John Ankerberg and Ergun Caner

[Paul33]

John Ankerberg has posted the following at http://ankerberg.com/

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

​

​

Ankerberg states that Caner's testimony is completely true.
Ankerberg claims that Caner's character has been maligned without any substantiation.
Ankerberg claims that Caner's selfless sacrifice is being attacked.
Ankerberg claims that those who are attacking Caner are unchristian and unbiblical.

Does Ankerberg's statement call into question his own integrity?

Caner's testimony is mostly lies, but Ankerberg thinks it is completely true. What does this say about other topics and guests Ankerberg has had on his show? Can we trust the veracity of anything that Ankerberg presents if he can state that Caner's testimony is completely true?

The evidence from Caner himself, that he has lied about who he is and what he knows, is overwhelming. Using only Caner's words, videos, books, and recordings, it is beyond doubt that Caner has a problem with telling the truth. Caner contradicts Caner. The evidence is substantiated. He has convicted himself. How can any one trust Ankerberg's judgment on any other issue if he thinks that Caner has been maligned without any substantiation when the substantiation comes from Caner himself?

Ankerberg's ability to analyze the facts and use logic and reason are also called into question. He claims that Caner's self sacrifice is being attacked. Nothing could be further from the truth. Caner's self sacrifice is not being attacked. In fact, Caner is not being attacked at all. His contradictory statements about his background and his mistakes about basic Islam are being revealed and he is being asked to explain the discrepancies and mistakes. This hardly constitutes an attack. But those who point out the discrepancies are themselves being attacked. Ankerberg calls them unchristian and unbiblical. What does this say about Ankerberg's discernment and wisdom? What does it say about Ankerberg's desire for truth and justice? How can he label those who are calling for explanations, unchristian and unbiblical?

What are we to make of this? It would seem to me that John Ankerberg has seriously damaged his credibility.

 

[Ruiz]

I think there will be a lot of people with smeared reputations when this is finally over.

As for John, I understand him wanting to defend a friend. That is natural and in an era where Christians have often done the opposite, I do respect his effort.

However, John is wrong from what I have seen of the evidence. He should have waited for the findings of Liberty, but at this point I am beginning to wonder if these men know what the findings will be and are paving the way to give shelter to Liberty. Again, this is speculation on my part and I would hope I am wrong as I love my alma mater.

Having said all that, I still think final judgment should wait till Liberty's findings. I also think a church should be involved, but I assume that because of Liberty and Thomas Road's relationship, this is being overseen by Thomas Road.

 

[Paul33]

Ruiz,

Does Ankerberg's support make you wonder about other things you have seen on his show? I remember watching the series on masonry, for example. Now I have serious reservations if what I saw was true. The masons I spoke to about what I learned on Ankerberg's show didn't know what I was talking about.

 

[Ruiz]

Ruiz,

Does Ankerberg's support make you wonder about other things you have seen on his show? I remember watching the series on masonry, for example. Now I have serious reservations if what I saw was true. The masons I spoke to about what I learned on Ankerberg's show didn't know what I was talking about.

No, it does not. First, much of what he covers I have independent knowledge of from other sources. Masonry is one example (and I would never belong). Secondly, much of what he has done can be verified.

 

[preachinjesus]

I think we've gotten to a point with this issue that some of you are more concerned with things that absolutely don't matter to you or your life that you've slunk deeply into gossip and slander.

Its like a bunch of old church ladies bugging about the pastor. Let it go.

There are far more important things to be talking about. This is not important.

 

[Revmitchell]

I think we've gotten to a point with this issue that some of you are more concerned with things that absolutely don't matter to you or your life that you've slunk deeply into gossip and slander.

Its like a bunch of old church ladies bugging about the pastor. Let it go.

There are far more important things to be talking about. This is not important.

The whole thing began this way with White and is now carried on by members on this board. The blood is in the water and the sharks are on a feeding frenzy.

 

[Ruiz]

I think we've gotten to a point with this issue that some of you are more concerned with things that absolutely don't matter to you or your life that you've slunk deeply into gossip and slander.

Its like a bunch of old church ladies bugging about the pastor. Let it go.

There are far more important things to be talking about. This is not important.

