fake ex muslims

FTN has written a response regarding some of the issues I have raised regarding Ergun Caner's errors.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

FTN's response can be found here: http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2010/02/responding-to-fake-ex-muslims-site.html

I have responded below:

FTN writes

The "Fake Ex Muslims" (FxM) site has a page of "issues" that are identified with respect to Ergun Caner (link to page).
I'd like to respond to a few of these "issues."

1) Injeel means Angel?

In one video that FxM has identified, Ergun Caner stumbles over the Arabic word for an evil spirit. The Arabic-root word he was looking for (and initially says) is Djinn (from Arabic ??? jinn?). Then, however, Caner makes a terrible blunder and follows Djinn with "Injeel" which is an Arabic word for the Gospel.

Result: Embarrassing slip of the tongue that suggests that Caner's Arabic is not fluent.

- - - - - -

FTN writes

2) Prophet Bahruch

In one video that FxM has identified, Ergun Caner lists something that sounds like "Bahruch" as one of the prophets of Islam. It may be that Caner is referring to the Old Testament dubious military hero Barak, who famously was afraid to go to battle without Deborah by his side. This is still a bit strange, because Barak is not really referred to in the Old Testament as a prophet, although Islam tends to claim the Old Testament prophets as being among her prophets.

Result: Puzzling comment from Caner.

- - - - - -

Response

This error is so puzzling and evidently false that it was later edited out by the producers of the John Ankerberg show. Thankfully the unedited version is still available if you dig around. Anybody who attempts to back Ergun Caner up regarding this error ? is wasting their time. Ergun Caner has already spoken of this error previously on his facebook account ? he brushed it off like it is nothing and emphasised that it can be possible for even ?bob?  to be a Prophet in Islam. I responded to his so called response here.

FTN writes

3) 40 Days of Ramadan

In one video that FxM has identified, Ergun Caner slips up and says that there are 40 days in the lunar month of Ramadan. This is, of course, simply a conflation in Caner's mind between the 40 days of Lent in Romanism (and Eastern Orthodoxy) and the shorter 29-30 day months that are lunar months.

Result: Embarrassing conflation between Romanist and Muslim fasting practices.

- - - - - - 

Response

Ergun did not get mixed up. Please check his response regarding the matter of the 40 days of Ramadan (I don’t think I have published his exact words but I will do soon). Ergun clearly stated that the reason he said 40 days is because there is a group called the “Alawites” who fast for 40 days, and that he teaches global apologetics, therefore he has to present what everybody believes. This is complete, utter nonsense – because of the following points:

1. The Alawites don’t even take up a single per cent of the Muslim population so it does not make sense to teach everybody the doctrine of this minor group who none of us had even heard of until he mentioned them.

2. It is not actually proven that this group fasts for 40 days.

3. Just because this group allegedly fasts for 40 days – that does not mean that the actual month of Ramadan is a 40 day month.

4. Ergun said it is a lunar month of 40 days – this is silly – no lunar month can have 40 days.

5. Ergun states “When WE celebrate Ramadan” – “its a lunar month” – “a 40 day month” – “that’s why our calendar is different than yours”.

6. Surely when he says “WE” he is referring to the majority of Muslims and not this minor group who nobody has even heard of?

7. Surely if Ergun fasted during the month of Ramadan until the age of 18 as he said he did – he would not forget how many days there are within it.

As I stated before – these major things are not merely issues that have been forgotten by Ergun Caner. Even James White, the professor who has only been studying Islam since 2005 knows that the month of Ramadan is NOT 40 days. James White does not claim to be an ex Muslim and even he knows after having only studied for such a small amount of time. So for Ergun to come out and say that Ramadan is a 40 day LUNAR MONTH is beyond me – particularly when he says he fasted during it - he obviously didn't.

FTN writes

4) Ergun's Shahada

In one video that FxM has identified, Ergun Caner slips up in two ways. First, he recites the wrong Arabic text when trying to state the Shahada (he quotes instead the opening lines of the Koran). Second, when he gives the translation of the Shahada in English he adds "final" or "greatest" into the translation, although there is no literal basis for that expression in the Arabic.

Result: Embarrassing pair of mistakes that strongly suggest that Caner is not very familiar with Arabic.

- - - - - -

Response

A simple Google search of “an expert of islam (this is funny)” will present you with a 19 second clip specifically showing this error. These 19 seconds of video are sufficient to prove that Ergun Caner is a fraud (read the comments). 

You just don’t get the Shahada wrong. Particularly when Ergun Caner claims to have prayed 5 times a day – this is because the opening of the Qur’an is recited a minimum of 17 times a day by Muslims (IN ARABIC) within the 5 daily prayers – and the Shahada is something which is included in ALL of the 5 daily prayers (IN ARABIC) – so anybody who claims to have prayed 5 times a day until the age of 18 and yet cannot distinguish between the two is – I’m sorry to say – A LIAR.

Besides, the shahada is the first pillar of Islam – for anybody to get that wrong is completely laughable. Even the Muslims who don’t pray know the Shahada in Arabic!

FTN writes

5) Jesus is the Messiah

In one video that FxM has identified, Ergun Caner suggests that Muslims believe that Jesus was only a messenger and not the Messiah. However, of course, Muslims also call Jesus the Messiah. It's unclear from the clip whether Caner is aware or unaware of the Muslim claims. Christians recognize that being the Messiah involves being the Son of God. Muslims reject the idea that there is such a thing as the Son of God. Thus, even if they us the term "Messiah," they mean something different by it than what we mean.

Result: Ambiguous alleged error.

- - - - - -

Response

FTN writes

6) Shabir Ally Dead?

In one video that FxM has identified, Ergun Caner refers to someone he calls "Shabir Ally" and states that this man was a leader, a debater, and is now dead. That's troubling, because Shabir Ally (one of Islam's leading debaters in North America) is very much alive. What Caner almost certainly meant to refer to is the late Ahmed Deedat. However, Caner used the wrong name.

Result: Embarrassing transposition of names, confusing that of one famous Muslim debater for that of another famous Muslim debater.

