The Vindication of Ernie Gruen.
This is something that we had just stumbled upon, and really ended up being a task that nobody (except God) had planned for.
The Story:
Shortly after this blog was started, I was doing some research online about Mike Bickle. Then I stumbled upon the Wikipedia page that was made about Mike Bickle. On it, a man named Ernie Gruen was mentioned as a critic of Bickle, but then the site said that Gruen had recanted his critiques and allegedly said that he was “deceived and a deceiver”. That made me a little more curious about the situation. In the early 80’s Ernie Gruen wrote a report warning others about the abuses of Mike Bickle and the Kansas City Prophets. If you’ve never heard of the Kansas City Prophets, you may have heard of the International House of Prayer (I.H.O.P), Morningstar, “The Call” with Lou Engle, and OneThing. If you are familiar with these movements, they are all associated with the Kansas City Prophets. Now, simply google the Kansas City Prophets, and see for yourself who they are, and what they do. Ernie Gruen is not the only man to confront the false teachings (and false hope) that these men dish out. Other more well-known men are Dr. John Macarthur who wrote “Charismatic Chaos”, and Hank Hanegraff with his book “Counterfeit Revival”. As I fished around on the internet, I couldn’t find much on Mr. Gruen, so of course this got even more interesting. Then, sure enough. I find Ernie Gruen himself. I found his website, and his e-mail is plastered right there on the home page. Apparently many others who have found confirmation with their own convictions concerning the 3rd wave charismatic movement in the Ernie Gruen Report have already contacted him and gotten questions answered about the situation by the man himself. Since I had really only known about Ernie’s report for a few days, I wasn’t sure how I could best use my opportunity to correspond with him. So the following happened. Here is a compilation of all the materials that have developed since the saga began.
—
Blog #1- The Infamous Ernie Gruen Report. January, 18th 2008.
The Ernie Gruen report is 233 pages full of info from financial issues to examples of abusive prophecy.
This letter is long, and Ernie is a Christian, and I can’t exactly pinpoint all of his doctrinal beliefs, but this document, by far is a major blemish on the “Kansas City prophets” record.
Also, if Ernie did in fact say that he was wrong in this report, the documentation still remains of personal testimonies, and evidence of edited tapes. I haven’t read the entire document, but what I have read doesn’t surprise me, and also, Ernie isn’t the only guy to have reported these sort of things within the movement.
So, here I gladly present perhaps the best document concerning Mike Bickle and his entourage’s history.
Aberrent Practices - By Ernie Gruen
If you have the time, and the paper, you should print this out. It is also available for download here.
The people who published the report to their website don’t seem to be keeping the site up anymore. I tried to find out info on them and their beliefs but was unable to. So I can’t say if I do, or don’t endorse them.
If Ernie returns by e-mail, I will post the response.
—
Blog #2- BIG UPDATE, ERNIE GRUEN’S RESPONSE TO MY E-MAIL.- January 18th, 2008
Alright, everyone knows that I found this statement about Ernie Gruen on Mike Bickle’s wikipedia page:
“Bickle’s ministry has historically been very controversial, even within the charismatic movement. This controversy was heightened when charismatic pastor Ernie Gruen released a report in 1990 documenting what he considered to be many aberrant practices in Kansas City. Ernie Gruen wrote a citywide letter saying that he was sorry for writing what had come to be known as the Ernie Gruen Report. In an open letter in the early 1990s Gruen referred to himself as deceived and a deceiver.”
On a side note this wikipedia page is also linked off of the International House Of Prayer’s wikipedia page. So that sort of tells me that both links were made by IHOP.
So, I found Ernie Gruen’s E-mail, and sent the following:
Hello Brother, Grace and Peace to you.
I have been researching the “Kansas City Prophets” because half of my church split and moved to the “International House of Prayer” where Mike Bickle is the pastor. I came across something known as the “Ernie Gruen Report” at this website:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Bickle
The site claims that you “wrote a citywide letter saying that he was sorry for writing what had come to be known as the Ernie Gruen Report. In an open letter in the early 1990s Gruen referred to himself as deceived and a deceiver.”
The site did not provide documentation of your alleged words. So I want to ask if you really did say you were sorry for the letter, and perhaps if there is still a chance of me reading the letter if it exists.
I do not wish to stir up any controversy or anything.
God bless you, and your ministry.
in Christ,
Devin Murphy
-
ERNIE’S RESPONSE:
SEE ATTACHMENT.
Attachment:
I am convinced that Bob Jones has a familiar spirit, a demon of divination, and is into the occult. He is just absolutely weird. ACTS 16;16-18Acts 16:16–Now it happened, as we went to prayer,that a certain slave girl possessed with a spirit of divination met us,
who brought her masters much profit by fortune-telling.
17 This girl followed Paul and us, and cried out, saying,
“These men are the servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to us the way of salvation.”
18 And this she did for many days. But Paul, greatly annoyed, turned and said to the spirit,
“I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.”
And he came out that very hour. NKJV
Also read Jeremiah 23:13-32
————————————————————-
And if people don’t believe me, they can e-mail Ernie themselves.
So it has been confirmed by the original source that the Infamous Ernie Gruen Report was never apologized for. And that whoever is keeping up Mike Bickle’s wikipedia page is either lying, or was lied to. There is no city-wide letter that Ernie Gruen wrote apologizing for the letter. None has ever turned up to substantiate the claim.
I.H.O.P is guilty until proven innocent.
—
Blog #3 More Answers From an Authority. January 27th, 2008- Posted by Natrimony
After Devin’s initial contact with Pastor Gruen I decided to follow his lead and e-mail him with some questions of my own. Pastor Gruen obliged my inquiry. His answers are short but comprehensive. I have reprinted my letter plus Pastor Gruen’s reply here in its entirety, without any editing. He also attached a warning against Bob Jones which is identical to the one he sent to Devin earlier reprinted on BIG UPDATE, ERNIE GRUEN’S RESPONSE TO MY E_MAIL. I did not include the attachment.
Also, Pastor Gruen has agreed to an interview with thegreycoats. Jarrod, Devin, and I are in the process of compiling questions which we hope to have a transcript of answers to sometime in the near future. We hope the answers will be refreshingly radical in their reformative effect on those who have bought into the IHOP and modern prophetic movements. But, in the meantime, this update must suffice for everyone tracking the relevance of The Infamous Ernie Gruen Report.
My letter:
Hello Pastor Gruen,
My friend Devin recently e-mailed you in reference to your report detailing aberrant practises in the Kansas City Fellowship during the late ’80’s and early 90’s. I have also come across an article on the blog “Thoughts and Ponderings” by someone who claims to be your grandson. He says that, “To sum up all of this, I would like to close with a conversation I had with my grandfather, Ernie Gruen. After being troubled by all that I have read about Mike Bickle, IHOP, and KCF, I finally confronted the man who confronted Mike Bickle. My grandfather said that he and Mike Bickle are now on good terms and he actually supports Mike’s ministry. My grandfather went on to say that they are friends but the person he did have a problem with is Bob Jones.”
I’m sure you’ve been through a nightmare of attack in regard to your forthrightness and Berean spirit. And, I would not be surprised if you were so sick of dealing with this issue that you do not respond to this. But my conscience requires me to ask: Are you really on good terms with Mike Bickle now and in support of his ministry? Have you ever written an open letter recanting your original report? Your leadership and advice is vital to my own spiritual struggle with the entity known as IHOP and its leader Mike Bickle. Thank you for publishing your report and I hope to hear from you soon.
Grace and Peace,
Nathaniel Ruland
Pastor Gruen replied with:
1. I have no animosity to Mike, but could not support his ministry.
2. My grandson since putting that on the internet has totally left Ihop, and will have nothing to do with it.
3. I never sent a letter repudiated the original document–that is a total lie. The document was and is true.
4. See attachment.
That’s it ya’ll, until we get more.
—
Blog #4 Recant??? January 30th, 2008 - Posted by thegreycoats
As you all know the Grey coats have been in contact with pastor Ernie Gruen . He is the author of a quite lengthy quite infamous report . We have asked the pastor about the rumors of his alleged recantation of this report in the form of a city wide letter and or public apology of any kind. The Grey coats have also requested an interview with pastor Gruen to help clarify the issue because there seems to be some disagreement on the truth of these matters. Did Gruen recant? Did he apologize for his report? Where are these rumors coming from ? Here is a brief taste of what is to come in the near future as we go and get the truth straight from the proverbial horses mouth.
