have corrected Ergun Caner's bio. They have removed the inaccuracies. They removed when he came to America, mention of Turkey, and mention of his numerous debates in 40 states and 13 countries. They are investigating his background. But their previous statement by Towns is more embarrassing then Caner's falsehoods.
Dr. Caner at the very least needs to apologize. He needs to state clearly and unequivocally that he misrepresented his background. We may assume that he did so to capitalize on his Muslim background in the wake of 9/11. The evidence is that E. Michael Caner became Ergun Mehmet Caner after 9/11, another falsehood.
The sad truth is that his actual testimony was sufficient enough. He could have said that being raised by a devout Sunni Muslim father gave him a unique perspective into the mind of the Muslim terrorists and on indoctrination. He didn't have to lie. That is what is so sad.
But the more I think about this, he did have to lie. His understanding and presentation of the basics of Islam is woefully inadequate. In order to become an expert on Islam, he had to enhance his Muslim identity. But his attempts at explaining Islam would be akin to an ex-Christian making the following statements about Christianity:
A key verse for Christians is Bible 3:15.
The Lord’s Prayer, “The Lord is my shepherd,” was foundational to my prayer life.
The Eucharist is a depiction of how a believer is baptized into the body of Christ.
Before we listened to the sermon, we sang verses.
The Lord’s lunch is celebrated weekly or monthly in the churches.
Ergun does not know what he is talking about. If an ex-Christian stated the above, he would be laughed at. If he presented himself as an expert in Christianity, he would be soundly ridiculed. So the more I think about it, Ergun Caner had to lie in light of his abysmal knowledge of basic Islam. So there is a fourth area in which he lied – what he knew about Islam. Sad.
But then, here comes Norm Geisler and John Ankerberg to the rescue. Geisler claims that Caner has been libeled and slandered. Ankerberg claims that Caner’s testimony is completely true. Both claims are completely and utterly false. Caner has not been libeled or slandered. He has been caught frabricating his background and knowledge of Islam. Caner’s testimony is so twisted that Ankerberg’s defense of Caner brings his own credibility into question. So is this what it means to be an apologist for Jesus Christ? Disregard the truth when lies have been uncovered? This is nothing but Christians acting badly for the sake of their money-making name brands. Just ask Mehmet.
So why are Geisler and Ankerberg covering for Caner? Could it be because they have a stake in the lies? Caner claims to have debated Abdul Saleeb. Geisler and R. C. Sproul have coauthored books with Abdul Saleeb. Ankerberg has coauthored books with Caner. There is a lot of money to be made in those books. But the real question remains, who is Abdul Saleeb? What if he is pseudonym? Or, worse yet, what if he doesn’t even exist? If Caner can fabricate his testimony, why can’t Geisler and Sproul fabricate an Arab convert? It is quite possible that the Caner lies are only the tip of the iceberg.
Posted by: starrstruck | June 13, 2010 5:04 PM