- - - - - -

Response

Ergun Caner claims to have debated Shabir Ally so for him to confuse the name of Shabir Ally with Ahmed Deedat (raheemullah) is quite funny. It can be argued that this is a mere slip up and mix up of names which is obviously the case and I accept this. However, the article and video dealing with this issue will remain because nevertheless – the mistake was made.

FTN writes

Conclusion

I haven't addressed all of the alleged errors attributed to Ergun Caner, but I've addressed some of the big ones. Others include some of the details surrounding Caner's conversion (the exact dates and relative dates between Caner's conversion and the conversion of his two brothers). Also, the birthplace issue that I've already mentioned in a previous post is brought up.

What is the conclusion of all this, though? The impression that I get is that Caner doesn't seem to remember that much Arabic from 25 years ago, assuming he ever understood Arabic at that time. It also appears that Caner has a tendency to get some of the details mixed up during his oral presentations. However, nevertheless, it does not seem to be reasonable to suggest that Ergun Caner is faking the whole fact that he was a Muslim as a child.

Ergun Caner has himself responded to these (at least I think it is these, or at least some similar charges) and his response can be found at the following link (link). His comments there are unequivocal and maintain his claim to having been a Muslim. However, as noted in a number of the videos, he was converted as a teenager in 1982. So, it has been over 27 years (at this time) since he was Muslim. Does that make some of his mistakes (identified above) less embarrassing? Only a little.

- TurretinFan

- - - - - -

Response

Ergun’s Q&A of July 2009 did not touch upon even a single lie. Rather it was a reminder to his gullible flock that those videos on YouTube should be ignored. Ergun Caner states on his Q&A that every month they try to deal with questions - I am asking where is the Q&A for June 2009? Where is the Q&A for August, September, October 2009? There are none. He doesn't deal with questions every month - he just felt it necessary to at least write something about the accusations I have placed on him.

My responses regarding what has been written is not aimed to personally attack the writer in any way or to make a mockery of what he/she has written.

FTN's reply can be found here: http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2010/03/responding-again-to-fake-ex-muslims.html

I have responded below:

FTN writes:

In a previous post I had begun to defend Ergun Caner against the accusation that he is a "Fake Ex Muslim" (link to my previous post). This post will have two parts. First it will address several more of the "issues" that the Fake Ex Muslim (FxM) site has identified, and second it will provide a reply to a response that FxM provided to my first post.

1. Who Converted in 1982?

In several videos that FxM has identified, Ergun Caner claims to have been saved on November 4, 1982 (or some time in 1982 - not every video specifies the 4th of November). In at least one video and in the Caner brothers' book, Emir Caner claims to have been saved on November 4, 1982. In two videos Ergun and Emir both say that Emir was saved one year after Ergun, and the Caner brother's book says the same thing. Additionally, official (or semi-official) biographies of both men apparently had indicated that they converted in 1982.

Result: It looks like Ergun Caner has mistakenly said 1982 instead of 1981 several times in regards to his own date of conversion and in various places. The inconsistency is a bit irritating, and it would be nice if the Caner brothers would clarify whether indeed Ergun was converted in 1981 or 1982 and whether the brothers were really saved a year apart.

Response

I can produce no less than 3 additional audio/video clips where Ergun Caner specifically states November 4^th 1982 - one day after his 16^th birthday ? not just roughly November 1982. I did not have access to these at the time of writing the article ? now I do, thus we can establish that he claims to have converted on November 4th 1982.

FTN's response is also nullified due to the reason that I have an audio clip of Ergun saying he was 17 years old when he went into that Church (i.e. he spent 4 days at the Church and his 18^th birthday was on the 3^rd day).

To suggest that Ergun actually converted in 1981 rather than 1982 is merely a baseless assumption, we must listen to what Ergun is saying ? he constantly says ?November 4^th 1982? ? besides ? it was 1 day after his 16^th birthday so it?s quite difficult to merely slip up 5 times in a row.

Not semi-official biographies ? these are words from their own OFFICIAL websites which both simultaneously stated that they converted in 1982 ? thus you can also read in their official published book ?Unveiling Islam? it also writes that Emir converted in 1982.

You don?t make the same mistake 5 times in a row ? it?s just not correct to say that Ergun mistakenly said November 4th 1982 on so many separate occasions. The most probable reason to why there is so much confusion regarding their conversion dates is because their false story which they agreed upon to stick to - got a little mixed up.

Ergun Caner won?t clarify this issue ? he knows he has been caught out.

FTN writes

2. Born in Istanbul or Stockholm?

In one video that FxM has identified, Ergun Caner claims to have been born in Istanbul, Turkey. Everywhere else, Caner claims to have been born in Stockholm, Sweden.

In the one video in question, Caner was making excuses for why he wouldn't go tan on the beach. The point he intended was that he had middle-eastern blood and consequently would tan quite a lot, which he apparently did not want. He inexplicably expressed this by claiming to have been born in Turkey.

Result: Embarrassing (also because he employed an ethnic slur connected with claiming he was born in Turkey) embellishment of his point.

Response

No, he does not claim to have been born in Stockholm, Sweden ?everywhere else?.

The only 3 occasions where I have seen him admit to have been born in Sweden is:

1) In Unveiling Islam,

2) On the John Ankerberg Show

3) In his statement released on February 25^th 2010.

Other than these 3 occasions, he intentionally misleads his audience by saying he was raised in Istanbul (I have 3 clips of him saying this),

he misleads them by saying he used to watch WWF wrestling when he was in Istanbul and he thought it was real,

he misleads them by stating he has always lived in countries which are majority Muslim (last time I checked ? Sweden and America are not Muslim countries). 

He intentionally misled his audience by agreeing upon an interview format about himself with Zola Levitt titled ?An Arab Christian?,

he purposely misled people by pasting an erroneous comment made about his book by Ann Coulter which says ?two Arab-Christians?,

he purposely misleads people by calling himself a Sand Monkey, Towel Head, Sand Nigger and Camel Jockey ? all of which are racist terms used against Arabs.