It has been spread around Kansas City and on the Internet that I sent out a letter saying that I was deceived and that I had retracted the document “Documentation of the Aberrant Practices and Teachings of Kansas City Fellowship (Grace Fellowship). They have been known by many names in the KC area, switching elders and church names on a regular basis. For a while they were known as Metro Vineyard. (Interesting John Wimber told me that he regretted getting involved with Mike Bickle, because he discovered that I was correct in the “Aberrant” document.)
I sent out no such letter; I issued no retraction; I did not issue an apology!
Statements asserting the above are total malicious lies!
The “Aberrant” document was and is exactly the truth of what happened. It was accumulated from tapes purchased from Bickel’s own ministry. The report is genuine!
Who originated these lies? I have no idea.
Who decided to spread these lies on the Internet and throughout KC? I do not know.
But it is Mike’s responsibility to see that these lies are repudiated by him and also publicly at I-Hop. Since it purportedly is regularly stated to newcomers to I-Hop. Of course it is to Bickel’s advantage to keep THE LIE going to increase his numbers and growth of his ministry.
Pastor Ernie Gruen
———————
As you can see Pastor Gruen is adamant in his statements that he did not recant or apologize. This begs the question, who has spread this rumor? Why have they lied about this man? And my personal favorite: Why does Mike Bickle’s wikepedia page keep getting re-edited every time we correct the error about Pastor Gruen’s report ? (interestingly enough it doesn’t even mention Pastor Gruen any more hmmmm…) The answers to these questions are out there somewhere . Maybe we will find a few as time goes by.
–Addendum: Pastor Gruen’s grandson Grant has reprinted this letter on his blog here:
http://apollos.wordpress.com/2008/02/02/ernie-gruen/
This reprint does support source authenticity. Namely, that we’re not just making all of this stuff up.
—
—Side Note—
In the midst of all this, discussions in the comment sections were happening about trying to interview Mr. Gruen. We wrote up some questions, and sent them with a prayer, and a few weeks later the questions came back answered. Here is that post.
—
Blog #5 The Much Awaited Interview with Ernie Gruen, February 17th 2008
They will not quit teaching any doctrine that makes them “elitist”.
4. Did you truly exonerate Paul Cain from all your previous accusations, if so would you mind telling us what changed your mind?
Mike Bickle himself exposed and discredited him. http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/orrel19.html
5. Did you really apologize to Mr. Bickle for the accusations you made in your report?
This fabrication that I apologized, spread by Mike Bickle and/or his I-hop staff, is a total lie. I never apologized to him–you do not apologize for exposing false prophets and telling the truth.
6. Do you think that John Wimber’s covering addressed the problems you spoke of in your report?
The elders of Full Faith Church agreed to stop sending out the “Aberrant Document” for two reasons: one, John Wimber said he would “clean up the mess at KCF” and provide oversight, and secondly to restore unity in the city. However, before Wimber died, he phoned me and said “I was right all the time in the ‘Aberrant Document’ and that he regretted getting involved with Mike Bickle.” The proof that this phone call occurred is that at this point KCF quit calling themselves “Metro-Vineyard,” and removed themselves from his covering.
7. Do you think that the international house of prayer is spiritually dangerous, if so what concerns you the most?
Please read an excerpt from an e-mail I received this week, with the name withheld:
“Last year I attended an internship at the I.H.O.P. called “Fire in the Night” . . . We had a class called the “Prophetic History” class where in it we listened to audio tapes of Mike Bickle’s experiences in the super-natural realm and prophecies of Bob Jones, Paul Cain . . . After some meetings with the leadership there I decided to leave the program. I was led to the report you had written about the Kansas City Prophets and Mike Bickle exposing them for their lies. After reading this report I was even more disturbed because of its content. I took what I had read back to the leadership at I.H.O.P. and presented it to them asking them if this, “the report you wrote” was true?
They then told me that it was not true and that you had made a public apology to Mike and others for having written it. The leader I spoke to said he was there to witness these things taking place. I wasn’t sure if he was telling the truth so I wanted to ask you a couple of questions personally.”
I challenge Mike Bickle and/or I-Hop staff to remove this so-called leader for telling a whopper of a lie!
1 Cor 3:11–For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ (NKJV)
Mike Bickle and/or I-Hop staffs have built their entire foundation on two discredited false prophets.
8. If there was any advice you could give to someone who is considering worshipping at I.H.O.P. what would it be?
Thoroughly read and study these two documents and then pray and make your own decision:
a) The original “Documentation of the Aberrant Practices and Teachings of Kansas City Fellowship.
http://www.intotruth.org/kcp/kcp-gruen.html
b) Paul Cain discredited by Mike Bickle:
http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/orrel19.html
9. Do you feel that the stand you took was worth it? Absolutely!
10. Why did you stop circulating the report? See answer in question #6.
Though Mike Bickle and/or I-Hop staffs unethically look for any reason to slander me, the personal situation involving me occurred several years after the “Aberrant Document” was released. It had and has no relationship to the contents of the document or its release whatsoever.
——-
Well, everyone, as you can see this is a big deal. If people who advocate men like Bob Jones, and Mike Bickle, and the International House of Prayer take this into consideration, a lot of pain, and knee jerk reactions will probably flare up. The purpose of this site is not to hurt you. We are here to call out some of the things that WE OURSELVES SAW within the movement. We still have many dear brothers and sisters in Christ that are involved in the numerous places associated with those mentioned in the posts. The same Messiah that saved us has saved them also. We know that there are many Christians within these ministries, so we aren’t necessarily attacking entire congregations or anything of that sort. We are simply asking for a formal response to what has been waged towards Mr. Bickle and his ministry.
The big issue here is that somebody started a rumor (that has been proven to be a lie thus far) that Ernie Gruen recanted. There have been people coming onto this site in the blogs saying that they have seen Gruen’s letter of recantation. Also saying that they themselves saw Mr. Gruen recant publicly. So far, when asked, NOBODY has produced any evidence of these other than their own testimony. Logically if this was as big of a deal as it has been known to be, then there would still be copies of the letter floating around.
People who work with the International House of Prayer have claimed that Ernie recanted.
Ernie says that he didn’t.
All we want to know, and want you to know, is who is telling the truth.
Decide for yourself.
Feel free to comment on this post, and also you can find all of the posts here in our archives if you wish to talk specifics.
In Christ, our Salvation,
The Grey coats team, Jarrod, Nathaniel, and Devin.
76 Comments
February 18, 2008 at
Looky
February 18, 2008 at
great work!
February 18, 2008 at
It appears you done everything you could to convince folks this is real. I would now invite them to investigate for themselves if they think this isn’t the real thing. There are now two confirming reports, one from Ernie and the other from his grandson. You have done a great job in obtaining this information firsthand, in my opinion. No other site that I know of has been able to do that thus far.
Let the doubters check it out further for themselves.
February 18, 2008 at
yeah yeah!!Thanx mbaker. i agree.
February 20, 2008 at
Thanks so much for making this available to all.
I read this document because my mother gave it to me to read.
I read the report and thought….I’ll have some grace in this area. Things happened then, but surely they have been cleaned up now. So I went to the IHOP website and looked up what they had to say about the controversey.
Here is a direct quote from their website about prophecy.
“WE DENY subjective prophetic experiences are equal to the inspired Word of God. In other words, all personal prophecy must uphold and honor the Scripture.
Explanation: Simple prophecy is limited to edification, exhortation and comfort (1 Corinthians 14:3). It is to enrich our spiritual life, rather than give direction in the domestic areas of our life.”
Here is the place to find it.
http://ihop.org/Publisher/Article.aspx?ID=1000010501
Yet they reference a prophecy that will dictate church matters in this document. Guess who one of the prophets was? Bob Jones.
http://ihop.org/Publisher/File.aspx?id=1000006121
They also still hold to their original prophecy. It too is found on their website. Scroll down below Mike Bickle’s profile. It’s called The Blueprint Prophecy.
http://ihop.org/Publisher/Article.aspx?ID=22497
So…..nothing has changed. Not even after their prophets were discredited. And Deuteronmy 18:20 is very clear. If a prophet has a false prophecy he is to be put to death. Therefore, he is not a prophet of God.
I am saddened for our city. I will pray that things will change at IHOP. I won’t go, but I will pray.
February 21, 2008 at
Thanks for the love Amanda, looks like you’ve been doing your homework. I give you an A+++
Keep up the good work, the word needs to get out to those being hidden from this sort of info.
in Him,
Devin
February 26, 2008 at
It also might be a good idea to add the fact that Ernie Gruen ran off with the secretary of his former church.