In my speculation, I admit it is speculation. I will explain why I speculated and my concern. However, there is much about this which is not gossip... and it does concern me. I am a Liberty University Graduate and a Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary Graduate. Most of us can pull up the inconsistencies independent of someone else, we can hear them first hand as I have heard them first hand. Thus, in some ways, I am not speaking of something I don't know but I am speaking of what I do know.

I do speculate and note it is speculation. However, I have two big name individuals now who said that after talking with Liberty and him they have concluded their current position. This is concerning to me in that I do not think Liberty should be discussing this with others, they should be waiting for the official findings of Liberty, and it seems too pre-emptive.

Yet, I do not doubt the character nor what these Godly men have said. I do not doubt they have talked to officials of Liberty.

Originally, I was actually optimistic about the committee formed for reasons I cannot go into on this board. My only worry was that they would be overly harsh on Ergun. However, I may be wrong after hearing some of the recent statements.

Yes, part of mine did speculate but the speculation was based upon people we can respect. I think they should have waited for Liberty but that they have talked to Liberty tends to concern me.

 

[Paul33]

I think we've gotten to a point with this issue that some of you are more concerned with things that absolutely don't matter to you or your life that you've slunk deeply into gossip and slander.

Its like a bunch of old church ladies bugging about the pastor. Let it go.

There are far more important things to be talking about. This is not important.

Would you have someone preach in your pulpit if you knew his support of someone was not truthful?

Ankerberg stated that Caner's testimony is completely true.

Do you think Caner's testimony is completely true? If not, does Ankerberg saying that it is bother you?

 

[Paul33]

The whole thing began this way with White and is now carried on by members on this board. The blood is in the water and the sharks are on a feeding frenzy.

I will ask you the same question I asked preachingjesus.

Do you think Caner's testimony is completely true? If not, does it bother you that Ankerberg said that it was?

 

[Paul33]

In my speculation, I admit it is speculation. I will explain why I speculated and my concern. However, there is much about this which is not gossip... and it does concern me. I am a Liberty University Graduate and a Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary Graduate. Most of us can pull up the inconsistencies independent of someone else, we can hear them first hand as I have heard them first hand. Thus, in some ways, I am not speaking of something I don't know but I am speaking of what I do know.

I do speculate and note it is speculation. However, I have two big name individuals now who said that after talking with Liberty and him they have concluded their current position. This is concerning to me in that I do not think Liberty should be discussing this with others, they should be waiting for the official findings of Liberty, and it seems too pre-emptive.

Yet, I do not doubt the character nor what these Godly men have said. I do not doubt they have talked to officials of Liberty.

Originally, I was actually optimistic about the committee formed for reasons I cannot go into on this board. My only worry was that they would be overly harsh on Ergun. However, I may be wrong after hearing some of the recent statements.

Yes, part of mine did speculate but the speculation was based upon people we can respect. I think they should have waited for Liberty but that they have talked to Liberty tends to concern me.

Ruiz,

Your thoughts echo mine. As a graduate of LU, I too, am concerned. At first I thought Caner needed to apologize and all would be well. But now I am not so sure. Geisler and Ankerberg have made statements that trouble me deeply about where the committee may be going.

I can only pray that truthfulness and integrity carry the day. Last week an administrator at Texas A & M resigned for lying on his resume. Caner's falsehoods go to the core of who he is and what he represents as a President of a seminary. Caner needs to humble himself, confess his sins, and resign for the sake of Christ and His Gospel.

 

[Ruiz]

Ruiz,

Your thoughts echo mine. As a graduate of LU, I too, am concerned. At first I thought Caner needed to apologize and all would be well. But now I am not so sure. Geisler and Ankerberg have made statements that trouble me deeply about where the committee may be going.

I can only pray that truthfulness and integrity carry the day. Last week an administrator at Texas A & M resigned for lying on his resume. Caner's falsehoods go to the core of who he is and what he represents as a President of a seminary. Caner needs to humble himself, confess his sins, and resign for the sake of Christ and His Gospel.