He purposely misleads people by saying he would wear "a Gafia" (an Arab dress which until this day of all my whole life of being in an Islamic environment, I have never seen a native Turk wear "a gafia", let alone a Turk who came from a broken family and was cared for by his Swedish mother).

He purposely misled everybody by saying ?there is not much roller skating in the sand? ? thus he is implying he has come from the desert lands of Arabia,

the only reason why he finally clarifies the issue  of being born in Stockholm is because of all the controversy surrounding him ? but did he admit to lying? No, of course not, he wouldn?t do that, in fact, Ergun claims he has never intentionally misled anyone.

3. How Old When Converted - 16 or 18?

In two videos that FxM has identified, Ergun Caner claims to have been 18 years old when he converted. However, Ergun Caner's birth date (according to his facebook page) is November 3, 1966. That would mean that on November 4, 1982, Caner would have been 16 (and he would have been 15 in 1981). Also, in a number of places (such as here) Caner's age of conversion is indicated to be 16 years old. Gahanna High School lists Ergun Caner as being in the class of 1984 (link).

Result: Embarrassing embellishment of how long Caner was a Muslim.

Response

FTN has not taken Ergun?s date of birth entirely into consideration.  To say Ergun was 15 in 1981 is not entirely accurate because Ergun would have been 14 for ten full months in 1981 until his 15th birthday in November ? to say he was 15 in 1981 ignores the fact that his date of birth so late on in the year.

There are countless other accounts of Erguns age during the time of conversion ? there is even one article which suggests he was 13 when he ?converted? ? but when you click on the video upon which the article is based ? it is not longer available.

Why so much controversy regarding a simple date? ? particularly when it was so close to his birthday ? and we know he celebrated his birthdays (pictures of this are available). Clearly ? another glitch within a false story by those carrying out this fraudulence.

FTN writes:

4. Came to America at 12 or 14?

In one video that FxM has identified, Ergun Caner states that he came to American "in 1978" when he was "14 years old." Now, given Ergun's birthdate above, he would have been either 11 or 12 in 1978 (depending on the month of his arrival).

Another troubling thing (that FxM appears to have overlooked) is that Emir Fethi Caner's birthdate is apparently August 25, 1970 (according to his own website's biography). However, the Caner brothers' book states that Emir was born after the Caner family moved to America (Unveiling Islam, p. 17). Emir Caner is listed as class of 1988 for Gahanna High School (link) and Erdem is listed as class of 1986 for the same high school (link). Assuming that each of the brothers was 18 when he graduated (which is usual in the U.S.) then that means that indeed Emir was born in 1970. However, if Emir was born in the U.S. then it means that the Caners moved to America somewhere around 1968-70 (when Ergun was 2-3 years old).

Result: There are some puzzling inconsistencies. Did the Caners move in 1978 or 1968? Was Ergun a teenager or a toddler when he moved? It would be good if Dr. Caner would clarify this biographical point. My guess is that the Caner family moved to America around 1968-1970, because it seems unlikely that they would mistakenly think that the youngest Caner brother was born in the U.S. when he was not. I am puzzled about why and how Dr. Caner could get the date and his age wrong.

The troubling issue that FTN speaks of has not been overlooked; it has already been written as a draft page but has not yet been published. I am glad that FTN has brought this issue up. I wrote the exact same thing to a YouTuber by the name of JesusFreak 28532 on the 9^th of Feb 2010. You can see what I wrote here:

?I have come across another issue about Ergun and Emir Caner.

1. Ergun says he was born in 1966 and that he moved to America from Sweden with his family in 1978.

2. Emir Caner was born in 1970.

3. They both say that Emir is the only one that can become American president because he was born in America.

So the question here is if Emir was born in America in 1970 then why have they both lied by saying that they moved to America in 1978??

For me the answer is obvious Ergun wants you all to think that he had a proper Islamic upbringing until his teenage years but in reality he was merely a toddler when he went to America from Sweden during a time which his mother and father were getting a divorce.

This is why Ergun slips up during one of his speeches and clearly says that he was held back at sesame street to learn English implying that he was put back a few years into Nursery (I think you call it Kindergarten if you are in America) And we know 12 year olds are not put back to Kindergarten.?

If they moved to America in 1978 and Emir was born in 1970 IN AMERICA ? it just doesn?t add up and they are clearly being dishonest about their date of arrival from Sweden to America.

5. Gibberish?

In one video that FxM has identified, Ergun Caner appears to be speaking Gibberish as though it were him speaking to his father. After the initial "Isa Ibn Allah," which is a way of saying "Jesus - the Son of God," the rest does sound like gibberish. I should point out that I have limited exposure to Turkish, which is one of the languages that Dr. Caner claims to be able to speak.

FxM also points out that in the video it sounds like Ergun is saying that "Isa Ibn Allah," translates to "I believe in Jesus," which of course it does not. I don't think that's the problem at all. Calling Jesus, "Isa Ibn Allah," is a way of affirming Jesus' divinity and testifying to one's belief in Jesus. That's all Caner meant by what he said.

Result: It looks like Caner embellished his story with some pseudo-Turkish.

Response

6. Date of the First Revelation to Mohamed

In two videos that FxM has identified, Ergun Caner claims that the first revelation took place on Mohamed's 40th birthday. This is inaccurate, according to FxM, since although Mohamed was 40 years old, the revelation did not come on his birthday. FxM is quite insistent that any devout Sunni Muslim (such as Caner claims to have been) would know when the date of the first revelation is, since it is within Ramadan. It is less clear whether all devout Sunni Muslims would also know when the actual date of birth (about 6 month prior) of Mohamed was.

Result: This seems like a relatively trivial error. The main point (that Mohamed had turned 40 when he received his first "revelation") was correct.

Response

FTN has ignored the concept of Laylatul Qadr. If FTN took the time to ask any Muslim in the street ? even a Shia ? ?what is so special about Laylatul Qadr?? ? the reply will be ?it is first night which the Qur?an was revealed?.