A lot of stuff happened in the 80’s and 90’s. A lot of it was from the Lord, some of it was not. The prophetic was very immature, as were many prophetic people.
Just people may not understand some of the things that have happened, does not mean anything.
We need to pray for the spirit of wisdom and revelation before we judge things we do not understand. Gods thoughts are higher than our thoughts, and his ways are higher than our ways.
The Lord is raising up many places in the U.S. IHOP is one of them.
I’m not telling you what to believe, and I’m not going to debate. The only thing I want to add is do not think that even you can be deceived. We are all deceived in different areas. Even though I’m assuming you are not a Rick Joyner fan (lol) I’m going to use a quote from his book..
“Know your present level of deception”
The only way we can know truth, true truth…is if God opens our eyes/understanding and allows us to see. Trying to understand everything with your intellect will leave you with nothing but confusion and deception. (note: Im not saying using your intellect is a bad thing, God gave it to us to use…but do not rely completely on it)
Whatever you think about IHOP-KC is your business, but please do not completey determine in your mind that IHOP (and the well known ppl affiliated with it) are false prophets and not of God….if you believe that…thats fine…but just leave room in your mind for the fact that you very well could be deceived about this yourself.
I’m not saying you are, but please just consider that fact in your own mind.
I could go on, but I’ll wait and see if you respond to this.
God Bless you bro. You have a great gift for writing, and I can just sense that God is going to use you in an amazing way.
Take care
- Scott
February 26, 2008 at
Obviously I had a ton of spelling mistakes in that, and missed some words. I trust you understand the point I was making.
February 26, 2008 at
Scott,
Thanks for dropping by and for the pleasantries. We are aware of Pastor Gruen’s alleged moral misconduct. However, an ad hominem argument does not discredit eyewitness testimony from an insider coupled with the backup of scores of churches. In other words that argument would be disregarded in a court of law.
Moving on. If you are not going to debate then why did you spend the time on a moderately long post? Are you a drive-by, is your position above defense, or, are you really interested in hearing the other side–going beyond your prophetically preunderstood cliches of ‘present level of deception’ , ‘intellect vs revelation’, and of course the blanket statement–’don’t judge what you don’t understand’.
>”A lot of stuff happened in the 80’s and 90’s. A lot of it was from the Lord, some of it was not. The prophetic was very immature, as were many prophetic people.”
This reads almost verbatim to a Mike Bickle quote from “Growing in the Prophetic”–yes I’ve read it. You might be surprised to find the level of past experience with IHOP to be pretty high on this site. Stick around. And, skim the page “Read This Before You Comment”.
February 26, 2008 at
>(in the 80’s and 90’s) The prophetic was very immature, as were many prophetic people.”
This could lead to a very interesting discussion. I was heavily involved in “the prophetic” in the 80’s and 90’s. For the most part the prophecy was forthtelling:
Yay, the Lord says that I love you with an undying love, and I will never leave you or forsake you
Fast forward to to the 2000’s where prophecy morphed into “foretelling”:
I sense the Lord is going to begin to name some new candy bars. When these are named they will release a prophetic anointing every time the name of the candy is mentioned. These names will have power to call forth life and salvation.
Now tell me, seriously, which is mature and which is immature?
I would posit that mature prophesy would edify, exhort and comfort. I would posit that mature prophesy would line up with, and be testable by, the holy scriptures.
A side note- as the “prophetic” matured, instructional material started suggesting that you no longer say “The Lord Says” but preface your “prophetic words” with “I sense” or something like that.
A mother says to her son: “Don’t go to the abandoned warehouse. Do you hear me?”
Son “yes, I hear you”
the son goes to the warehouse, and mom discovers it.
Mom ” Didn’t I tell you not to go to the warehouse?”
Son ” I said ‘I heard you’, I didn’t say I wouldn’t go”
This is the same sort of wiggle-room that prophets of today are taught. Children play this game. It is not a sign of maturity.
February 26, 2008 at
Scott
if you look at the bottom of the gruen interview he mentions hs immorality and says t took place years after the report. my frend what you are doing when you brng t up is using an emotional pull to win an argument. his immorality has no effect on the report it self. thats like saying rush limbaugh can no longer be a good political analyzer because he had a problem with pain pills. and no i am not a big joyner fan. he obviously does not know his own present level of deception. as based on the final quest which we would all do well to take off the shelves of every bookstore in the world. but i dont have time for that right now. hope you have a jolly day and thanks for stoppin by.
February 26, 2008 at
Hey, you guys got off pretty easy with Scott. After Miriam Franklin copied the interview on her blog, Scott told her it was “a waste of an article”. And that’s all. No howdy doo or anything.
February 26, 2008 at
it is not a waste but hey if thats how he feels. it doesn’t change the facts of the article that gruen wrote. folks are gonna have to realize that essentially all we have done is prove that the report is still upheld by its author. they gotta deal with the info in the report it self or not at all. yet if they refuse to even check the report we have very little to discuss with them. and slamming Gruen works both ways folks, fair is fair. if your gonna argue that gruen cant be trusted because of his lapse into sin. then you need to be ready to have the same logic thrown back at you. if gruen is dscredited because of immorality then so is Paul Cain and Bob jones. they also fell into pretty Gross immorality. so by scotts own logic they cannot be trusted either in which case i am o.k. since we are already asserting that they cant be trusted. you shall be snared by the words that you type
February 26, 2008 at
I sure hope that the prophecies in the Bible weren’t “immature”.
That’s just the thing for me. When “the prophetic” is “immature” ultimately relates christians as if they are some jedi’s growing in “the force”.
NO prophecy is “immature” if it is, then God becomes immature. The prophecies spoken do not rely on the one speaking the prophecy. Rather, on God who speaks.
Honestly, I caught what I’ve so often seen within the charismatic movement. Being told that I don’t understand. Then playing the “above reproach” card (wrongly) with the whole “I’m not going to debate” thing, implies that our friend Scott has full assurance that we are wrong. So much that he believes it useless to debate with us, or even discuss with us. This is especially sad because DOCTRINAL BELIEFS MUST BE TESTED BY SCRIPTURE (emphasis meant) and
NOBODY HAS BIBLICALLY DEFENDED THE VIEWS OF IHOP OR MORNINGSTAR ON THIS SITE, whether it be on prophecy, the bridal paradigm, the “fasted lifestyle”, nothing.
So, here we are again, with a supportor of these groups giving his 2 cents and sounding nice in that condescending sort of niceness that is loaded with implications…
Now Scott, I’m sure I sounded pretty harsh, but we do totally want the full truth of the Gospel. We don’t want to miss anything that Jesus has to offer. If you can really defend your position from the Bible, we really do search out what is being said to us (though some people judge us otherwise). Also, as Natrimony said, it is a logical fallacy to use a man’s character against the content of a document that he produced. Truth remains truth no matter what the one bringing the truth has allegedly been through.
For example, I will relate the part where you committed a logical fallacy (logic is a gift that God gave man to use to help discern what is wise, and what is foolish):
Ernie Gruen drops facts about Mike Bickle’s fellowship of the time.
“It also might be a good idea to add the fact that Ernie Gruen ran off with the secretary of his former church.”
Adolf Hitler does a math problem with the following equation:
20+9=29
“It also might be a good idea to add the fact that Adolf Hitler killed millions of jews.”
So, does the man’s truth claim change because of a moral act? No.
Ernie Gruen never recanted, but some people still say that he did, and some people from IHOP even said that they saw him recant (allthewhile they were around 6 or 7 years old when it happened..?)
OK, I’m definitely done for now.
Scott, please come back and talk to us, also, bring your friends, your pastors, anybody, no other people from the 3rd wave movement will stick around and try to convince us on what they believe we’re missing out on.
in Christ, true love,
Devin Murphy
February 26, 2008 at
An interesting case in point is Zack’s latest post here:
http://zackhensley.wordpress.com/
While I greatly applaud his commitment for refusing to respect someone’s beliefs to the point of letting them think they’re not going to go to hell without Jesus, I wonder why IHOP folks can’t see, that by the same token, we are trying to protect them from some of the false beliefs their leadership is promoting.
I don’t get it.
February 26, 2008 at
Scott -
To me it is pretty simple. But then I have a pea brain.
Jesus said “let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” Ok, so Ernie gruen fell into sin. Is Mike Bickle without sin? I don’t think so. Are you or I without sin? I don’t think so. We all sin and fall short of the glory of God. Remember that teaching from Sunday School?
