After studying IHOPKC, MorningStar, and earlier charismatic movements, a historical pattern becomes difficult to ignore ...

Stumbled across this 1991 Olathe Daily News article today about Bob Jones’ confession of sexual misconduct involving a mother and daughter. John Wimber sent Ken Gulliksen, the Vineyard USA's North American director, to investigate. Gulliksen heard from the victims. He heard Jones confess. Then he told the newspaper: “Separate from the incident, he’s a sweet guy.”

I find it interesting that evangelicals use their Scofield Bibles to justify burning The Passion translation. Why not burn the whole stack and try reading the Bible without Scofield, Simmons, or even Ryrie, whispering in your ear? Is this just a debate about the interpretations evangelicals still recognize as human and those they’ve already mistaken for the Bible?

If Jesus is the Word made flesh—and the New Testament calls him the cornerstone—why does this picture seem to lay the foundation for reading Scripture without him?

This made me chuckle and sigh at the same time. He includes humility among the foundations of a good society, then describes nearly everyone outside his worldview as deluded, entitled, promiscuous, destructive and enraged at God. The world in which Mr. Winger would have us all live would be ordered by people who cannot recognize in themselves the very vices they propose to correct in everyone else.

On some days, all you can hope for is one true sentence. Today, this was mine: I cannot prove who released the glitter, but I have no evidentiary reason to believe the laws of nature briefly reorganized themselves above a charismatic congregation.

Ran across this “revelation” the other day (circa late 1980s). It instructs leaders to emphasize Jesus in the very offices Paul Cain supposedly occupied. The promise isn’t that prophecy becomes more true. It’s that it becomes “more convincing.” Interesting distinction.

I am no fan of Candace Owens. But a prominent Bible teacher has decided that “critic” is no longer enough. She must be equated with a murderer. This rhetoric helps normalize violence, regardless of the author’s intent. This post is less an indictment of Owens than an illustration of the entropy of evangelical thought in real time. Notice the maneuver: inflammatory speech is condemned with inflammatory speech. An attempt to expose moral confusion ends up reproducing it. And it gets hailed as courage. Let’s hope no one else gets shot.

Absolutely agree. If someone is hired to investigate misconduct inside a church, that’s a serious problem. For the misconduct. And maybe for the church, too. It all depends on the investigator, I guess.

The heart of the Charismatic/Evangelical abuse crisis is not that leaders abused authority. It's that entire systems trained people to mistake compliance for spiritual maturity and the surrender of conscience for faith.

🚨BREAKING: In Chicago, ICE agents were caught on video assaulting a local chaplain for filming, and asking questions, about what was happening on her own street… AFTER the arrest was already made. In the video, Alley Henny, a Black chaplain, is standing with her back against a parked car while recording. An ICE agent is already pushing her backward as she simply asks: “What did he do?” But here’s what makes this situation even more disturbing… The man had already been detained… He was already INSIDE the ICE vehicle. The arrest was over. That means, there was no active arrest taking place for her to “interfere with.” Yet, multiple agents surrounded her anyway. One agent yells, “Get back! We have a warrant for his arrest. Get out of here.” She responds, “This is my neighborhood.” The agent’s response? “I don’t care.” Then, while she’s already backed against a car, and surrounded by TWO agents… a THIRD agent rushes over, grabs her, and forcefully shoves her down the street while screaming, “GET BACK! I ALREADY TOLD YOU ONCE!” And just to be clear… She wasn’t stopping an arrest. She wasn’t obstructing agents from reaching a suspect. She wasn’t preventing agents from taking someone into custody. The suspect was ALREADY IN THE VEHICLE. So, this entire situation raises serious concerns about excessive force and retaliation against protected speech. Because once the situation is already controlled, there’s no reason for that level of force against someone who’s just recording and asking questions. And if that kind of response isn’t checked, and held accountable, it starts to send a very dangerous message… That recording and questioning government actions can be met with physical violence, and intimidation. And that’s exactly what the constitution is meant to prevent.

I’m using Claude to write a manual for Christian leaders on handling hostile questions. So far, it has achieved full charismatic accountability-statement consciousness: "... not a goal, not malice. A disposition toward presumed authority that I keep enacting even after being told, because the correction lands as words I can repeat but not as behavior I change."

If prophecy needs testing, who gets to design the test? Can the prophetic movement reform itself when prophecy is both what’s being tested and what's holding the movement together?