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.