What is being brought out here is the false teaching, extra-biblical teaching, foundational basis’ based on false prophecy, and the “new” paradigm we MUST operate under or we will see the wrath of God. Come on, they are talking about truth here. They are talking about the Gospel of Jesus Christ, our Lord.
Does anybody care that Jesus died for us, bled on the cross for us, and was resurrected so that we may have forgiveness and eternal life? The body of Christ today has become so enmeshed in “ME” (i.e. I am the bride (puffed up chest) so I am more special than you, or I can hear the Lord (prophecy) and you can’t, or in 40 days you too can be rich, etc) Does anybody care that we are walking in times that are perilous and there are souls who are still lost?
Where is the sovereignty of God for pete’s sake?
Greycoats - sorry I just had to vent.
March 1, 2008 at
I happened across this page in my wanderings. I’m in no way affiliated with IHOP, other than I watch their daily devotional on GodTV some mornings. I’ve read some of their website.
I have a question… and it’s a serious one.
How do you know that this Pastor Gruen and his grandson are actually the right people? If I’m reading correctly, you’ve only had internet discussions, with no way of confirming identity.
I ask mainly because a few years ago, it was done to me. Someone set up a website with my name on it and invited people to discuss things with them, purporting to be me, in an effort to damage my reputation.
Just food for thought.
March 1, 2008 at
Kathi,
Most of us aren’t fooled so easy.
If I was pastoring in a local community and someone set up a website purporting to be mine, selling books I had written. I think I would know about it and do something about it.
Furthermore, it is very simple to search the internet registration records and find out who is behind the curtain, as it were.
http://who.godaddy.com/WhoIsVerify.aspx?domain=erniegruen.com&prog_id=godaddy
You did know about the WHOIS lookup, didn’t you?
Now, if you lookup the erniegrien.com site you will see the site is maintained by Ronald Gruen of Gruen Computer Services, 213 Barto Dr., St. Louis, MO.
Next if you do a search of the St. Louis Mo GIS website
http://gis.stlouisco.com
and enter 213 Barto Drive, you will find that the parcel is owned by Vicki Gruen (Ron’s wife). I can even give you her mailing address if you’d like. Or look it up yourself (Property Assessment Details)
http://gis.stlouisco.com/search/ur.asp?var1=address&var2=Barto&var3=213&var4=Dr&var5=#10J531605
I guess lastly, the person representing himself as Ernie Gruen (because he IS Ernie Gruen) has done nothing to damage his reputation. Everything he has said is consistant with the reports in various periodicals from the 1990/1991 timeframe that reported on the situation.
Food for thought? Yeah I’ll think about it as I picnic in the “grassy knoll.” I am so tired of the conspiracy theory BS
http://thegreycoats.wordpress.com/2008/02/17/the-much-awaited-interview-with-ernie-gruen/#comment-1357
which keeps coming up on this topic. Let’s give it a rest, please.
March 1, 2008 at
Hey Kathi,
Thanks for dropping by.
We have discussed this very issue in-depth in the comments at : The much awaited Ernie Gruen Interview.
If you look at Ernie’s website, and his Grandson’s, you will see that we would have to go through A LOT to duplicate all of that.
If that doesn’t help out, we’ll be happy to discuss more questions with you.
in Christ, our Only.
Devin Murphy
March 1, 2008 at
Oh, also, after reading your blog on Once save always saved, I’m sure many of us would love to discuss that with you. Not with big long comments, just some short discussions.
Also this isn’t the thread for it, perhaps the “ask away” thread would be good. Because one thing that I and the other moderators agree on, and will take to the grave, that once Christ has saved someone, nothing can snatch us from His hands.
March 1, 2008 at
Well, I honestly hope when we stand before the Lord, that it’s you that’s right and not me, and that far more people make it to heaven than appears. (and what will you say to Him if you’re wrong?)
Why not just get everyone to sign on the dotted line in Kindergarten then, so there’s no worries? Then everyone can live as they like.
Heck, I could go back to witchcraft and worshiping deities other than Him…
———————-
Oh! But you were on a witch hunt… hmmmm….
Online ID theft is easy (and yes I know all about WHOIS… believe me.)
March 1, 2008 at
kathie.
we are not hunting witches we are hunting wabbits. and why do you think that you can lose your salvation? i am asking for dialog and not a fight. and yeah identity theft is easy but we have the real deal. look at some of the reasons we gave on the gruen interview post. his grandson has the same emails. he sent the one i posted on recant out in mass to alot of folks. we all got the same email. family friends and us. i mean gosh do we have to have 2 forms of i.d. all the time?
March 1, 2008 at
Hey Kathi nice sarcasm. If I am not believing in a salvation by Christ’s graceful atoning work which purchases merciful forgiveness and also imputes righteousness to me then I probably won’t be saying much at the day of judgement. Hey, we don’t expect our information to break through every radical-charismatic’s presuppostitional view of reality. However, if just a few are brought to a place of honest questioning, then well, that’ll do.
March 1, 2008 at
>Online ID theft is easy (and yes I know all about WHOIS… believe me.)
Kathi,
Since you seem to have already determined that we are on a “witch hunt” then I guess that makes your earlier comment “Just food for thought” sort of disingenious, doesn’t it.
If you knew about WHOIS then you should have done your homework before trying to plant seeds of doubt. Better, yet, you should leave planting seeds of doubt to Satan, he is far more skilled at it then you seem to be.
It’s stupid to carry this lame discussion on any further, but if this is some sort of elaborate farse, I might add that the person posing as Gruen’s grandson somehow managed to get himself registered at a state university with an email address that indicates his actual name. Working closely with the IT department at a major state university, I can assure you that type of fraud does not occur.
I hope that did not come across as too rude, but it is hard for me to figure out your motivation for coming across as one who at one moment is “innocently” tossing out food for thought and next hurling the typical witch hunting accusations out.
At the very least you should admit that the evidence against your conspiracy theory is compelling.
Furthermore, if you are going to posit theories about the veracity of the report, please answer YES or NO:
Have you read the Ernie Gruen report?
If the answer is NO (or if you have no reply) then you are way over your head.
March 1, 2008 at
Kathi, I responded in the “Ask Away” thread
March 8, 2008 at
I was in the Vineyard at the time of the Ernie Gruen (EG) report. My understanding is that EG had recanted in the sense of having acknowledged that it was not his place to bring correction to KCF. Rather than release a public report, he should first have gone to those having authority or influence over the KCF.
I think EG’s moral failure is relevant to the assessment of his claims. His motives and truthfulness reasonably become suspect in the light of his subsequent actions.
Nevertheless, it was my understanding at the time of publication of the report that there was definitely smoke within KCF if not outright fire. Wimber’s involvement was specifically intended to bring order and accountability out of what had become, or at least had seemed to become, chaos.
Subsequently Mike Bickle acknowledged that leadership and oversight at KCF had been less than ideal. He wrote a book that offered lessons learned about the local church administration of prophecy and prophetic ministers.
My take is that some of this history has been forgotten. And some, having been passed from mouth to ear, has been unintentionally distorted. There was plenty of blame to go around. But what occurred doesn’t necessarily entirely discredit any of those involved. God is still able to bring correction to those who are His. So, I would urge caution in judging Bickle, IHOP. or Gruen based on this sad episode. Instead, we should study to learn what the episode reveals about the Church, ourselves, and our God.
March 8, 2008 at
Chairos Seeker,
All right. Welcome to the greycoats. Don’t be scared…but do be prepared.
‘I think EG’s moral failure is relevant to the assessment of his claims. His motives and truthfulness reasonably become suspect in the light of his subsequent actions.’
No. You are presenting an ad hominem argument in this case which is most certainly a red herring. Gruen’s morality has no bearing on the truth value of his statement. A man’s moral fortitude may become suspect but an assertion may be true irregardless of moral fortitude. The evidence must be weighed. Hookers make true statements in court. A drug dealer is a credible witness if the evidence is in his favor. Bill Clinton had an affair with Monica Lewinsky. However, does that outside circumstance mean that when Bill Clinton adds two and two that we should question his truthfulness when his answer is four?