When we Muslims fast during the month of Ramadan - the most sacred of the nights are the last 10 ? one of the reasons for this is because the night of the first revelation ? i.e. Laylatul Qadr is one of the odd nights of the last 10 ? it is usually agreed upon that is the 27^th night.

The reason why we seek this night is because Laylatul Qadr is the night on which all your sins can be forgiven ? ALL MUSLIMS know this ? we seek this night during the last 10 and spend our full night in worship ? thus we can understand that the 27^th of Ramadan is not 12^th of Rabi al Awwal.

Things will be clear for FTN if he/she researches this, he/she will come to know that Laylatul Qadr is something which ALL MUSLIMS are aware of ? and with Ergun claiming to have been a devout Muslim - it?s quite humorous to think that he does not know even though he claims to have fasted during ?the 40 days? of Ramadan.

The emphasis of the issue is on Laylatul Qadr ? not entirely the birthday of Muhammad (pbuh) ? because to know that the first revelation took place on Laylatul Qadr ? one will also understand that it did not happen on the birthday of Muhammad (pbuh) ?two birds with one stone.

7. The 12th (Hidden) Imam

In one video that FxM has identified, Ergun Caner claims that both the Sunni and Shia Muslims believe that a caliph named Mahdi disappeared and is hidden somewhere, still alive. According to FxM, this is something believed only by the Shia Muslims. FxM is insistent that no devout Sunni Muslim could be unaware of this difference in belief between the Sunnis and the Shia Muslims.

Result: Again, this seems like a relatively trivial error. The main point of what Caner was talking about was the belief itself. Although he may (as far as I know, he did) erroneously attribute a Shia belief to the Sunni, this doesn't appear to be a significant error.

Response

This error is not relatively trivial. Ergun Caner claims to have been a devout Sunni Muslim ? he even teaches the subject of Islamic eschatology ? how can he not know? This is a more than significant error ? to brush it aside as though it is nothing giving Ergun the benefit of far too many doubts.  

FTN writes:

Response to FxM's Rebuttal to my first post (link to Rebuttal)

As to 1) FxM helpfully corrects my comment about Jinn by explaining that "Jinn" can be used for both good or evil spirits. FxM argues that understanding the difference between Jinn and the Injeel is a fundamental matter of Islamic doctrine. I have no doubt that it is, but it seems that Caner simply substituted one Arabic word for another. His audience easily understood that he meant spirits, he just used the wrong Arabic word (after using the right Arabic word).

FxM raises the interesting point that Caner claims to have participated in Arabic language fellowships. This means (if it is true that Caner has participated in such) that Caner has even less of an excuse for using the wrong word.

Response

No, he did not use the right Arabic word as FTN is assuming.

Ergun was referring to the Angel which writes down what you do. The Angel is not a Jinn, the word in Arabic for Angel is ?Malaika?,

the Jinn is the ?Qareen? which follows you around and metaphorically whispers negative thoughts into your soul in order for you to commit sin.

Thus you can understand the difference between the one that ?writes down everything? and the one that doesn?t.  FTN should look this up in order to verify this.

So we can understand that not only did Ergun use the wrong word, but he also attributed the wrong word to the wrong entity ? a double error.

I do not understand how somebody who grew up speaking Arabic/Turkish, was a devout Sunni Muslim until the age of 18, constantly writes books on Islam until today and consistently speaks on the subject of Islam ? can make such an error ? it?s only fair to say that Ergun is not aware of these fundamental principles because he is being dishonest about being a former devout Muslim.

I don?t doubt his half Turkish heritage ? but to come from a broken family where the cultures of his mother and father clashed when they were merely toddlers which resulted in their divorce and then to say he comes from a devout Muslim family even though he lived with his mother ? is nothing but a lie.

The reason why I know they lived with their mother and not their father is because Emir Caner stated to John Ankerberg that on the night he converted ? they went to visit their father at HIS home ?because of the divorce that had already happened?.

FTN writes:

As to 2)  I am sorry to hear FxM's report that Caner brushed off this particular error (which he apparently recognized was an error, since he edited it out).

Reponse

 FTN should not be sorry. FTN should rather acknowledge the fact that Ergun does not possess this intrinsic knowledge of Islam that he claims to have. FTN cannot accept the fact that Ergun Caner is a compulsive liar.

FTN writes:

As to 3) Again, I am sorry to hear what Caner's own response to this error of his was. Caner reportedly responded that it was ok for him to say that "Ramadan is 40 days ... because there is a group called the Alawite who fast for 40 days." Whether or not such a group exists, the month of Ramadan (being lunar) is necessarily either 29 or 30 days.

Response

Exactly my point. How can somebody who claims to have fasted during the month of Ramadan not know how many days are in it? It?s like going to work for 5 days a week for 18 years and then saying you went to work 15 days a week.

FTN writes:

As to 4) I agree with FxM that messing up the Shahada is an astonishingly serious error. I would love to see what (if any) explanation Caner has for this error.

Response

Ergun will give you no explanation; it is not possible for him to dodge this ? he does not know the most fundamental and basic principle of Islam.

FTN writes: 

As to 5) I understand that FxM thinks that Muslims have a better understanding of what it means for Jesus to be the Messiah than Christians do. Hopefully, he's aware that we know the Muslim view to be wrong, and we are able to demonstrate the error of the Muslims from the inspired Scriptures. That's a different question, however, from whether Caner was trying to explain that Muslim beliefs about Jesus are wrong, or whether Caner was unaware that Muslims say that Jesus was the Messiah, while interpreting what it means to be the Messiah differently.

Response

FTN has put words into my mouth. I did not state that Muslims have a better understanding. I merely stated that there is a difference between the Muslims and Christians regarding the belief of Jesus (pbuh) being Messiah. This is not a theological discussion of what it truly means to be the Messiah ? to say ?we KNOW the Muslim view to be wrong? is instigating a confrontation ? I will not do this.

FTN's explanation does not justify Erguns statement of ?concerning why you do not believe in Jesus to being Messiah? ? because we do believe in Jesus (pbuh) as Messiah ? just not necessarily the same as Christians do.

FTN writes:

As to 6) I agree with FxM that it remains a funny mistake, although perhaps (since I am more sympathetic to Dr. Caner) I view my own chuckles regarding it as more of an embarrassed laugh than an amused laugh.

Response

I lost sympathy for Ergun Caner when he used the phrases Sand Monkey and Sand Nigger ? I lost sympathy for Ergun Caner when he stated that Muhammad (pbuh) is a Prophet of Hell.

The mistake is funny. Ergun tries ever so hard to put himself into the shoes of Muslims, but because he doesn?t know anything about us or Islam ? he keeps making these kinds of stupid errors.

FTN writes:

As to the Conclusion) I agree that Dr. Caner's Questions and Answers don't deal directly with the issues. I note that in the meantime Dr. Caner has provided a new statement (which deals with the issue of his having allegedly debated Shabir Ally, albeit obliquely)(link to statement).

Response

The only issue Ergun ?dealt with? was the issue of him saying he has debated Shabir Ally. Although I was the one that provided the evidence to James White ? this issue was not published on my website up until yesterday. Besides ? saying he merely misspoke is not exactly dealing with the issue ? FTN ought to read James White's rebuttal regarding this matter ? he hits the nail on the head.

I am in the process of writing a response to Ergun's statement which will be made available on the responses section of fakeexmuslims.com very soon.

FTN writes:

Conclusion to this Section

Again, I think that the evidence provided by FxM is tending to show that Caner seems to be willing to embelish his stories a bit. It's unclear what the proper resolution to his conversion timeline is - but there is a definite set of contradictions there. It is also not clear when he moved to America. It does look like he said "18" where he should have said "16" on at least two occasions. It also looks like he used gibberish to spice up a story he was telling. None of these things, of course, demonstrate that Ergun Mehmet was not previously a Muslim.

Response

There is something called embellishing stories, then there is something called lying through your teeth. As I stated before ? I have more clips of Ergun specifically saying ?November 4^th 1982? whilst I also have a clip of him saying he went into the Church at the age of 17 (i.e. 2 days before his 18^th birthday) ? so to suggest he mistakenly implied he was 18 during his conversion is not really a valid argument.

FTN writes:

If indeed Ergun came to America as a toddler, and if (as his book says) his parents were divorced and his primary custodian was his mother, it is quite possibly that he was not particularly well grounded in Islam, no matter how devout his father was.

I should take this opportunity to point out that the Mirele's blog article suggesting that Caner's father didn't help build the mosque in Columbus, OH seems to be flawed (link to blog article). That article notes that the Islamic Foundation building was actually constructed in the 19th century. However, the article overlooks that the most recent renovation was completed in 1984, which fits well with Caner's story regarding his father's role.

Response 

Then Ergun should not put ?BUILD? in capital letters on July 2009 Q&A ? so much for ?I have never intentionally misled anyone?.  

FTN writes:

Indeed, that article also shows a photograph of Caner's father (apparently from the late 1970's) in front of the at least partially converted building (there is a star and crescent above one of the windows) (link to photo). Caner's father is the man in the middle in the suit (next to what appears to be some sort of Imam). The face in the photograph corresponds to the face in Unveiling Islam, p. 14.

So, it does appear that Caner was at least raised by a relatively devout Muslim, and there does not appear to be any good reason to doubt that he remained at least formally and outwardly in the Muslim religion until he was 15 or 16.

Response 

If I were to send FTN a picture of my father standing at the entrance of a farm ? that does not mean my father was a relatively good farmer.

You cannot assume from a picture of his father standing outside an Islamic Centre that his father was a relatively devout Muslim.

Do devout Muslims heavily smoke? (Ergun says his dad was a heavy smoker)

Do devout Muslims celebrate birthdays? (Ergun says they were ?Wahaabis?, they don?t celebrate birthdays).

The picture does not prove anything ? all it shows is a man standing outside an Islamic Centre ? that?s it.  

Besides ? Ergun first uploaded the picture of him standing inside a room with that Imaam who is in the picture and the caption of the image stated that the Imaam was his father.

FTN fails to see any reason to doubt Ergun Caner being a Muslim ? that?s quite ignorant of the nearly 70 errors/lies that have been presented in totality (videos + website).

FTN's reply can be found here: http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2010/03/response-to-fake-ex-muslims-part-3.html

I have responded below (responses are in black, whereas FTN's writings are in red):

I've responded to the "Fake Ex Muslims" (FxM) site twice previously (first) and (second). This is the third response. I'll address a few more issues and then respond to FxM's responses to my previous section.

1. Insha-Allah or Al-Hamdolilah

In one video that FxM has identified, Ergun Caner claims that Muslims say "Insha-Allah" (which I'd roughly translate as "according to the will of Allah"). FxM notes that the correct Muslim response is actually "Al-Hamdolilah" (which I'd roughly translate as "to the praise of Allah"). As far as I know, FxM is right.
"Insha-Allah" is similar to the Christian "If the Lord wills." It is primarily (again, as far as I know) a prospective

Result: This looks like one of Caner's embellishments. The basic point Caner is trying to make is simply that Muslims ascribe the course of events to the will of Allah. Caner is correct in that regard, but he seems to have spiced up his story with biographical details which seem unlikely to be true. comment. One would, therefore, say, "I will (Insha-Allah) go to the market tomorrow." In contrast, one might say, "I was robbed (Al-Hamdolilah) in the market yesterday.

We all get the point Ergun is trying to make, but this error should not be made on two separate occasions by somebody who claims to have been a DEVOUT Muslim for 18 years – even more so by somebody who claims that Arabic is their language before English and that “English is hard”. Getting the point does not mean that an error was not made. Nonetheless, surely if he “literally” did say Al-Hamdolilah 100 times a day as he said did, then he would not get it mixed up with a phrase that is used in an antonym of the situation.

2. Salah in the Bathroom?

I see that part 13 of the video series connected with FxM is out. The gist of the argument presented is that Caner claims to have prayed (performed his Salah) on a prayer rug in high school bathrooms. FxM notes that this is a prohibited thing in Islam. FxM concludes that consequently Caner was lying.

The problem for FxM is that although it is forbidden, sometimes Muslims do it (example). The example I provided is from a forum. Notice that the folks answering the opening post give a variety of answers.

I also note that my friend, Dr. White, has taken the position that the idea that Caner prayed in the bathroom is probably an embellishment (link).(I also discovered this rather unusual response - link - from someone who claims to be a Muslim, and claims that "This is allowable in the Hanafi legal school in Islam." Of course, that article questions FxM's Muslim credentials, attacks Dr. White, and contains numerous problems in terms of English spelling and grammar, so I'm not really sure whether we should even take that website seriously.)

Result: This may be evidence that Caner was not a carefully observant Muslim - it is not proof that Caner was lying.

I am saddened to know that FTN possesses a similar mentality to that of Ergun Caner. When Ergun Caner was questioned regarding the issue of Ramadan being 40 days – his excuse was that so and so group engage in the practice, thus the error is “justified”. This is exactly what FTN has done. FTN has searched the internet for some Muslims who have erroneously performed their Salah in the bathroom and then used it as a justification of Ergun’s claim to have prayed in the bathroom. Almost similar to the fashion of how Ergun somehow manages to attribute himself to almost all of the major Islamic sects in order to appeal to a wider audience and to justify everything he says, he said he was a Sunni, he said his mother was Sufi, he is quoted to have said his youth group were Shia – and not forgetting he also said that he was a “Wahaabi” (a misnomer and often an offensive term used to describe Muslims who adhere to the methodology of the pious predecessors). It’s like me attempting to justify a Christian worshipping in a Synagogue by saying I read that a “Christian” did this – thus the error is “justified” – it isn’t. Ergun says he was a DEVOUT Muslim and that his father “was an Islamic Leader” – and he prayed in the bathroom? That’s funny.

3. Halal and Haram

In at least one video (and apparently at least one audio), FxM notes that Caner is associating Halal and HaramHalal and Haram is broader than just dietary restrictions. Nevertheless, Halal and Haram do refer to the dietary restrictions.

Result: Caner may or may not be unaware of the broader signification of the terms. His comments in the video are, strictly speaking, true and accurate, whether or not they are precise. with dietary restrictions. FxM correctly notes that the signification of

The error is not him associating Halal and Haraam with dietary restrictions. The error is based upon his ignorance of the fact that Halal and Haraam is much broader than that – to label Halal and Haraam as “the dietary restrictions” neglects the true meaning of Halal and Haraam.

***

Response to FxM's reply (reply is halfway down the page at this link).

As to 1) I do agree that Ergun Caner has used the November 4, 1982, date many times. I also agree that my suggestion that it should be 1981 is just speculation. I am doing my best to try to reconcile the conflicting evidence in a reasonable way. Whatever doubt that someone may have that the Caner brothers were Muslim, one cannot reasonably doubt that the Caner brothers became professing Christians. It then follows that they first professed their faith at some date - the only question is what date.

I have never stated that they did not become Christians. My emphasis on what they claim to have been before they were Christian – the lies by which they have attained their fame.

As to 2) I agree that there have been numerous occasions where Dr. Caner has given people the false impression (either explicitly or implicitly) that he was raised in Istanbul, Turkey.

Good.

As to 3) I agree that if Caner converted prior to November 3, 1981, then Caner would have been 14, not 15. I was simply going back one year from November 4, 1982, to November 4, 1981, in view of the comments by Ergun and Emir that their conversions were one year apart.

Okay.

As to 4) I should have spoken more carefully, in saying that FxM had not yet raised this issue as one of the issues on his main web page. I, of course, am not aware of his work that is in draft form or of his comments on Youtube.

I was not implying that FTN missed what I state, seeing as I have not made it public, it is understandable that FTN did not know I have already acknowledged this discrepancy. One man working alone with so many things to do - work, university, home etc – it’s fairly justified that I cannot publish articles as quick as some other people.

As to 5) I think the apparent gibberish was more of an attempt to amuse than to con, but obviously FxM disagrees with me. The clip (the one I've seen - FxM indicates that there is a second one) shows that Caner was really getting "into it" (as we would say) with the crowd.

Yes I disagree. If the basis of your life is that you come from a background of different cultures & languages and then you use gibberish – it is not for amusement – it is a con. It is confirming the imposed preconception within the audience that he has the ability to speak these other languages when he doesn’t, thus the audience are being intentionally misled.
The second one which FTN refers to is part 12 of the FAKE EX MUSLIM EXPOSED videos. Within this part 12 – Ergun Caner is caught pulling off the same stunt – but this time it offends me even more – seeing as he is speaking of a nation to which the Pashto language is associated.

As to 6) FxM seems to have mistakenly thought that I was ignoring the concept of Laylatul Qadr. I was not. I was trying, apparently unclearly, to emphasize the fact that the birthday of Mohamed is not as significant in Islam. Consequently, while it is an error to say that Laylatul Qadr was the same day as Mohamed's birthday, it is not a particularly serious error. It would have been more serious if Caner had given Mohamed's birth date (in the third month), but Caner did not. And, of course, the point of what Caner was saying was that Mohamed was 40 years old at the time, which is a common Muslim belief.

When FTN fails to mention Laylatul Qadr then it is justifiable for me to assume that the concept was ignored. And no, the point of what Caner was saying was not that Muhammad (pbuh) was 40 years old at the time, the point he was emphasising is that it was his 40^th birthday – a deliberate attempt to make the event of revelation seem unrealistic. Along with the baseless lie of saying he roared like a camel (sometimes he says lion) and foamed at the mouth. FTN must abstain from giving Ergun the benefit of the doubt – all I see are excuses – no real explanations.

As to 7) I may be wrong to say that the error is relatively trivial. David Waltz seems to agree with FxM that this error by Caner is a significant one (link to Waltz).

Of course it is not trivial, it is a major error from somebody who claims to have been a DEVOUT SUNNI MUSLIM.

(At this point the numbering repeats, because we are now referring back to the first round of responses)

As to 1) I agree that I was wrong to say that "Jinn" was the correct word for angel. FxM states that "Malaika" is the correct word for angel, whereas Jinn would have been the correct term for the evil spirit (although Jinn don't necessarily have to be evil spirits according to Islam). Islam makes a distinction between Angels and Jinn. In fact, I think FxM has made a slight error here (although I am not accusing him of being a fake Muslim because of this error). The Arabic word for "angel" (singular) is Malak. Malaika is the plural form ("angels").

I agree that I have made a slight error with regards to the word Malaika – I mistakenly used the plural for Angel, rather than the singular, nonetheless, I was referring to the same entity without using a word which is used for something other than an Angel like Ergun Caner did.

As to 2) FxM states says that I should think that "Ergun does not possess this intrinsic knowledge of Islam that he claims to have." If one judges Ergun's knowledge of Islam only by his writings, Ergun's knowledge of Islam appears significantly more substantial than when we judge it by his videotaped oral presentations.

For example, the 40-day Ramadan error is not made in Unveiling Islam and in that book Ergun is clear that the first revelation (discussed above) is believed to have come during the month of Ramadan (see page 42).

The book also does not make the mistake about the 12th/Hidden Imam (see page 159).

All the more reason for Ergun to not slip up when he mentioned it out in the open; seeing he has included the information in his book, the knowledge of these topics should be even more fresh in his mind - not forgetting he claims to have been a devout Sunni Muslim who believed these things anyway.

The book even mentions the correct birthday for Mohammed, placing it in the third month (see page 160). I have noticed that FxM's criticisms are mostly focused on Ergun's oral presentations. I'm not saying that those criticisms are invalid. I'm simply noting that if Ergun doesn't know what he's talking about, it is hard to explain how he gets things right when he's writing. But perhaps FxM has some responses planned to Ergun's book(s). I may simply be unaware of his plans.

It’s easy to write a book about any subject if the sources of the information are in your presence. I could write a book about Harry Potter – all I would need is a copy of all the Harry Potter books with me while I write it.

As to 3) no further comments.

Good

As to 4) I hope Ergun will prove FxM by providing clarification, but we'll have to wait and see.

False hope - Ergun already said he won’t speak about these accusations again.

As to 5) FxM declines to argue over whether the Muslim or Christian view is correct. I realize that there is a time and a place for everything. That debate is, of course, not directly germane to the Caner issues. Nevertheless, I would love the opportunity to demonstrate to FxM that the Bible's teaching regarding the Messiah is the truth that is to be believed.

The topic of the discussion is Ergun Caner. I dislike it when one attempts to divert away from the issue in question. If FTN desires an argument with a Muslim regarding the Jesus (pbuh) being the Messiah, then FTN should go to his local Mosque and speak with a Muslim there – or – get in contact with a Muslim who has posted a video on that topic.

As to 6) FxM indicates that he lost sympathy for Caner when Caner used derogatory terms for Arabs and when Caner said something negative about Mohamed. I don't defend the use of derogatory terms for people. That kind of offense is unnecessary, and I don't let Caner off the hook simply because he claims to be a part of the group (as FxM may be unaware, in some parts of American culture it is thought that members of a group can use derogatory terms for that group, as long as they are part of that group).

Ergun is not part of the group, he is half Turkish – not an Arab, thus his racist comments are not justified.

On the other hand, we who follow Jesus must necessarily take a negative position about Mohamed, who denied the divinity of Jesus. To deny that Mohamed is a false prophet would be to betray our Lord. We realize that this will offend Muslims, but it is a necessary offense. Both positions cannot be correct, and following our Lord requires us to affirm his divinity and to designate those who oppose the Gospel of Jesus as false prophets.

Denial is one thing – but saying he was “FALSE PROPHET OF HELL!!!” and "a TOWEL HEAD” is something else. Of course FTN denies Muhammad (pbuh) – but inappropriate statements such as the ones that Ergun made is not exactly good moral conduct. James White is a Christian who I like, he is friendly, kind and courteous – I would never imagine him using such filthy terms. As a Muslim, I believe that the trinity doctrine to be incorrect - but as a good human being - you will never hear me mocking those who believe it by saying "THE TRINITY IS A FALSE DOCTRINE FROM HELL!!" - although the belief to reject it is part of my faith, speaking in such a manner is just wrong and disrespectful. Anybody who possesses the mentality of speaking in such a manner is not setting a good example. Particularly in the case of Ergun Caner who says "be kind to my brethren (Muslims)" - "be careful not to offend them" - is this not an element of hypocrisy?

As to the remaining comments) FxM notes that Dr. White "hits the nail on the head" with respect to the issue of whether Caner debated Ally. I agree with Dr. White and FxM in that regard. I note that while questions remain regarding how Caner could make such an error, the error itself has been acknowledged. FxM also notes that "There is something called embellishing stories, then there is something called lying through your teeth." I agree that there is a difference. FxM, responding to my comment about Caner's father's work on the Islamic Foundation building, states: "Then Ergun should not put “BUILD” in capital letters on July 2009 Q&A." I agree that it was a bad choice of words. Regarding the photographic evidence that Caner's father was at the Islamic Foundation, FxM wrote: "If I were to send Francis a picture of my father standing at the entrance of a farm – that does not mean my father was a relatively good farmer." I agree, but I don't think the analogy holds. I agree that having one's picture taken with an Imam is not proof in itself. It is simply evidence.

The analogy does hold. Anybody and everybody can take a picture standing outside an Islamic building; but that does not mean that they are relatively good Muslims. We have a local shop here for Muslims which was recently refurbished by some non-Muslim builders – if one were to take a picture of the non-Muslims who were involved in the reconstruction (standing in front of the building); does that mean that they were relatively good Muslims despite the fact that they weren’t even Muslim? This is rhetorical and FTN is not required to answer this.

FxM further asked: "Do devout Muslims heavily smoke? (Ergun says his dad was a heavy smoker)" In my experience, lots of Muslims smoke and smoke openly. I can't say whether Islamic law places a certain limit on smoking, although I am sure that an argument exists that heaving smoking is dangerous for health and consequently haram.

Once again, FTN must not neglect the fact that Ergun states his dad was a DEVOUT SUNNI MUSLIM. He even stated in an interview that his dad was “one of the group of scholars” who work around the Imaam (don’t know where he got the idea of group of scholars working around the Imaam, but oh well), he said his father was an Islamic Leader, whilst he also claims that his father was Mu’athin (one who gives the call to prayer). Yes, many Muslims do smoke – but not the ones who are as devout as Ergun says his dad was. Smoking is Haraam in its entirety – with Ergun and his family being Sunni Muslims – they should have understood this too.

FxM further stated: "Do devout Muslims celebrate birthdays? (Ergun says they were “Wahaabis”, they don’t celebrate birthdays)." I can't recall Ergun saying that. FxM clearly has more familiarity with Ergun's many oral statements than I do. Nevertheless, that sounds like an embellishment. The Islamic Foundation on Broad St. in Columbus, OH, is not a Wahaabi institution, as far as I can tell. I don't recall birthdays being haram for Sunnis in general, but I may be mistaken.

FTN must abstain from using the word embellishment as a substitute for the word lie. It is not an embellishment to say you were something you weren’t. Ergun says he was a "Wahaabi" because he wants people to think he is associated with this group that supposedly have the “suicide mentality" – thus it is a deliberate lie in order to mislead – not an embellishment. (Although it is a misconception amongst the ignorant that those who adhere to the methodology of the Salaf are "extremeists" and "suicide bombers")

FxM added: "Besides – Ergun first uploaded the picture of him standing inside a room with that Imaam who is in the picture and the caption of the image stated that the Imaam was his father." Yes, that was a very odd mistake. I don't doubt that they were at the place with their father (as opposed to their mother), but the man in the picture was obviously not Caner's father.

Yes, I know it was not his father. But FTN writes that is was a "mistake" - the same way Ergun substitutes the word 'lie' with 'mistake' - FTN is doing the same.

FxM concluded: "Francis fails to see any reason to doubt Ergun Caner being a Muslim – that’s quite ignorant of the nearly 70 errors/lies that have been presented in totality (videos + website)." I certainly see plenty of evidence than Ergun embellished his biography, particularly in his oral presentations. I also see evidence that Caner spoke carelessly on many occasions.

Once again, embellishment is a soft word to describe Ergun Caner. What Ergun is doing is producing deliberate baseless falsehood in order to mislead people. We can argue all day about whether Ergun is embellishing or lying – it would not be good to waste such a healthy discussion on the difference between lying and embellishment. Nonetheless – to say you were a devout Muslim merely because your father was Turkish is not embellishing a story – it is lying – because being Turkish does not automatically mean you are a devout Muslim.

However, I have no doubt that Ergun Caner said the Shahada as a child, even if he only said it on the weekends when he was with his father. That is "enough" for a child to be considered Muslim, from what I understand of Islam.

What FTN fails to understand is that being half Turkish does not necessarily mean that they "said the Shahada" or were even Muslims.

If an Englishman were to embrace Islam even though he did not possess the fundamental beliefs like that of a Christian – it does not mean that this new Muslim is an ex Christian merely because England is a so called Christian nation. If we were all to have this incorrect and improper mentality, then the 64,000 White British Muslims are all ex Christians – despite the fact that most of them probably weren’t even Christians to begin with. Some of these White British Muslims may have been baptised or whatever – when they were young children – but what exactly does that mean if one does not act upon or believe in their faith when they are older? Surely it is considered fraudulence if any of these 64,000 White British Muslims were to come out and say they were ex devout Christians merely because they were baptised as Children, let alone lie about their whole lifestyle and upbringing prior to their conversion in order to attain riches and fame.

FTN must abstain from judging ones faith based upon the country of origin, not everybody in Saudi Arabia is necessarily a Muslim. As with a small handful of “Muslim countries” – a lot of Turkey is not exactly a country where Islam is widely practiced or implemented.

The above example, in fact, does Ergun Caner favours - the similitude demonstrates individuals that are actual full breed native Britons who were born and raised in England - wheres Ergun is a half breed Swede/Turk raised in America.

I note that someone (perhaps FxM?) has suggested that Ergun erred in one oral presentation by claiming that one has to say the Shahada specifically to an Imam in order to be a Muslim.

It is not a condition to say the Shahada in the presence of another in order to become a Muslim.

I think FxM should be willing to admit that there is evidence that Caner was a Muslim, even if he was not nearly as devout as some of Caner's self-reports would seem to indicate.

There is evidence he is half Turkish, and inevitably being half Turkish and seeing his father on occasions – he would be aware of some aspects of Islam, albeit minor things like “oh look that’s an Islamic Centre, what happens here dad?” or “hey dad, can I stand next to those people who look like they are praying?” / “ok son, go and stand there with your hands like *this*” – not necessarily meaning he was a Muslim himself. I’m certain his father was a Muslim, although probably not as practicing and devout as Ergun painted him to be – nonetheless – we have concluded that Ergun went through a divorce as a toddler and was brought up mainly by his Swedish mother – not by his Turkish father.

Truth will stand out against falsehood. And lies will always stand out from embellishments. 

Conclusion

I will concentrate on making some more videos slowly during my spare moments. I am a student, I work 6 days a week at this present time (University gap year) and I like playing football (soccer) on Sunday’s, thus we can understand I am very busy. Plus – this pre-mature discussion is based upon evidence of a website which is yet to be finished, hence the “website under construction” on the homepage. When it is finished and the dozens more issues are added, there will be loads more of issues to discuss. FTN is more than welcome to blog about my website and attempt to refute the issues I have raised so far.

Nonethess, there are undeniable lies, errors, misleadings and complete falsehoods being presented by Ergun Caner both about himself and the Islamic faith. Whether FTN opts to believe Ergun is a FAKE EX MUSLIM or not - is not my problem - neither do I worry too much about what FTN thinks. The lies, errors, misleadings and complete falsehoods are sufficient to prove that Ergun Caner is a person who should not be listened to by anybody who stands for truth.