Paul,

It is not like we hate Liberty, either. I think most of the alumni I have spoken to about this situation are cautiously optimistic that Liberty will do the right thing. We are not trying to "get Liberty" or "attack Liberty." Most of us love our school. We, though, want to be put forth a school of integrity who sends out students who are "Champions for Christ" and see this situation as an attack on the school's integrity.

Yet, these statements by Geisler and Ankerberg do concern me. Now, if at the end of this Liberty does take steps to deal with the situation and Geisler and Ankerberg acted completely independent from Liberty, I will view my current hesitation as a momentary lapse of judgment. If, on the other hand, these men spoke after talking to Liberty and this is a foreshadow of their decision, I will be highly disappointed in Liberty.

 

[Revmitchell]

I will ask you the same question I asked preachingjesus.

Do you think Caner's testimony is completely true? If not, does it bother you that Ankerberg said that it was?

There is not enough evidence to determine this. Those who have not spoken with Caner personally cannot know. Sad

 

[preachinjesus]

Would you have someone preach in your pulpit if you knew his support of someone was not truthful?

Ankerberg stated that Caner's testimony is completely true.

Do you think Caner's testimony is completely true? If not, does Ankerberg saying that it is bother you?

My point, which you seem to have missed, is that it doesn't matter. There is a process ongoing and there will is a resolution forthcoming.

What you're doing at this point is gossiping and backbiting. You're not letting it go.

This doesn't matter as much as other things right now. You need to let it go. Its not that important.

Listen, I'm an alumnus of Liberty and have deep roots with the school still. As I have mentioned elsewhere here I am absolutely outraged about this (specifically that Dr. Caner has said to use Arabic but has been shown that he isn't speaking intelligible Arabic) and am praying for peaceful resolution.

That said you're prattling on with these threads is showing your immaturity and inability to trust spiritual leadership in place to handle this situation. You need to stop this foolishness.

 

[John Toppass]

I am beginning to think that he thinks prattling and foolishness are his gifts.

 

[Paul33]

I am beginning to think that he thinks prattling and foolishness are his gifts.

My dear John, are you stalking me? Are personal attacks the best use of your time?

 

[Ruiz]

There is not enough evidence to determine this. Those who have not spoken with Caner personally cannot know. Sad

Two points on this statement.

First, because of recordings, we do not need to have "been there" to hear the full context of the statements in question and to make a decision as to their legitimacy.

Secondly, I have not talked to Caner about the charges. Liberty is investigating and I trust there are some reason to investigate. This does not mean he is guilty, but it means there were situations which demand Liberty to take the charges serious.

 

[Rhetorician]

Paul33 Response

John Ankerberg has posted the following at http://ankerberg.com/

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

​

​

Ankerberg states that Caner's testimony is completely true.
Ankerberg claims that Caner's character has been maligned without any substantiation.
Ankerberg claims that Caner's selfless sacrifice is being attacked.
Ankerberg claims that those who are attacking Caner are unchristian and unbiblical.

Does Ankerberg's statement call into question his own integrity?

Caner's testimony is mostly lies, but Ankerberg thinks it is completely true. What does this say about other topics and guests Ankerberg has had on his show? Can we trust the veracity of anything that Ankerberg presents if he can state that Caner's testimony is completely true?

The evidence from Caner himself, that he has lied about who he is and what he knows, is overwhelming. Using only Caner's words, videos, books, and recordings, it is beyond doubt that Caner has a problem with telling the truth. Caner contradicts Caner. The evidence is substantiated. He has convicted himself. How can any one trust Ankerberg's judgment on any other issue if he thinks that Caner has been maligned without any substantiation when the substantiation comes from Caner himself?

Ankerberg's ability to analyze the facts and use logic and reason are also called into question. He claims that Caner's self sacrifice is being attacked. Nothing could be further from the truth. Caner's self sacrifice is not being attacked. In fact, Caner is not being attacked at all. His contradictory statements about his background and his mistakes about basic Islam are being revealed and he is being asked to explain the discrepancies and mistakes. This hardly constitutes an attack. But those who point out the discrepancies are themselves being attacked. Ankerberg calls them unchristian and unbiblical. What does this say about Ankerberg's discernment and wisdom? What does it say about Ankerberg's desire for truth and justice? How can he label those who are calling for explanations, unchristian and unbiblical?