Not only that, but you discredit your own position through using faulty logic. When flipped, the same statement would read, “I think [Bob Jones, Paul Cain]’s moral failure is relevant to the assessment of [their] claims. [Their] motives and truthfulness reasonably become suspect in the light of [their] subsequent actions.” However, in the case of Jones and Cain, the name of God is attached to false motives and lack of truthfulness. In addition Jones and Cain have no corroborating evidence (other than their own snake-oil salesmanship) to support their many ‘prophetic’ truth claims, whereas Gruen had the backing of many churches plus individual testimonies. He owned his allegations also, and has accepted their consequences, choosing not to hide behind the name of the Almighty as many do who claim to be ‘the Lord’s annointed.’
You know what? I almost forgot. I have yet to hear or read any valid confession on Gruen’s part of moral misconduct. I really don’t know where your source for that information comes from. I’ve heard a lot of allegations made against him on the blogs but nothing substantial. Nothing like the public spectacle which Cain and Jones have become.
One more thing. If you intend to use the greek noun for ‘appointed occasion’ in your name it should be a K not a Ch. Unless you have some sort of kitschy intention like me. (I use an “n” instead of an “m” in natrimony.)
March 8, 2008 at
Natrimony
Gruen does admit to his moral failure in our interview. we did not post the question simply because we printed it like we got it with the exceptions of correcting spelling. at the bottom you will see that he says the episode took place years after he wrote his document. which means that it is truly irrelevent . to all who read this. GRUEN WAS NOT FALLEN WHEN HE WROTE THE REPORT! it took place years afterward according to him. also i agree if we use charios seekers logic then it strengthens our case it most certainly does not hurt it.
March 9, 2008 at
Jarrod,
“A personal situation” is a pretty ambiguous phrase. I’m not quite sure I really know what that means.
I don’t know why I waste my time with these drivebys sometimes.
March 9, 2008 at
@Nat, you mistake my position and intention. I am no apologist for Bob Jones or Paul Cain. I am merely trying to correct certain aspects of the historical record and suggest how some apparently inconsistent accounts may be reconciled. I think that doing so is in everyone’s interest, irrespective of their opinion of Cain and Jones.
I must misunderstand: You seem to be arguing that the moral character of a reporter is irrelevant to evaluation of the reporter’s truth claims. Certainly, I disagree with that position. Moreover, my doing so is not an instance of the ad hominem fallacy, which connotes tailoring an otherwise invalid argument to the peculiar sitution of the hearer(s).
I’m frankly puzzled why you’d not think that the moral character of any reporter would be relevant to (though, of course, not solely determinative of) the weighing of his claims. To cite precedent, law courts make place for this (except in ways prohibited by the 5th amendment).
Certainly, prostitutes and criminals sometimes tell the truth. But, I think we agree that those who practice one sort of moral corruption often thereby fall prey to others. You seem to be arguing that the corrupt are more trustworthy than the pure. I’m sure you don’t intend doing so. Perhaps you would be kind enough to clarify. I apologize for having somehow misunderstood, as I’m sure I have.
With respect to Gruen’s claims, I’d say they addressed problems in church leadership more than problems with Cain or Jones. Certainly, the problems originated with Cain, Jones, and others. But, it was the responsibility of pastoral staff to maintain discipline. So, the ethics of Mike Bickle would seem to me to be more directly germane to the situation than those of Cain or Jones.
So far as I know, Bickle has not been found to have morally fallen, though I suppose some might view his theology as sufficiently erroneous to constitute moral failure. Further information on these points would be of interest.
@thegreycoats, nat
Clearly, the time of discovery of a moral fall is less relevant than the time of the fall. Gruen’s fall could well have preceded publication of the report. I’d venture that subsequent events demonstrate that his moral state at the time of publication should be considered unknown.
On a related point, I seem to have again been unclear. I don’t argue that all of Gruen’s claims were false. Quite the contrary, I’ve acknowledged that at least some–perhaps many–of them were valid. But, to accept all his claims as valid on their face would, in my view, be rather credulous.
In offering this opinion, I don’t mean to exonerate Cain, Jones, or even Bickle. It’s just good analysis. If drinking water from the well has a high bacteria count today it quite possibly had one yesterday as well.
@nat, I think the term “driveby” is loaded and unkind. I think it would even qualify as an ad hominem attack of the sort unworthy of someone who nobly aspires to apply logic to his faith, as you obviously do. I respectfully suggest that you reconsider your choice of words.
Also, please note that the word Greek “chairos” is spelled using the letter chi not the letter kappa. So, “ch” is the proper transliteration to the Roman alphabet. That said, I don’t doubt that you’ve seen it transliterated with a “k,” which does better signify the correct pronunciation than does the “ch.”
March 9, 2008 at
Chairos,
If you have read the Gruen report, you have see that the most troubling claims are taken from direct transcriptions of public statements from Bickle, Jones and Cain. The source of these transcriptions was documented. If any of these were fabricated, it would have been easy to discredit the report. To my knowledge, these transcriptions have never been challenged. Gruen’s character, or anyone’s character for that matter, is irrelevant to the accuracy of these transcriptions.
Either they are accurate or not. The attacks on Gruen’s character look awfully suspicious to an outside observer and careful reader of the report. The simplest defense is to simply compare the transcriptions with the referenced source material and discredit Gruen. Why would this not have been done for the sake of truth? Why would Bickle not have set the record straight simply to promote peace in the body of Christ?
I think I know why.
-r
March 9, 2008 at
Chairos,
I was in the Vineyard at the time of the Ernie Gruen (EG) report.
You were at the Vineyard where this took place or in a Vineyard Church? If you were there were you on staff, leadership, or just a member of the church?
“My understanding is that EG had recanted in the sense of having acknowledged that it was not his place to bring correction to KCF. Rather than release a public report, he should first have gone to those having authority or influence over the KCF.
You understand because you were there or are you sharing something that you got second hand from someone else? Secondly, I was under the impression from the report that EG did go to them first before he wrote the report. Are you saying from first hand knowledge that this is not the case?
March 9, 2008 at
Responding to post #30…
I disagree also with the logic of the persons moral characture in this particular incident or issue having anything to do with the truth of the report.
If the report was written with transcripts from tapes, notes testamonies of the actual issues then it seems to me that the document except for the points that he did apologize for are indeed factual. And if the issue of what ever the “personal matter” was happened in a time well after the fact of the document, then it has no bearing on the document.
I guess if we follow the logic of what you are stating then King David, after his sin with Bathseba, even after he repented, would make what he wrote (Psalms) not anymore truthful because of his moral characture. Even though he was a man after Gods own heart. We might as well take the book out of the bible.
Of course with that stated, then we should accept the repentece of Paul Cain, but because I/we do doesn’t mean I have to trust him. The fruit will tell if he is still teaching and preaching false doctine in the days ahead.
March 9, 2008 at
“CH”airos,
Don’t get all huffy now. So you’re not a driveby eh? Where did you get your definition for ‘ad hominem fallacy’–wikipedia? Ad hominem means ‘against the person’ recheck the location of your term. Yes, within the realm of informal logic (evidence theory) character witnesses are admittable sources of testimony. The practice has such weak results though that only defense attornies grasping at straws utilize ‘character witness’ strategies. But, maybe you are acquainted with the legal system in a way that I am not and can provide proof otherwise (I don’t own many historical journals of U.S. juridical precedent).
>But, I think we agree that those who practice one sort of moral corruption often thereby fall prey to others. You seem to be arguing that the corrupt are more trustworthy than the pure. I’m sure you don’t intend doing so.>
I don’t agree. A tax evader is not more likely to kill his wife than the Acting Commissioner of the IRS. And, I don’t appreciate the attempt at framing my argument. The actual events of Gruen’s allegations must be addressed. What about the church endorsement which accompanied Gruen’s testimony? What did he have to gain, he pastored a very large and successful church during that period–how was Bickle a personal threat to the extent that Gruen would care to lay his own rep. on the line to assassinate Bickle’s character. But, if attention can be diverted from these questions then dealing with the content of Gruen’s allegations can be more easily circumvented.
So, we could continue arguing about arguing but I really don’t want to spend my Sunday afternoon in that pursuit. Bickle’s pastoral ethic and discernment is certainly under indictment by his endorsment of such characters as Jones and Cain. Not to mention the organization which he founded–IHOP–on the foundation of the flash in the pan hucksterism seen in the KCP phenomena of the early ’90’s. Bickle struggles to maintain legitimacy within evangelicalism without paying proper attention to the faulty Neo-Montanist roots of his own construct. Sadly, he has convinced a generation (most of whom were between 0 and 10 during the KCP debacle) inculcated by relativism that his new teachings are valid due to the influence of such ‘prophetically gifted’ individuals as Cain and Jones. If Cain and Jones (among others) are truly the foundation of Bickle’s influence then there is much to be said indeed. I personally don’t think that anyone need ‘dig up’ any dirt on Bickle other than what is plainly in sight, but which has been artfully redecorated and explained away with over-spiritualized doublespeak and Post-Modern platitudes. I say, give the unsanitized version of the prophetic history, warts and all, and let the young IHOP inductees decide from there.
Don’t argue Greek with me man. I was trying to poke fun at myself and be nice by bringing that up. But, do you honestly think I would have said anything if I weren’t sure of my grammar? Check Matthew 8.29, Mark 1.14, Rom. 5.6, etc. in the Nestle-Aland or the USB and see that kairos is spelled with a kappa—καιρός . You can find a pretty comprehensive working definition here:
http://english.ttu.edu/kairos/layers/metaphor.html
Please. The fact that you can’t tell a kappa from a chi is more than enough evidence that you enjoy talking about things that you don’t really comprehend. And, I mean that in the kindest way possible.
March 9, 2008 at
TJ,
Accepting repentance and restoration to preaching positions which effect other honest believer’s lives are two different things. Temporal activity yields temporal consequence. In Jones’ case he used his ‘gift’ to persuade women to provide him with private pleasure. Cain used prophetic visions to validate his celibacy thereby masking his affinity for same-sex attraction. How could a church or church leaders ever place them in positions of influence within the body of Christ again? It is simply ludicrous.
March 9, 2008 at
#35
I agree with you but in my attempt to answer my own arguement/debate/statement in this I could see where someone might take what I said and say something to the effect that if David was forgiven should we then not forgive also.
Personal experience of a church leader that I knew who was convicted of rape/molestation who came to the church after he had served his time and asked forgiveness, recieved it from us because we interpreted the scriptures that we must, BUT, we also stated after the meeting with the person, actually to his face, that we can forgive him but we didn’t have to trust him and he would no longer be allowed to minister in the church in the capacity he had done in the past. he was also given guidelines if he was to stay. If over time he followed these guidelines and proved his trustworthiness to us, he would be allowed back in ministry.
He chose not to stay because we did not embrace him fully and just let him back in a place that would be of danger for himself as well as others. My point being, I can because I believe the bible tells us to forgive, forgive these men but at the same time it will be a long, long time before I would ever trust them in a position as a “PROPHET” in the church, if there were even such a thing today.
Since these men still teach the heresy as stated in 1948 by the AG church, the neo-montanist error and it is obvious that they will until their last breath (unless the Lord performs a miracle) then I stand on the foundation that the fruit has not changed therfore they are in error and teaching false biblical/extra-biblical interpretations.
I was addressing the whole lne of thought about what ever the “personal issue” was with EG. I did not agree with post 30 and agreed totally with post 31
March 9, 2008 at
TJ,
Good words.
March 9, 2008 at
TJ,
Yup.
March 9, 2008 at
Chairos Seeker,
I think to end this all, I’ll just write a report called “The Ernie Gruen Report - 20 years later.” If I can keep my self squeeky-clean maybe it won’t be discounted. Wait a minute- even if I fall, it would still be true…. What ever shall we do?
Oh I get it- how ’bout we judge things against the WORD OF GOD? Yeah, that’s the ticket - we could call it a “plumbline.”
Much better.
March 10, 2008 at
Folks, you’re making wrong inferences about my opinion. I’m sure I’ve contributed to that by taking some positions that you reject. But, I’ve done so only because I’m concerned to be intellectually honest and fair. Quibbles about evidence and argumentation aside, I come to the same conclusion as most of you here: the EG report was substantially accurate. Even Bickle’s own book Growing in the Prophetic would substantiate significant errors, excesses, and problems of accountability. If you haven’t read it, I’d suggest that you do so.
I was only trying to explain that claims that EG had recanted have some basis in fact. While he doesn’t seem ever to have denied the truthfulness of his accusations, many or most of which I emphasize that I agree were true, he did stand down when Wimber became involved. As I see it, and as was explained to me at the time, he acknowledged that he did not having standing to discipline Bickle. In that very limited sense, he recanted having publicly made the charges, while continuing to insist that his charges were accurate.
I think this nuance has led to misunderstanding of the disposition of his charges. Both those who say the charges were never withdrawn and those who say they were withdrawn each have a piece of the truth.
If you incorrectly understand my statement as an attempt to vindicate Cain or Jones, I’m unsure how I can respond. It doesn’t vindicate or even defend them. But, I think it shows how some folks, particularly those who’ve come along after the fact, can innocently and even rightly claim that EG’s charges were withdrawn.
Even though I agree that EG’s claims were substantially correct, I think it’s important to emphasize that the best reason they can be accepted is because they can generally be externally corroborated, not because of EG’s trustworthiness. Arguments that he fell after he made the charges or that he was an adulterer but not a liar don’t have much power to convince.
Nat, I apologize for my error in Greek transliteration and for incorrectly construing your tone, as is so easily done in blogspace. As you point out, I’ve apparently been waylaid by a common transliteration error. I see “chairos” much more often than “kairos.” I can’t think why that is. Maybe it’s by attraction to “chronos” (time).
Knowing the similar word chairos (joy), I didn’t bother looking at my Greek text when I created the handle. But, you shouldn’t infer from a spelling error that I don’t know the alphabet. Fact is, it seems that I’m comfortable enough with Greek to sometimes fail to check the text when I should. In any case, thanks for pointing out the error. Maybe I will follow your lead and consider “chairos” a happy conflation of “chairo” and “kairos.” I do rather like that.
If any of my remarks seem to have been unkind, I apologize. Frankly, some of the remarks aimed at me hurt. And, while I tried to put aside that hurt, I may not have entirely succeeded. One’s feelings tend to leak out regardless how one’s conscious mind disposes otherwise. Nevertheless, any falling short of God’s fully unconditional love is sin.
Folks, I agree with much of what you say. In fact, we’re on the same side of most of the questions related to these issues. We disagree here and there with methods and the way we evaluate certain evidence.
But, the tone of so many remarks here is not Christlike. If you’ll forgive me for saying so, you seem to be congratulating one another on correctly seeing the truth rather than helping others to see what you’ve seen. You’d be much more effective in ministry to the undiscerning if you’d take a gentler tone with those who enter the discussion, especially those who generally agree with you.
There’s no need to hide your observations or arguments. Just consider treating folks with a little more respect, even if though don’t seem to be using their minds or otherwise deserve it. Gratuitous words and phrases such as “Wikipedia” and “driveby” are not edifying. At least, I wasn’t edified by them.
I know I have logs in my own eyes, even if I can’t see them. And, if you’d like to point out some of them, I’d be grateful. I’m not trying to tear you folks down. I’m trying to build you up.
At this point, you can count me in the “driveby” column.
Peace,
March 10, 2008 at
Chairos seeker,
Hey, the debate was just getting good. I thought you weren’t a driveby?
>Even though I agree that EG’s claims were substantially correct, I think it’s important to emphasize that the best reason they can be accepted is because they can generally be externally corroborated, not because of EG’s trustworthiness.<
That not what you said to begin with which was:
>I think EG’s moral failure is relevant to the assessment of his claims. His motives and truthfulness reasonably become suspect in the light of his subsequent actions.
“You’d be much more effective in ministry to the undiscerning if you’d take a gentler tone with those who enter the discussion”
When addressing the ‘undiscerning’ (people with honest questions, doubts, unsophisticated positions, etc.) we are markedly patient. However, you take a position making a somewhat convincing rhetorical argument and obviously display a wider scope of knowledge on the topic than some. So, sorry your feelings are hurt but if you are going to bring an argument be prepared to defend it. Sarcasm is a rhetorical tool. Oh and thanks for the ‘unChristlike’ label. I’m not surprised you would resort to that. I can empathize with how much it stings when an argument is disproven and I drop a peg in my own mind. Kind of makes me want to start calling names too sometimes
You know,I don’t really have any ‘logs’ to point out. But,if you think of more ways to ‘build us up’ maybe you could just dispense with the pleasantries and speak plainly.
March 10, 2008 at
I am still curious to know if you were there Charios? At the very church this happened at?
March 10, 2008 at
TJ, I apologize for seeming to have ignored your query. It got lost amidst some of the issues related to process and tone.
Yes, I was at the Anaheim Vineyard during and after Bob Jones’ dismissal. I was not an employee of the church and don’t claim privileged knowledge. For the most part, I know only what the church leadership announced.
John Wimber did not even speak from the pulpit the sin which Bob Jones had committed and warranted his immediate dismissal. He felt that it would be debasing even to mention it. So, I learned certain details second hand and later corroborated them with, for example, Rick Joyner’s frank account.
After 15+ years, my recollection of some details may be less than perfect. But, I’ll respond as best I can to any follow-up question you pose so long as I can answer it more or less objectively.
BTW, I think you and others here would find interesting discrepancies between Rick Joyner’s account and the account given by Bob Jones at Morningstar’s 2007 Spiritual Warfare and Deliverance Conference, which is freely available on the Manna Reserve web site. If you can tell me how to discreetly exchange e-mail addresses, I will e-mail you the 10-minute excerpt in question, which runs only about 975k.
One reason I stopped by was to learn whether others here have noted these discrepancies, which I think may explain how some innocently but wrongly approve Bob Jone’s past moral character. Unfortunately, I got sidetracked by a debate.
March 10, 2008 at
tjsmith5255@yahoo.com
March 14, 2008 at
What say, TJ: did you hear what I heard? I’m hoping to avoid having to listen to the clip a second time, as I found it distressing to listen the first time. . . .
March 14, 2008 at
CS,
I apologize I haven’t listened to it yet. I have been very busy at work and also preparing for this weekend service at church (helping lead worship).
Be patient please, I actually will have time to listen Saturday morning and then I will respond.
LOL- PTL- WWJD - DWJD - JF
TJ
March 14, 2008 at
Charios
therodofjah@gmail.com
March 14, 2008 at
CS,
I listened last night to the MP3 of the Bob Jones interview, made a copy of the MP3 and listened again this morning in the car.
1st let me say that I am not one who believes in blaming Satan for our own choices. Bob Jones surely attempted to absolved himself other than to say anger took root and he became bitter. Again his choice. I really felt like this was an attempt to put a supernatural spin on an ungly situation that HE did.
Mat 15:16 And he said, “Are you also still without understanding? 17 “Do you not see that whatever goes into the mouth passes into the stomach and is expelled?[fn4] 18 “But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. 19 “For out of the heart come [all] evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. 20 “These are what defile a person. But to eat with unwashed hands does not defile anyone.”
So when Bob ones says that he still feels at that time that he did nothing wrong, if he was walking down the street undressing women and being lustful, that was his choice to take that road, the temptation that maybe satan put in his mind and when his (Bob Jones) sinful nature and desires to hold of it, he sinned. He stated later that he wasn’t going to enter into adultry. He already did so just by thinking it as he walked down the street.
The other thing is, he (Bob Jones) didn’t deliver anyone. He gave absolutely no credit to the One who “gave him authority” over these demons he cast out.
I also think it was a very telling thing that John Wimber gave Bob Jones plane tickets and then seperated himself from the man. In the post from EG he states that John Wimber called him (EG) and told him he (EG) was right and he shouldn’t have gotten involved with Mike Bickle.
Now that I have pointed those two things out, I need to read your post above and then see if I heard what you heard from the interview. More to come.
TJ
March 14, 2008 at
TJ, I concur in your observations. I also found no mention in Jones’ account of the event/events that took place at the Anaheim Vineyard, which were the cause of his being shipped out. Jones’ seems to me to be claiming that his lust never gave way to action, which is patently false.
As a reminder, the full interview is available on the Manna Reserve web site. In marking out the clip, I did my best to ensure that all relevant information was included.
P.S. I don’t have reason to doubt that Jones’ symptoms may have begun after exposure to one or more particularly powerful demons. However, the extent to which that might absolve him is unclear to me. Certainly, a Christian can’t get a free pass by claiming “a demon made me do it” and “I was exposed to the demon only because you made me pray for really oppressed people.”
March 14, 2008 at
Potential correction: Jones’ does mention being the subject of false accusations. He may intend to allege that he never abused the woman and her daughter whose charges were accepted by John Wimber.
March 14, 2008 at
CS
I thought of that after I wrote, in that he (Bob Jones) said that the Lord, Holy Spirit, angel (not sure who was talking to him as he mentions all three) said that there would be accusations made about him that would be false accusations. So with that statement, then the women and her daughter are made out to be liers.
Not that false accusations haven’t been made before in other situations as these even in the world but seems convenient to be able to make these statements as a “prophet” and “anointed one” and therefore using the “saith the Lord” to 1) aquit oneself and 2) self reconciliation to the church.
TJ
March 14, 2008 at
“Jones’ seems to me to be claiming that his lust never gave way to action, which is patently false.
He thought it and according to our Lord that is the same as doing it even if he thinks he didn’t. He did admit to physically kissing her. WHAT JUNK!
March 14, 2008 at
TJ, I agree that lust is, in the eyes of the Lord, as serious a sin as adultery. But, we don’t generally discipline church members who fall short of acting out their sinful thoughts. So, if true, Jones’ claims would be relevant to the handling of his restoration. However, I find no evidence that a process of restoration was conducted under the authority of any local church. And, I’m extremely skeptical of his claims that he didn’t act out apart from a kiss.
To be fair to Jones, a report by Rick Joyner (given time, I can find the URL) was frank in admitting the Jones had seriously sinned in action and had wrong the woman and her daughter. So, at one point, Jones was forthright in admitting his wrongs.
The relevance I attach to the interview is that folks who hear it but don’t know the full history can be led to form an impression of Jones’ fall that isn’t complete or accurate. I recently heard a TV host praise Jones as one who had “never wavered.” Such erroneous statements may derive from the incomplete picture given in this interview, at which Rick Joyner and possibly Jack Deere were present. I’d really like to know how they’d put this together.
March 14, 2008 at
Argg!!! I just typed an answer to you CS and hit the wrong key and it all went bye bye.. Here we again…
CS
“..The relevance I attach to the interview is that folks who hear it but don’t know the full history can be led to form an impression of Jones’ fall that isn’t complete or accurate. I recently heard a TV host praise Jones as one who had “never wavered.” Such erroneous statements may derive from the incomplete picture given in this interview, at which Rick Joyner and possibly Jack Deere were present. I’d really like to know how they’d put this together.
Got ya!
I suppose most of that camp (prophetic, dominion, MSOG, etc) probably use the standard thought that there are many in the Bible that were men of God and even though they may have fallen in sin they were still used of God so the same with Bob Jones.
And why tell the whole truth and admit to anything. When you supernatural-ize the whole thing and you have a whole group of people who either don’t know the scriptures, or how to test the spirit, and are just looking towards these men as “anointed”, they can get away with anything or say just about anuthing and it is believed.
David and Bathsheba, Solomon and the mixed marriages and following after their false gods, and others. Yes God used them but the consequences seemed to fall either on the next generation or they were slain.
If I put myself in this picture as a one time follower of the teachings that come from these men and the fact that I became mentally numb to the truth. I would say that I put it together by believing these high profile people who make up tehse statements were indeed “men of God” who wouldn’t or couldn’t be decieved and decieving and I would accept whatthey said as truth. I would have never ever thought of researching or questioning what they said. Man, it’s alot different for me now.
March 14, 2008 at
Jones admitted to “Sexual misconduct (not adultery)”
[Jones] also confessed to using his ministry position to manipulate the women and in divisive and slanderous activities in the church.
(Metro Vineyard) Leaders also detailed plans for counseling and caring for the two women involved.
Christianity Today March 9, 1992
Bob Jones is one of the Kansas City Prophets. Seen by some as the most controversial of the Kansas City Prophets. Was removed from the Vineyard Anaheim because of sexual improprieties, which consisted of encouraging women to undress in his office so they could stand “naked before the Lord” in order to receive a “word.” Still active today, with the abundant support of Rick Joyner. Jones is a major proponent of Latter Rain and Manifest Sons theology.
http://www.cephas-library.com/evangelists/bob_jones_shepherd_rod.html
March 15, 2008 at
Bill, I think the CT account is essentially accurate. I note that it makes no mention of counseling/discipline for Jones, whom I understand from his interview to have moved to Florida after his dismissal. I do think it’s important to note that Rick Joyner’s account concurs in Jones having abused (my word) the women. That is my main point in encouraging comparison between the Joyner’s account and the interview, which seems to gloss over or omit the incident at Anaheim.
I suppose that some could argue that the written record is so clear and explicit that Jones need not give a full account every time he explains what transpired. But, I do not agree. I would hope that if–God forbid–I should ever be in such a place, that the main points of my message would be my personal unworthiness and the grace/mercy of God. I would also hope that I would offer no excuses or reasons for my failure. Owning those points would, I think, be minimal conditions precedent to restoration, let alone restoration to ministry.
FWIW, I’ve heard (on MP3) Paul Cain recently preach just such a message. Not that such a message disposes of all related issues. I am troubled by details of Cain’s (alleged) restoration. However, at least in his case there was a process, even if the process was rather secretive and possibly less than credible. And, at least, he forthrightly admits his sin. However, I am mindful of the joint statement by Bickle, Deere, and Joyner that unprecedented levels of deception and manipulation hindered their attempts to minister to Cain after discovery of his sin.
I am simply amazed that anyone without personal knowledge of the skills and character of Cain’s restoration team would accord the team or its claim of completed restoration any confidence or credibility. I’d really like the opportunity to dialog with such an individual. Takers?
March 15, 2008 at
Oops, I see that address tags are not permitted. Here’s the URL for Joyner’s report:
http://www.harvestnet.org/lookback/GUP.htm
March 15, 2008 at
CS,
That was just an excerpt of the the article, and even the excerpt mentioned counseling. The article was a sidebar to a bigger article on Wimber. My copy is on a server elsewhere and I can’t download it from home on dial-up.
I think that further detail on the misconduct, and a continued rehashing of those details could and would be harmful to the women involved. Of course, I also think that Jones does the church a dis-service by not retiring and perhaps getting a job as a greeter at Wal-Mart (which would be the perfect job for him, BTW).
I find this troubling:
“He had prayed for a spirit of lust to be broken off of a well-known evangelist, but he had done this without permission from the Lord. In Bob’s words, when he did this it “jumped on” him, and he could not shake it.”
Because I don’t understand why anyone would need the Lord’s permission to pray good things for another. And where is God in all of this? Does he reward such things by allowing His prophet to be overcome by this demon?
Quite frankly this is the Flip Wilson argument (”The devil made me do it”).
And why did it take the prayers of Mahesh Chavda to break it? Is God a respector of persons? I’ve had Mahesh pray for me, and well, he’s just Mahesh.
On the topic of restoration, I can list example after example of men who boasted that they were accountable. Yet when they fell, after a period of denial, they finally chose to undergo restoration. Every time they CHANGED who they were accountable to and selected another group of leaders. Perhaps that is human nature, but is makes ANY claims of accountability suspect.
March 15, 2008 at
Bill,
“That was just an excerpt of the the article, and even the excerpt mentioned counseling.”
I saw reference to counseling of the victims but didn’t see reference to counseling for Jones. Do I correctly understand that the original source mentions plans for Jones’ restoration? If so, is there any information on whether those were carried out? In that event, I’d wish to retract my good-faith claims of skepticism regarding process.
“I think that further detail on the misconduct, and a continued rehashing of those details could and would be harmful to the women involved.”
If I understand correctly, you’re suggesting that Jones may have been exercising appropriate discretion in omitting details of the Anaheim incident? I do see your point. But, it seems to me that Jones would have referred to the incident in a general way or otherwise have avoided giving the impression that his sins were only/mainly in thought rather than action. I do recognize that it’s easier to dissect a talk than give one. But, I myself would have been speaking with notes that ensured that I covered the key points.
“Because I don’t understand why anyone would need the Lord’s permission to pray good things for another.”
There’s a notion that one shouldn’t engage a demon without the Lord’s explicit permission. It’s considered one thing to pray and another to minister deliverance. This does make sense to me. I’ve received this very advice from folks experienced in deliverance ministry.
“And why did it take the prayers of Mahesh Chavda to break it? Is God a respector of persons?”
There’s a notion that it’s unsafe to pray deliverance solo. So, the emphasis shouldn’t be on Mahesh personally but on having a brother/sister present. This does make sense to me.
“Every time they CHANGED who they were accountable to and selected another group of leaders. Perhaps that is human nature, but is makes ANY claims of accountability suspect.”
Yup. Theology of the local church seems to me to be one of the key points in such matters.
March 15, 2008 at
it seems to me that to blame a demon or poor wimber for the lust of your own flesh is a lot like Adam in the garden. No God it wasnt my fault it was the woman ,no it wasnt my fault it was the serpeant. that is not repentence that is passing the buck. hmm. no personal responsability. does it bother anyone that Jones took no personal responsibility but essentially blamed it on Wimber for praying out of turn? how can one be restored with a confession like that? is there such a lack of wisdom in the church? hmm these are questions they are not meant to be read as rhetorical.what happened was wrong and i have read the news reports and wimbers own account of discipline on the matter. what i havent seen is an actual confession with contrition. but who am i right ?
March 16, 2008 at
>There’s a notion that one shouldn’t engage a demon without the Lord’s explicit permission
Well, since these guys only claim a 66% sucess rate in hearing from the Lord, that means even if they THINK they have the Lord’s permission, they are in deep do-do 34% of the time.
I mean, what, do they get a signed slip or something?
Seems like the bible says “Greater is he that is in me, then he that is in the world.” That said, I don’t think any mature Christian would have anything to fear with a demonic encounter, period.
No the empahsis was on Mahesh. I take it from the artcile that Rick Joyner was praying. If he felt he needed to have a brother with him praying, it could have been the closest usher, for pete’s sake.
Quoting Joyner: I did not want to make the same mistake that he had by trying to take authority over something that powerful alone, so I found Mahesh Chavda, and we prayed together for it to be broken off of him.
Seems to me like he LOOKED for the big gun. Which goes against my theology- the power is in JESUS, no the person praying.
Funny Mahesh story- he was praying for a friend of mine, and really pushing on him. My friend did not go down, Mahesh pushed more. Finally my friend raised his eyebrows and shrugged, and Mahesh walked on. You had to be there.
-Bill
March 16, 2008 at
“what i havent seen is an actual confession with contrition.”
The account by Joyner seems to me to indicate contrition. One could argue that it’s second hand. But, I’m not sure Jones has the language skills to write a properly contrite report.
In any case, I don’t think that our inability to spot contrition is all that relevant. What matters is the opinion of those responsible for Jones’ discipline and restoration and our assessment of their credibility. But, I’m unsure who they are and what they did. So, I end up in the same place you’re at, albeit by a somewhat different route.
Please bear in mind that my intention in pointing out this interview wasn’t to criticize Jones or those to whom he was/is responsible, whoever they are. I was trying to demonstrate that someone hearing only that interview could come away with a relatively favorable impression of Jones that downplays the extent and significance of his fall. That may explain why he’s welcome in so many places today.
March 16, 2008 at
“I don’t think any mature Christian would have anything to fear with a demonic encounter, period.”
From the standpoint of systematic theology, I agree that your argument is sound. But, folks I’ve interacted with who are experienced in deliverance ministry tend to take a more cautious approach. My guess is that they’ve learned the hard way that pride and presumption sometimes sneak up on the best of us–maybe particularly on the best of us. So, they tend to recommend first trying to get a sense of what God may be doing before taking on a deliverance case.
With respect to accuracy in hearing God, I’d suggest you’re working with soft numbers that don’t provide a basis for the sort of extrapolation you offer. I think the KCF folks were estimating accuracy of personal and large-scale prophetic words rather than accuracy of discerning God’s will in a ministry situation. Moreover, I’m personally not very confident that their estimates were well founded. And, even if they were accurate in one time and place I doubt that they generalize well.
I think one could reasonably presume that God wants to free a brother/sister from a demon. But, it seems prudent to ask Him. If He says “NO” in upper-case letters it might be worth reconsidering the situation. (I don’t mean to suggest that a Christian can be possessed by a demon. That’s a whole rabbit trail in its own right. I do believe that a Christian can be harassed and even influenced by demonic activity. However, he/she remains accountable for his/her acts irrespective of external influence.)
“Seems to me like he LOOKED for the big gun. Which goes against my theology- the power is in JESUS, no the person praying.”
I agree that he sought the most skilled and experienced partner available. My original comment goes not to the choice of partner but the advisability of having a partner.
I suspect there’s no theological difference here concerning the source of power. It’s just that, even in an area of giftedness or power, one tends to operate more effectively after opportunity to learn from experience. Even if you believe in a gift of preaching (prophecy) you’re likely to prefer listening to a seasoned preacher rather than a seminarian.
This isn’t an absolute principle, of course. An analogous claim would be that, with time to advance in maturity, one can become more effective in prayer. God being sovereign and gracious, He can and does often answer even badly put and wrongly intended prayers of spiritually immature folks. But, the spiritually mature are more likely to pray effectively; that is, according to God’s will.