What are we to make of this? It would seem to me that John Ankerberg has seriously damaged his credibility.

My dear Brother Paul,

I will tell you what we ought to make of it. We ought to keep be like a good soldier. Stay in our foxhole, keep our head's down, and our mouths shut.

Liberty is investigating the issue and will come forth with the findings soon enough. John is only defending a friend. Even in a court of law a man is innocent until proven guilty. So I say on both counts, let's back off and leave the findings to those to whom power has been given.

Let's leave the rumor mongering to the lost and worldly crowd, could we please?

"That is all!" raying:

 

[Paul33]

My point, which you seem to have missed, is that it doesn't matter. There is a process ongoing and there will is a resolution forthcoming.

What you're doing at this point is gossiping and backbiting. You're not letting it go.

This doesn't matter as much as other things right now. You need to let it go. Its not that important.

Listen, I'm an alumnus of Liberty and have deep roots with the school still. As I have mentioned elsewhere here I am absolutely outraged about this (specifically that Dr. Caner has said to use Arabic but has been shown that he isn't speaking intelligible Arabic) and am praying for peaceful resolution.

That said you're prattling on with these threads is showing your immaturity and inability to trust spiritual leadership in place to handle this situation. You need to stop this foolishness.

What doesn't matter?

That Ankerberg's assessment of the situation is that Caner's testimony is completely true?

That Geisler believes that Caner is being slandered and libeled?

That Ankerberg believes that those who have questions are unchristian and unbiblical?

Geisler and Ankerberg make their living questioning the beliefs and practices of others. Now when they are asked to explain their beliefs and practices, it is suddenly unchristian and unbiblical?

Preachingjesus, it does matter!!!!

It is not gossip or backbiting to discuss the public words of two leaders who themselves appear to be slinging mud at any who raise questions. Thank God we live in America where leaders can be held accountable like the Bible requires.

Lying and covering for those who lie may not be important to you, but I think most would agree that it is important to God. God hates lies and falsehoods. Take a look at Revelation 21:8 and 22:15. Both the Father and the Son address the issue of lying. They hate it.

If I can't let it go, it appears that I am in good company. God is going to put liars in the lake of fire. Jesus states that they are outside! But you say that it is not that important.

You then resort to personal attacks. Your use of "prattling on" is demeaning. Instead of engaging the issue of Ankerberg's support for Caner, the one who points it out is immature. It would appear, however, that someone else is being immature. I am not going to resort to name calling, even if you have chosen to go that route.

You are right about one thing, though. I don't trust "spiritual" leadership that claims that lying about who you are and what you know is not a moral or ethical issue. Elmer Towns needs to retract his statement. You see, Towns states that Caner is exonerated. LU rejects the truth because it comes from bloggers, Christian or otherwise. Secular media sources run with the story. And, now, LU decides a committee needs to be formed. And did Towns say an inquiry was held? Well, no, nothing like an inquiry has been held, states Johnnie Moore. So excuse me if I don't trust that kind of "spiritual" leadership.

As to who needs to stop this foolishness, I will leave that to others to decide. But you are welcome at anytime to not waste any more of your precious time on this, since it does not matter and is not important.

 

[Paul33]

My dear Brother Paul,

I will tell you what we ought to make of it. We ought to keep be like a good soldier. Stay in our foxhole, keep our head's down, and our mouths shut.

Liberty is investigating the issue and will come forth with the findings soon enough. John is only defending a friend. Even in a court of law a man is innocent until proven guilty. So I say on both counts, let's back off and leave the findings to those to whom power has been given.

Let's leave the rumor mongering to the lost and worldly crowd, could we please?

"That is all!" raying:

My dear Rhet,

Let me see if I understand you correctly. Since Caner is John's friend, it is ok for John to lie (saying Caner's testimony is completely true) in defending his friend. Is that what you are saying?

As to the foxhole argument. Are you saying, see no evil, hear no evil?

So it is acceptable for Ankerberg to defend his friend, but not acceptable to raise a question about Ankerberg's defense. Is that what you are saying?

That is all.

 

[Jerome]

And maybe Paul33 knows a little somethin' about see-nothin', know-nothin', do-nothin' university boards of directors:laugh: