Bethel Just Released a New Statement. Here's Our Take.

Bethel Just Released a New Statement. Here's Our Take. ![rw-book-cover](https://img.youtube.com/vi/AcXNqe4vg6E/maxresdefault.jpg) 🔗 **Source:** [Bethel Just Released a New Statement. Here's Our Take.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcXNqe4vg6E) > [!note]+ Document Notes > tags: [church-accountability, bethel-church, pastoral-restoration] > author: [MISSING] > source: Remnant Radio > reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcXNqe4vg6E > date created: {{date:YYYY-MM-DD}} {{time:HH:mm}} > > # 🏷️ Title: Bethel Just Released a New Statement. Here's Our Take. >  ## 🧭 Table of Contents - [📝 Summary](#-summary) - [📖 Main Content](#-main-content) - [🗒️ Notes](#️-notes) - [📚 References](#-references) - [🗣️ Paraphrase](#️-paraphrase) - [📰 Newsletter](#-newsletter) - [✅ Action Items](#-action-items) - [🧪 Hypotheses](#-hypotheses) - [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment) - [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#-accessibility-assessment) - [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#-deib-assessment) - [✅ Logical Validity](#-logical-validity) - [🛡️ DARVO Analysis](#-darvo-analysis) - [🎯 Conclusion](#-conclusion) ## 📝 Summary - Bethel Church released a new statement addressing allegations of misconduct and organizational failures - Remnant Radio hosts Joshua Lewis and Miller analyze the statement's language, transparency, and concrete actions - Key issues include: Sean Bolz's prophetic data-mining, Bob Hartley and Ben Armstrong allegations, culture of honor theology problems - Bethel announced external investigations, governance changes, and ended platforming of several leaders - Hosts appreciate the restoration vs. reinstatement distinction but critique vague language and limited specifics - Bottom line: Positive steps taken, but transparency and concrete theology changes still needed ## 📖 Main Content Remnant Radio, a charismatic Christian ministry focused on spiritual gifts and theological discernment, reviews Bethel Church's latest public statement addressing multiple scandals and organizational failures. The hosts position themselves as continuationists who support spiritual gifts but criticize abuse and manipulation within charismatic circles. ### Background Context The statement comes after allegations involving: - **Sean Bolz**: Accused of stealing prophetic words from Facebook and data-mining personal information instead of receiving genuine divine revelation - **Bob Hartley**: Multiple sexual misconduct allegations from women - **Ben Armstrong**: Allegations of attempted grooming, which Bethel initially called an "affair" rather than clergy sexual abuse - **Danny Silk's influence**: His books "Culture of Honor" and "Unpunishable" created theological frameworks that allegedly enabled cover-ups ### Bethel's Announced Changes The church outlined several reforms: - External leadership consultant Martin West/XGAP reviewing governance - Independent investigations into specific allegations - Stronger reporting pathways through third-party services - Board of elders increased involvement - Bill Johnson taking planned sabbatical - Shift from global conferences to local community focus ### Key Theological Issue: Restoration vs. Reinstatement For the first time, Bethel distinguished between restoration (healing and forgiveness) and reinstatement (returning to leadership positions). They explicitly ended platforming of Todd Bentley, Mike Bickle, Sean Bolz, and Bob Hartley. ## 🗒️ Notes #### ⏱️ [00:00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcXNqe4vg6E?t=0) Introduction and Background - Remnant Radio positions as continuationist ministry that reviews exposure content - Sean Bolz allegations: data-mining Facebook for "prophetic" words instead of divine revelation - Danny Silk's "Unpunishable" book promoted restoring problematic leaders #### ⏱️ [00:05:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcXNqe4vg6E?t=330) Pattern of Enablement - Bill Johnson endorsed Sean Bolz on TBN despite knowing character issues - Culture of cover-up instead of protection for victims - Gary Morgan (Australia) situation - Bethel knew but took no action #### ⏱️ [00:12:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcXNqe4vg6E?t=735) Analyzing Bethel's Statement Language - **Joshua Lewis critique**: Language uses "may have been helpful" and "may have appeared" - softens responsibility - **Miller observation**: Projects action without specific admissions of wrongdoing - Shift from global ministry to local community focus seen as potentially positive #### ⏱️ [00:18:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcXNqe4vg6E?t=1125) External Investigation Concerns - External doesn't necessarily mean independent if Bethel pays consultants - No transparency about who gets investigation results - Missing details about consultant credentials and independence #### ⏱️ [00:25:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcXNqe4vg6E?t=1530) Culture of Honor Theology Review - Bethel reviewing "honor, accountability, restoration, reconciliation, authority structures" - Danny Silk's Culture of Honor creates closed-loop system discouraging discernment - Physics of Heaven and Passion Translation also problematic but not addressed #### ⏱️ [00:32:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcXNqe4vg6E?t=1920) Restoration vs. Reinstatement Distinction - **Positive development**: First time Bethel acknowledged difference between forgiveness and returning to leadership - **Concern**: No clear theology of punishment or specific reinstatement criteria - Sean Foy notably absent from de-platformed list despite ongoing fraud allegations ## 📚 References - [Mike Winger's Sean Bolz videos](https://www.youtube.com/@MikeWinger) - Danny Silk's "Culture of Honor" and "Unpunishable" books - Bethel Church Reading official statement - BSSM (Bethel School of Supernatural Ministry) context ## 🗣️ Paraphrase Bethel Church released a statement addressing multiple scandals involving sexual misconduct, data-mining fake prophecies, and theological frameworks that enabled predator protection over victim care. While the church announced external investigations, governance changes, and ended some problematic partnerships, critics argue the language remains too vague and avoids specific theological repentance. The hosts appreciate the new distinction between restoration (forgiveness) and reinstatement (return to leadership) but want clearer criteria and more transparency about investigation independence. ## 📰 Newsletter Charismatic churches face accountability reckonings as Bethel Church responds to mounting scandals with governance reforms and external investigations. For WordPress ministries, this highlights the importance of transparent leadership structures, independent oversight mechanisms, and clear policies distinguishing between forgiveness and platform restoration. Consider implementing robust reporting systems, third-party accountability partnerships, and theological frameworks that prioritize victim protection over leadership reputation management. ## ✅ Action Items #### Community - Develop clear restoration vs. reinstatement policies for church leadership misconduct - Create independent reporting pathways that don't flow through accused leadership - Establish theological frameworks prioritizing victim protection over leader restoration - Review honor culture teachings that may discourage healthy discernment and accountability #### WordPress - **Documentation**: Create accountability and misconduct reporting guidelines for community leaders - **Community Team**: Establish independent oversight mechanisms for leadership conduct reviews - **Training**: Develop resources distinguishing between forgiveness and platform privileges restoration ## 🧪 Hypotheses - Vague corporate language in apologies indicates legal consultation prioritizing liability over transparency - Culture of Honor theology systematically undermines critical thinking and accountability in charismatic churches - External investigations funded by accused organizations lack true independence - Restoration-focused theology without punishment concepts enables repeat offenses - Public pressure from alumni and victims drives more change than internal accountability mechanisms ### 📊 Methodology - Rhetorical analysis of official church statements comparing specificity vs. vagueness - Theological content analysis of Culture of Honor teachings and their practical implementation - Comparative study of church investigation independence based on funding and oversight structures ### ❓ Questions - What specific criteria will Bethel use for future leadership reinstatement decisions? - How truly independent can investigations be when funded by the accused organization? - Which other charismatic leaders should be investigated for enabling these patterns? - What theological alternatives to "culture of honor" better balance grace with accountability? ### 🔮 Future Research - Long-term tracking of whether Bethel's governance changes produce measurable cultural shifts - Analysis of how charismatic theological frameworks intersect with abuse enablement - Comparative study of church accountability mechanisms across denominational traditions ### 💡 Implications - **Practice**: Churches need independent accountability structures, not internally controlled investigations - **Policy**: Distinction between restoration and reinstatement should become standard across church governance - **Theology**: Honor culture teachings require systematic review for accountability-undermining elements - **Education**: Charismatic leadership training must include robust safeguarding and transparency components ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment Reading level: College level (Grade 14-16) due to theological terminology and complex organizational analysis #### 👀 Visual learners - Present: Detailed discussion of organizational structures and leadership hierarchies - Improve: Add organizational charts showing before/after governance structures, timeline graphics of scandal revelations #### 🔊 Aural learners - Present: Full video discussion format with multiple speakers - Improve: Provide audio summary with key takeaways, chapter markers for easier navigation #### 🗣️ Verbal learners - Present: Clear definitions of restoration vs. reinstatement, theological terms explained - Improve: Add glossary of charismatic terminology, comparison tables of theological positions #### 🧩 Kinesthetic learners - Present: Step-by-step analysis of statement sections - Improve: Create accountability framework checklists, policy development worksheets #### 🧠 Logical learners - Present: Systematic critique of language patterns, cause-and-effect analysis - Improve: Add decision trees for reinstatement criteria, accountability process flowcharts ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment #### Screen reader semantics - Present: Clear heading structure, descriptive content - Improve: Add alt text for any referenced documents, ensure timestamp links are properly labeled #### Contrast and readability - Present: Standard video format accessible across platforms - Improve: Provide high-contrast transcript options, summary bullet points ### 🌍 DEIB Assessment #### Cultural breadth - Present: Addresses issues relevant across charismatic denominational traditions - Improve: Include perspectives from non-Western church accountability traditions #### Representation - Present: Multiple male host perspectives - Improve: Include survivor voices, diverse theological backgrounds in future episodes ### ✅ Logical Validity #### Strong reasoning - **Causal analysis**: Effectively connects Culture of Honor theology to accountability failures through specific examples - **Pattern recognition**: Identifies consistent behavior patterns across multiple scandal cases #### Fallacies - **Appeal to authority**: Occasionally relies on "we've done episodes on this" without providing direct evidence - **Ad hominem potential**: Some characterizations of leaders could be seen as attacking character vs. actions #### Tone of voice - **Analytical but pastoral**: Balances critical examination with expressed hope for genuine reform - **Insider perspective**: Speaks as charismatic believers concerned for movement health, not external critics ### 🛡️ DARVO Analysis **Minimal DARVO present** - The analysis actually identifies where Bethel's statement employs DARVO-adjacent tactics: - **Deny**: Using "may have appeared" language minimizes actual harm done - **Attack**: No direct attacks, but deflecting to "perception" issues rather than concrete failures - **Reverse**: Positioning as victim of unfair scrutiny while maintaining leader status ## 🎯 Conclusion While Bethel's statement represents progress through external investigations and the restoration vs. reinstatement distinction, the vague language and limited theological specificity indicate incomplete repentance. True accountability requires transparent investigation processes, specific admission of systemic failures, and concrete theological reforms beyond corporate-speak promises. The charismatic movement's health depends on prioritizing victim protection over leader reputation management. --- ## Full Transcript [00:00] Hey everybody, welcome back to the [00:01] wonderful world of Vernet Radio. In this [00:02] program, we're going to be reviewing a [00:04] new statement released by Bethl Church [00:05] in Reading. Uh it's going to be exciting [00:07] program. Stay tuned. [00:11] Hey guys, my name is Joshua Lewis. Uh we [00:13] are at the Rim Radio covering things [00:15] like theology, spiritual gifts. We are [00:18] continuationist. We believe in the gifts [00:19] of the spirit. Uh but one of the things [00:21] that we do here on this channel uh as [00:23] rarely as we possibly can is reviewing [00:25] exposure content uh which involves [00:27] bringing some clarity and truth into the [00:30] charismatic space where there has been [00:32] confusion uh distrust where there has [00:35] been abuse and manipulation. So, uh, [00:37] there have been, man, recent allegations [00:40] surrounding a gentleman by the name of [00:41] Sean BSite [00:43] quite a while ago and, uh, Bethl Church [00:46] gave a response to some of those initial [00:48] critiques and concerns, begin to review [00:51] some of their policies and procedures [00:53] and now have released this statement in [00:56] response. If you don't know, uh Shawn BS [00:59] is a gentleman who had been stealing [01:01] prophetic words off of Facebook and then [01:03] revealing them, releasing them over [01:05] congregations, individuals, uh based not [01:07] on the word of the Lord, but based upon [01:09] information that he had gleaned and data [01:11] mind. Uh this was further compounded, a [01:14] little insult to injury was added when [01:17] Danny Silk's book unpunishable began to [01:20] be reviewed. uh and some of the uh core [01:22] individuals such as Jonathan Welton um [01:25] in that book as hey let's restore this [01:28] guy into ministry let's get him involved [01:29] is a self-proclaimed wolf I mean he [01:31] calls himself a wolf and when you begin [01:32] to look at his background you can go to [01:35] the minor prophets check out um an [01:37] episode on that specific exposure uh [01:40] you'll see that Danny Silk who is [01:41] pushing the culture of honor and [01:43] unpunishable over at Bethl church well [01:45] their theology has actually created this [01:47] problem their ecclesiology and [01:49] restoration process has actually created [01:51] the problem that they're now living in. [01:54] In addition, uh there has been videos uh [01:57] that have been released uh by Mike [01:59] Winger about a Shawn BS of Australia. I [02:02] can't recall his name off the top of my [02:03] head. U Miller, can you can you recall [02:05] this guy's name? [02:07] >> I don't remember, but I mean there's a [02:09] number of other people that are not that [02:11] you haven't mentioned that [02:13] >> we should also mention. [02:14] >> Go for it. Yeah. [02:16] Well, you've got allegations not just [02:18] against Shawn Bulls for uh attempting to [02:22] garner sexual activity with other men [02:25] that he was that were under him in [02:27] ministry, data mining for prophecy. But [02:30] then you got other guys like Bob Hartley [02:33] who also had done a number of really [02:35] gross and grotesque things. Uh several [02:37] women have come forward on that. Then [02:39] you've got Ben Armstrong who was on [02:40] staff at Bethl. a girl came forward [02:43] about his attempted grooming efforts [02:45] which Bethl called an affair rather than [02:48] clergy sexual abuse. [02:50] And then you've got others that they've [02:52] platformed like Brian Simmons and the [02:54] Passion translation and Sean Fo who's [02:56] got a number of allegations and right [02:58] now is being uh sued for um fraud. I [03:03] think $250,000 was given by a man named [03:06] Steven Bray who is now suing Sean Floyd [03:10] for alleged fraud. So there's just [03:12] allegation after allegation after [03:13] allegation. And what Bethl has [03:15] demonstrated time and time again was a [03:17] culture of cover up as Mike Winger has [03:20] now uh aptly coined that phrase. And so [03:24] this is a muchneeded response. We've [03:27] seen responses initially that were [03:28] really bad and then the public responds. [03:32] And not just the public, but like really [03:34] it's the BETHL alumni. I got to say, and [03:36] I've said this in the past, but it's [03:38] worth stating again. The real heroes uh [03:41] of this story are the victims who've [03:43] come forward and the Bethl alumni who've [03:45] spoken up and said this isn't okay. And [03:48] so [03:50] again, those who are who who just read [03:53] this statement that Bethl put out, which [03:54] we're going to read for you, um we we [03:57] want to address those who are easily uh [03:59] persuaded by that. um and and really [04:01] just appeal to them again because it's [04:04] you're the ones making the changes here [04:05] and there are changes happening and it's [04:07] a good direction and good change that's [04:09] happening. So [04:10] >> yeah, another thing [04:11] >> am I leaving out other names? [04:13] >> Well, I mentioned the guy that I [04:14] mentioned from Australia, his name is [04:16] Gary Morgan. The reason I bring him up [04:18] is not because he is in, you know, close [04:20] relationship with Bethl necessarily, but [04:22] they knew about the information and did [04:23] nothing with it. [04:25] >> You know, [04:25] >> Brian Simmons from the Passion is one of [04:27] his big endorsers. They they have [04:29] another uh gentleman [04:32] there at Bethl. Oh, Bill Johnson, who is [04:35] the founding pastor there. He's no [04:37] longer the pastor of Bethl Church, but [04:38] still functions in a leadership [04:41] capacity, even if it's more of a [04:43] consulting fatherly, you know, kind of [04:46] relationship there. But, you know, Bill [04:48] goes on to [04:50] what is it TBN broadcast with Sean BS [04:53] and talks about, well, man, this is this [04:55] guy this book is great. It's little [04:57] little slice of heaven, but then also [04:58] when you know the character of the guy [04:59] who wrote the book. So he knows all this [05:02] stuff about Shawn BS up at this point [05:03] and does nothing with it. And there's [05:06] conversation still about Chris Valatin [05:09] and Danny Silk and their involvement [05:11] with investigating Shawn BS and where [05:13] that process went. We've done episodes [05:15] on that if you want to get caught up. [05:16] You know, we'll link it so you can go [05:18] check those sorts of things out. But all [05:20] that being said, that kind of catches [05:22] you up to the current timeline. There is [05:23] massive distrust with Bethl church in [05:26] reading um because of the Bob Hartley's [05:29] because of the um Jonathan Welton's [05:32] because of Danny Silk and his consistent [05:35] empowerment of uh man really bad [05:38] leaders. Um then you've got, you know, [05:40] Bill's personal endorsement of guys he [05:42] knows are frauds. Then you've got this, [05:45] you know, situation over in Australia [05:47] with Gary Morgan and they know about [05:49] this but do nothing about it over and [05:51] over and over again. Uh these issues [05:54] continue to arise. There's a serious [05:56] problem uh over at Bethl when it comes [05:58] to ecclesiology and the structure of [06:00] their church. Um there are other [06:02] theological issues that we would quibble [06:04] with, but uh first things first, I think [06:06] that we have to handle some of this [06:08] exposure stuff. So, in light of all of [06:10] this, Bethl releases an apology. [06:14] We did a video reviewing Chris Valatin's [06:16] response to the Mike Winger video and [06:18] then Chris Valatin's repentance the week [06:21] later, which seemed pretty sincere and [06:23] genuine. We want to celebrate [06:25] >> a total total 180. I I was incredibly [06:30] >> Well, I think his response was so much [06:34] more meaty than Bill's response was. And [06:37] again, I just want to stress, we're not [06:39] out to crucify these guys. I know for [06:41] some people, you could easily be led [06:43] into thinking like, man, they guys those [06:45] guys about they just can't do enough and [06:47] remnants always so harsh on them. Like [06:49] that's not really our heart here. Uh we [06:51] just want to be we want to do as best as [06:53] we can to honestly evaluate it largely [06:55] because me, Michael, Josh, we are [06:58] charismatics. So we we love this stuff. [07:00] We really want to see this stuff [07:01] progress. The gifts of the spirit being [07:03] used in the church all the way around [07:04] the world. people being properly [07:06] equipped. You also just want to see [07:07] purity in all of it so that that Christ [07:09] is rightly represented. So [07:11] >> yeah, um I think we should probably dive [07:15] into the letter. You know, I we'll put [07:17] my two cents into that situation as [07:19] well. I we we celebrate the things that [07:21] we see coming out of Bethl that are good [07:23] and godly and appear to be repentant. [07:26] Um, and then on the back end, you know, [07:29] we're going to criticize things that we [07:30] think are out of step with the gospel [07:33] that might encourage and continue the [07:36] kind of abuse that we've been seeing in [07:37] the church. Um, so one of the calls, one [07:40] of the things that we say here on the [07:41] program is that we try to call balls and [07:42] strikes. That's one of the things that [07:44] we're going to consistently attempt to [07:46] do. Uh, we'll attempt to do that with [07:48] our friends. We'll attempt to do those [07:49] with people we disagree with on minor [07:51] issues. Uh, and then people who are [07:53] enemies of the cause of Christ. uh we [07:55] will we will call that strike every [07:57] time. So uh that that's our hope and [07:58] aim. So uh Miller, do you want to walk [08:00] us through this statement and uh and [08:03] we'll dive in. [08:05] >> Yeah, sure. So dear BETHL online family, [08:09] in the past few months, we have listened [08:10] to feedback from our congregation, [08:12] staff, board of elders, BSSM alumni, [08:14] online community, and leaders from [08:15] across the body of Christ. This feedback [08:17] was moving and important. It has shown [08:20] us areas in our leadership and culture [08:21] that need attention and reform. Since [08:23] February, we have been working hard to [08:25] make positive changes to our culture and [08:26] structure. Strengthening our church [08:28] community. We believe healthy ministry [08:30] begins with a strong community, active [08:32] leadership, and steady pastoral care. [08:34] This season has shown us how important [08:35] it is to strengthen those foundations. [08:37] In the fast past several months, we've [08:39] made intentional changes to our local [08:41] church and staff first. That work [08:43] includes in March 2026, reshaping Wonder [08:45] Conference to focus on serving and [08:47] ministering to the women of our church [08:48] community. April 2026, cancelling the [08:51] healing conference to redirect time, [08:52] focus, and resources towards this [08:54] priority. April, beginning gathering [08:56] staff feedback about areas in our [08:58] culture that need to be improved. April [09:00] began developing a volunteer focused [09:02] group made up of team members across our [09:03] organization to help strengthen [09:04] accountability, connection, and mission. [09:06] May reshaped our men's conference into a [09:08] more locally focused event centered on [09:10] disciplehip, community, and connection. [09:12] We are committed to showing real change [09:14] through our actions, lasting cultural [09:16] shift, and renewed commitment to live [09:18] according to standards that scripture [09:19] calls us to. Uh Josh, you want to stop [09:22] there and respond some or do you have [09:24] anything you want to say in that? [09:26] >> I think that this means something to [09:28] people who are internal who have seen [09:30] what's going on in March and April and [09:32] May. Uh to an outsider, I I don't really [09:34] know what any of this means. Um, I don't [09:37] know how focusing on connection or a [09:40] women's community event is caring for [09:42] their folks. I'm sure that it is for [09:44] people who are local, um, who are like, [09:47] "Hey, that's we're we're just addressing [09:49] these issues. They're getting feedback [09:50] from us." Again, I want to have the, uh, [09:53] rosecolored glasses and hope the best [09:57] when it comes to responses like this. [09:59] Um, so I don't know what any of that [10:00] means personally. Um, all of it seems [10:03] extremely vague up until this point that [10:05] we've been reviewing things with [10:06] leadership. I don't know what's been [10:08] reviewing what's been reviewed. I don't [10:10] know um h if there's any intent to [10:13] change some structural things up until [10:15] this point. Not seeing a whole lot I can [10:17] respond to. Got anything? [10:19] >> Okay. [10:20] >> Yeah. I just think it's important. I [10:22] know that in charismatic Christianity we [10:25] are kind of groomed to uh ex hope for [10:28] the best out of people and that's a good [10:30] thing. We you know love believes all [10:32] things. I think the area where we tend [10:34] to lack discernment is while love [10:38] believes all things and we are to be [10:39] innocent as a doves we also fail to be [10:42] shrewd as a serpent. And so there is [10:44] that component where we actually do need [10:46] to use some critical thinking skills to [10:47] assess and evaluate what's happening [10:49] around us. Now that said I don't want to [10:51] be overly critical and that is also an [10:54] area of temptation for all of us. And so [10:56] right now I'm with Josh. There's not a [10:58] whole lot said here. I think what [10:59] they're trying to communicate is instead [11:01] of focusing on their global reach, [11:03] they're actually trying to hone in and [11:05] take care of the family they have there [11:07] within the Bethl community. I think [11:09] that's actually a beautiful and good [11:10] thing and probably considering how many [11:13] people on the inside that they're [11:15] directly responsible for were hurting [11:16] based on the failures to expose guys [11:19] like Shawn Bulls. And that failure to [11:22] expose him meant more people got hurt. [11:24] The failure to expose Bob Hartley meant [11:26] more people got hurt. The failure to [11:28] expose a number of these leaders means [11:29] more people got hurt. And so if you're [11:32] on the inside of that church and you're [11:34] watching this happen and you're saying, [11:35] "My leaders failed me. How can I trust [11:37] them? I don't even know if I can come [11:38] here." It's like, well, yeah, they need [11:39] to double down on their efforts to take [11:41] care of in-house things. And so I can [11:44] see that, especially when it comes to [11:45] the women's conference, especially [11:46] because it was women by and large who [11:48] were hurt by these people. It makes [11:51] sense that they do that. So let's [11:53] continue though. [11:54] Let me let me jump right in there [11:56] because that was one of the critiques. [11:58] Now that you brought it up, it does jog [11:59] a memory of mine. When the first Mike [12:02] Winger video released, Chris Valatin [12:04] kept appealing to the fact that he had [12:06] this big international public global [12:08] audience that he was pastoring and he [12:10] didn't know how to do that. And one of [12:12] the things that we critiqued was like, [12:14] dog, you have a local community you're [12:16] supposed to protect and you're not [12:17] protecting them. And if to your point, [12:20] if that is what is being communicated [12:22] here on, hey, we're focusing on our [12:24] local assembly, we're caring for those [12:27] people, that's a that's a huge change [12:29] that I want to celebrate. That's a big [12:30] deal. Again, I'm not necessarily getting [12:33] that from this, but after you mentioned [12:35] it, I'm like, hey, that's a really great [12:36] way of reading it. I really hope that's [12:37] what's taking place. So, again, would [12:39] want to celebrate that. [12:42] >> Cool. All right, I'll keep reading. uh [12:44] where we are. We want to update you [12:46] about our ongoing progress in [12:47] leadership, governance, church culture, [12:49] platforming, and community support. [12:51] Looking back, we recognize specific [12:52] challenges which could have been handled [12:54] more consistently with our biblical [12:55] principles. The engagement of outside [12:58] professionals early earlier may have [13:00] been helpful and we could have provided [13:02] more open communication offered clearer [13:03] timelier responses. At times, our [13:06] emphasis on internal discussions and [13:08] confidential processes may have appeared [13:10] to limit accountability resulting in [13:13] unintentional harm to individuals both [13:14] within and beyond our church community. [13:17] Um, regarding governance and leadership, [13:20] some of what uh some of that work has [13:21] included the following. We have engaged [13:24] external leadership consultant Martin [13:25] West and XGAP to review our governance. [13:28] An organizational structure, lead [13:30] leadership culture and operational [13:31] health. Martin XGAP has worked with many [13:34] organizations and churches around the [13:35] world helping build healthier leadership [13:38] teams and culture. Our day-to-day [13:40] operational, financial, and leadership [13:41] is now being carried by an executive [13:43] team. This team is led by Steve Moore [13:45] and Richard Gordon. Pastors Bill [13:47] Johnson, Chris and Kathy Ballatin, and [13:49] Dan Fairley will continue in their roles [13:51] as founders and senior spiritual leaders [13:53] as part of strengthening healthy [13:55] governance practices. Decisions [13:57] regarding organizational structure, [13:58] cultural view, and accountability [14:00] processes are being guided by [14:02] appropriate oversight structures, [14:04] independent input, and executive [14:05] leadership. We have increased [14:06] involvement and oversight from our board [14:08] of elders. Pastor Bill is on sobatical [14:11] originally planned with the members of [14:12] the board of elders in summer of 2025. [14:15] Okay, so next would be the reporting on [14:17] accountability and safety. So let's just [14:19] talk about the where they're at and the [14:21] governance and leadership, some of the [14:23] updates they have there. Josh, we go [14:25] first. Well, I I'll I'll take a stab at [14:28] one statement that is representative, I [14:31] think, of a lot of what I read in this [14:33] letter and picked up on. Um, the [14:36] engagement of outside professionals [14:38] earlier may have been helpful. Our [14:40] emphasis on uh intentional discussion [14:43] and confidential process may have [14:45] appeared to limit accountability [14:47] resulting in unintentional harm. this [14:50] language of may um appear unintentional [14:56] um uses language that instead of like [14:59] plainly stating, "Guys, we were wrong [15:01] about this. We really screwed this up. [15:02] We're sorry. Um it it repackages [15:06] everything as perception rather than [15:09] rooting things in truth. This is what [15:11] happened. This was bad. We did this [15:13] wrong." To be fair, this letter was [15:15] likely crafted with a bunch of lawyers [15:17] present. um and or went through some [15:20] kind of screening process to make sure [15:24] PR does what PR does. Um but I think [15:27] that victims know that there was real [15:28] harm done. And I think when someone is [15:30] reading this, you have to keep that in [15:32] mind as well. And when you use language [15:34] like may have been helpful, may have [15:36] appeared to limit accountability [15:38] resulting in unintentional harm. Um that [15:41] that boils everything down to perception [15:44] instead of hey guys, we're sorry if this [15:46] really betrayed your trust by doing [15:47] this. this is why we did it. Explain it, [15:49] not justify it, and then go, okay, maybe [15:52] we can do this better moving forward. [15:54] Um, which it seems like they're trying [15:56] with bringing someone else in. I don't [15:58] know this guy. I don't know this guy's [15:59] credentials. Um, but I would be careful [16:01] with some of this language. Uh, it's not [16:05] my favorite if I'm going be honest. [16:08] >> Yeah. Okay, great. They're bringing [16:10] external help. Uh, organizations need to [16:12] do this, especially when there's serious [16:14] failures that the main leaders have [16:16] committed. It's like what you've just [16:17] done is shown that you leaders are [16:19] actually not capable of evaluating the [16:20] situation. Your tendency is to protect [16:23] the perpetrator and not the victim to [16:25] restore the perpetrator and not the [16:27] victim. And that's been time to time [16:29] what's happen here. I I think there was [16:31] a clip that I uh something I said that [16:34] you guys clipped that went kind of viral [16:35] because I I called out Chris Ballatin [16:37] for rushing to restore Mike Pickle and [16:40] yet saying nothing about what it looks [16:42] like for him to put efforts into [16:43] restoring the victims. And so, uh, it's [16:46] good. They recognize, hey, we've failed. [16:48] We need outside help, and they're going [16:50] to get that help. The problem is is I [16:52] don't know what this help is. You know, [16:54] what's not stated, uh, is actually kind [16:56] of important. It doesn't tell us, you [16:59] know, what prompted the review. I mean, [17:01] I'm assuming what prompted it was their [17:03] failures, but you should state that [17:06] whether there was any kind of um [17:09] misconduct on their part that that [17:11] actually so owning that misconduct and [17:12] saying here's why we're doing this [17:15] because here's where we failed. I get [17:17] that they kind of did that in their [17:18] former statement, but it needs to also [17:19] be in the statement as well. And then [17:21] when it comes to the those who are doing [17:23] the investigation a little bit about [17:25] them like okay are the the findings of [17:28] their investigation this outside [17:29] consulted team is it going to be made [17:31] public? Uh who hired the consultants? Uh [17:34] who pays them? I'm assuming BETHL pays [17:36] them. I think that kind of goes without [17:38] saying but it doesn't state that. And [17:39] then that that's kind of important [17:41] because it reminds you that if this [17:43] investigation is being paid for by Bethl [17:46] then who gets the results of those [17:48] findings? Does it automatically go [17:50] public or does it just come to an [17:52] internal channel where then lawyers [17:54] prepackage what's said so that it can be [17:56] stated publicly without any potential [17:59] backlash or PR nightmares? Um, and then [18:03] can people who are interviewed can they [18:06] be interviewed confidentially with the [18:08] results of the investigation leaving [18:11] those people who are interviewed still [18:13] confidential? So it it just again [18:15] external doesn't necessarily mean [18:17] independent and that's a big problem. I [18:19] just don't know what to do with that. So [18:21] uh there needs to be more information. [18:23] There needs to be more transparency. Uh [18:26] and that reform I mean the the the [18:28] transparency they talk about here where [18:29] they sort of acknowledge like hey our [18:31] lack of transparency has actually harmed [18:34] people but you're still kind of not [18:35] being transparent and that's what we [18:37] want. That's what we need. And that's [18:39] because trust has been broken. And I say [18:41] that trust has been broken. [18:44] Um, people are going, "Well, Remnant [18:46] Radio, it's not like you guys need to [18:48] have their trust." Well, no. To be fair, [18:50] we all do. They put themselves out there [18:52] as a public trustworthy uh resource to [18:56] source other churches to bring in the [18:58] kingdom and usher in all that heaven has [19:00] for earth. And I I think I don't know [19:03] about you, Josh, I used to look to [19:04] Bethl. I stopped a long time ago because [19:07] I was seeing major failures. Um but they [19:09] were the example church and they put [19:11] themselves out there to be the example [19:12] church. So again um that public response [19:15] and that public transparency, it [19:17] actually does matter. [19:19] >> Yeah, that was a whole mouthful. [19:20] >> No, it's good. It's great. I'm seeing [19:22] another thing in here as part of [19:24] strengthening healthy healthy governing [19:26] practices after saying Bill Johnson, [19:28] Chris Valatin, um Danny Dan Farley, all [19:33] of these guys are still in their [19:35] executive leadership roles as spiritual [19:37] leaders and founders of their space. [19:40] They go on to say a part of [19:41] strengthening healthy governing [19:42] practices practice decisions regarding [19:45] organizational structure c cultural [19:46] review and accountability processes are [19:48] being guided by operative oversight [19:51] structures independent input and [19:54] executive leadership. That doesn't mean [19:56] I don't know what that even means. Um it [19:59] says hey our leaders are still leading [20:02] but we're going to have we're going to [20:04] have structures put in place for healthy [20:05] governance practice. [20:08] your leaders were the ones who put those [20:10] governance practices in place, the ones [20:13] that you already had. And you're, it [20:15] looks like you're looking to those [20:16] leaders to do the same thing. To be [20:18] fair, they suggest that there's [20:20] oversight structures. They say their [20:22] board of elders is going to be more [20:23] involved. Maybe that's coming from their [20:25] internal board. Um, accountability [20:27] processes uh uh being guided for [20:31] oversight structures. Again, I don't [20:32] know what that means. Independent input. [20:34] I mean, does that mean that you're [20:35] having like Todd Bentley give input? [20:38] Like, I don't know what that means. And [20:40] and again, I'm not saying that Bethl [20:41] Church is looking to Todd Bentley, [20:43] right? I'm just saying like [20:44] >> it's certainly not Todd Bentley, but [20:45] >> I know it's certainly not, right? But [20:47] but that's what I'm asking the question [20:48] kind of tongue and cheek to say, is it a [20:51] Patricia King? Is it some someone else [20:53] that everyone is right now looking to [20:55] going, yikes, you have been caught in [20:58] scandal after scandal, too. You knew [21:00] about a lot a lot of this stuff and [21:02] haven't done anything about it. you [21:03] participated in cover up. I mean, what [21:06] kind of leaders are they bringing in to [21:09] give independent input that I think for [21:12] me if and Bethl's not trying to win me, [21:14] right? Like necessarily. But if I'm [21:16] going to Bethl church and I'm saying, [21:18] "Hey, [21:19] I want to know what's going on. Thank [21:21] you for, you know, giving me direction [21:22] of our future." I'm gonna have this [21:24] question which is who are these leaders? [21:26] Who are these external inputs that [21:29] you're getting? And then how much [21:31] executive leadership team has a say? How [21:33] much does the board have a say? [21:36] Those are those are questions because if [21:38] someone says, you know, hey, I'm so [21:42] sorry this thing happened in our church [21:43] recently. You know, this horrible abuse [21:45] took place. We're we're getting involved [21:48] in in in restructuring things. We're [21:49] keeping all the leadership exactly where [21:51] they are, but we're just going to we're [21:52] going to look at restructuring. I think [21:54] you you owe it to the member of your [21:57] church to give some details on what that [21:59] looks like. Unless, of course, you're [22:01] just saying we haven't yet put up a [22:03] structure. We're waiting to do that, [22:04] which I think is what they said in their [22:06] last letter. So, I'm I'm not quite [22:08] seeing how this is informative of [22:11] actually what's happening in their [22:12] assembly as of yet. [22:14] >> It's I I this is kind of fun because I [22:18] get to put to practice my my degree in [22:20] college. My degree was rhetoric and [22:22] communication. So uh what what I see [22:25] here is there's everything about this [22:31] statement it projects and uh [22:34] communicates action. Look we did this in [22:36] March and we did this in March and then [22:37] we did this in April and April and April [22:39] and May. So here's all the actions we're [22:42] taking. Here's how we're taking [22:43] responsibility. And it it projects that [22:45] that that [22:47] persona of we're the kinds of people [22:49] that take responsibility. We're the [22:50] kinds of people who take clean up our [22:51] mess. But then when it doesn't give you [22:54] any details, there's really no admission [22:57] of anything. And that's the really tough [22:59] part. Now, the thing is, I actually [23:01] believe they're taking steps. I I really [23:03] do. I believe that part of it. I believe [23:04] they're taking actions. They're [23:06] consulting the outside. [23:08] >> But the thing is, public trust is right [23:10] now what you need. And if you can't [23:12] state the sins and the failures [23:14] explicitly, [23:16] then it's really hard to know that [23:18] repentance and change has truly [23:20] happened. And so we need specifics. And [23:22] I I get why they do this. There's [23:24] there's this is a PR nightmare for them. [23:27] And I wouldn't be surprised if Bethl's [23:30] financials are suffering. I don't know. [23:32] I mean, this is me purely speculating [23:34] here, but I I've got to wonder with a PR [23:37] nightmare like this, what would rise up [23:40] when suddenly parents go, I'm not [23:42] sending my kids there. Um, you know, I'm [23:45] not paying for you to go to that [23:46] ministry school. Um, that was a major [23:48] avenue of finances and that's suddenly [23:50] gone. And people, they plan budgets on [23:53] those things. So, I just I I know how [23:56] it's what it's like running an [23:57] organization. I And so, I I get it. Um [24:00] but we we need details and that those [24:03] details yeah they might cost you and but [24:05] that that's actually what's needed [24:07] because of how trust has been broken. So [24:09] let's continue Josh [24:11] >> please. [24:13] >> Okay. Um where do we leave off? [24:16] Recording accountability and safety that [24:18] work includes February 2026. An [24:20] independent organization with expertise [24:21] in complex investigations is leading the [24:23] inquiry into allegations involving a [24:26] specific leader and a response. And that [24:29] seems like one leader. Um, we will not [24:31] comment further while the investigation [24:33] is ongoing because the process is [24:34] independent. We do not oversee its [24:36] timeline. In February 2026, we continued [24:39] third party safe church reporting [24:41] pathways through Miratech, formerly [24:43] known as Centrio. In March 2026, we [24:46] expanded review, escalation, and [24:48] follow-up processes related to safe [24:50] church reports, including clarified [24:51] reporting and escalation pathways, [24:53] strengthened follow-up expectations, and [24:55] additional review measures for concerns [24:57] involving misconduct, coercion, misuse [24:59] of spiritual authority, and leadership [25:01] dynamics. In March and April, we began [25:03] our consultation with the outside [25:05] professionals in clergy accountability, [25:07] misuse of authority, and leadership [25:08] dynamics in preparation for the [25:10] increased training this summer. In [25:12] April, we strengthen our review [25:13] processes for allegations involving [25:15] misconduct or misuse of spiritual [25:16] authority. More than just building [25:18] stronger systems, we believe God is [25:20] calling us to create a healthier [25:21] culture. We want our co our church [25:23] family to be known for God's presence, [25:25] purity, power, humility, wisdom, [25:27] integrity, healthy leadership, [25:29] accountability, safety, and real [25:31] pastoral care. Uh, okay. I'm going to [25:34] pause there, Josh, because I don't want [25:36] to go to the next. The next one will be [25:37] wider culture and ministry review. [25:39] >> Yeah. Uh so the February 20 26 [25:42] independent organization with experience [25:44] in complex investigation is leading the [25:46] inquiry into allegations involving a [25:48] specific leader and our response. So you [25:52] mentioned hey that looks like it's only [25:53] one leader. I think our assumption is [25:55] that's Bob Hartley. That's my assumption [25:58] is because there's allegations. [26:00] >> My assumption my assumption is it's [26:02] internal. It has to do with [26:05] Ben Armstrong. But I mean, if it's an [26:08] investigation that's ongoing, he's Yeah, [26:10] that's probably what it is. [26:12] >> That that's what that's that's the [26:13] person I meant. I apologize. I'll maybe [26:15] I'll cut that. Um, but yeah, the idea is [26:17] I I think that's likely Bit Armstrong. I [26:19] got the wrong name just a second ago. [26:21] Um, but but here's the thing. I think [26:25] people who need to be investigated and I [26:28] say this like I know this is gonna upset [26:29] some people but like I I think Chris [26:32] Valatin and Danny Silk need to be [26:33] investigated as to how much they knew [26:36] what they did what they didn't do and [26:38] Bill [26:39] >> because really we know these guys are [26:42] bad dudes like that's been made plain to [26:45] the public eye if you release a [26:47] statement [26:47] >> say these guys you mean you mean the [26:49] predators not Bill Johnson [26:50] >> the offenders not those three that I [26:52] mentioned clarify because that sounds [26:55] Thank you. Thank you, Michael. Yeah. [26:56] Yeah. Yeah. You know, Sean BS and um [27:00] these these various individuals who come [27:02] out, I don't want to get their names [27:03] wrong, Ben Armstrong. These individuals [27:05] who are at Bethl. I think in the public [27:07] eye, we already we distrust. We think [27:09] these guys are are wolves. They're [27:12] they're not healthy dudes. Um I I think [27:14] what we actually need an investigation [27:16] on is the discernment of the people in [27:18] charge. Um, if I was a member of Bethl, [27:22] I it would be easy for me to say these [27:25] the wolves are wolves, but like my [27:26] shepherds are are they just like wholly [27:30] uninformed and unable to make [27:32] discernment, you know, function [27:34] appropriately because that would [27:36] determine whether they needed to step [27:38] down or not. And I've said it not in our [27:40] major Bethl videos, but like I really [27:43] think that the right response for these [27:46] guys is to step down and let another [27:48] group of leaders come in to try and [27:50] restore confidence in the leadership of [27:52] Bethl and steer them into a different [27:55] direction. Um, but I mean those are [27:58] those are my two cents on some of this. [28:00] You know, I'm glad that they're, you [28:02] know, making more robust their reporting [28:05] process. I'm I'm glad they have some [28:07] kind of independent investigation. I [28:09] would love to know who that was with. Um [28:11] because again, that makes a world of [28:13] difference on who's doing the [28:15] investigation. What organization are [28:17] they trained to do that? Is it a lawyer [28:20] group? Um or is it a truly independent [28:23] investigation of people who have [28:25] practice looking for these sorts of [28:27] things? Um yeah, I mean that those are [28:30] those are my initial thoughts on the [28:32] reporting accountability and safety. [28:36] Yeah. Um, there's a lot of like [28:39] corporate jargon. [28:42] It's good actually. I mean, I don't like [28:44] corporate jargon. I like [28:47] they value and what they're and that [28:49] they're bringing in outside help to help [28:51] them accomplish pursuing those values. [28:53] So, like healthy governance practices, [28:55] um, organizational structure, uh, [28:57] anything that involves sort of reform. [29:00] Um, and I I like that and the fact that [29:02] there's independent input being given to [29:05] the organization. What I there are still [29:08] things that are lacking like I I want to [29:09] see words like repentance and confession [29:12] and specifics around areas where they've [29:14] failed in the past. You know, there is [29:16] something sort of alluded to though. You [29:18] know, the fact that the elders were [29:20] previously well, it says that they're [29:22] going to be more involved. Okay, that [29:24] means they might have been previously [29:26] not super involved, [29:28] which is a good thing. I think also the [29:32] the language of Bill being on sbatical, [29:34] that's intentional, right? They're [29:35] trying to make sure that we know that [29:38] everybody knows this isn't a forced [29:40] sabbatical for Bill or Bill's not [29:42] getting a paid vacation because he he [29:44] failed. Like, this was already in the [29:45] works and planned. And I I get that and [29:48] that does happen coincidentally. um he [29:51] you know he's probably going to get the [29:53] most scrutiny uh as the founder and [29:56] that's how that works. It's always if [29:57] it's you have a top down organization [29:59] then the blame ends up going back to the [30:01] top and and rightly so especially in [30:03] this situation and so yeah they're being [30:07] very intentional in the language here. [30:08] Um and I'm not saying that's bad. I [30:10] actually think that's that's good. You [30:11] want to make sure you're looking at all [30:13] of these things and making sure that [30:14] things can't be miscommunicated. [30:16] Um, so, uh, I see overall a positive [30:20] shift here. Um, again, uh, time will [30:23] tell like where is the repentance and [30:26] confession here? Um, and I and I know [30:28] that they've done that in the past, but [30:30] that's still specific statements, [30:33] specific failures. Uh, the reason you [30:35] need this reform is because there was a [30:38] problem here in the past where we as [30:39] leaders failed. And so, the area where [30:41] we leaders failed is also an area that [30:43] needs to be investigated. All of us need [30:45] our own psyche kind of checked out. And [30:47] quite frankly, I'd love that. If I was [30:49] going to uh if there was a suddenly had [30:52] the funds to do an internal [30:53] investigation because of allegations, [30:55] I'm like, cool, this is great. Let's [30:58] let's investigate us as leaders because [31:00] whatever they find is going only going [31:02] to help us become more like Christ at [31:03] the end of the day. And so, they should [31:05] welcome that. And maybe they are. It's [31:07] just not explicitly stated. Uh the only [31:10] person that we know of that's probably [31:11] being investigated is Ben Armstrong. And [31:13] yet I wish that the leadership had been [31:15] investigated on some level to understand [31:17] how it is that we got where we are. Um [31:19] but I think what they're doing is mostly [31:21] looking at systems and overall health [31:23] and pictures. So Josh, do you have any [31:26] more to comment on that? [31:28] >> Yeah, you know, you said like in this [31:29] one there's not a whole lot of apology [31:31] and taking ownership of what's happened. [31:33] Um is that appropriate in this letter? [31:36] Like I I'm I was asking myself the same [31:38] question when I read it going, "Hey, [31:40] this isn't a much of an apology." But [31:42] then I go, [31:43] >> they released a public video [31:46] >> they they released a public letter. Like [31:48] I don't necessarily want to scrutinize [31:50] them for saying, "Hey guys, here's an [31:51] update on our apology." Um remember how [31:54] repentance needs to be followed by [31:57] actions. Like we we can't just be Zakius [32:00] and be like, "I'm sorry for stealing [32:01] everybody's money." We have to be Zakius [32:03] who says, "I'm sorry for stealing [32:04] everybody's money and hears it back." [32:06] Right? Some kind of restitution. And it [32:09] looks like they're taking I don't see [32:12] anything about restitution in this [32:13] letter yet. Right. Um what we see [32:16] >> I see actions and evaluations. [32:19] >> Actions and evaluations trying to not [32:22] rectify the past as much as it is to [32:25] create safeguards moving forward so this [32:27] kind of thing doesn't happen again. I [32:29] still and that's good. I think that's [32:30] part of repentance. It's really changing [32:32] that's probably changing your direction. [32:34] That's great. I still need restitution. [32:36] and I'm not seeing it yet, but uh [32:38] looking forward to it still. [32:41] >> Well, the the reason I think it's [32:43] actually important is because in the [32:45] past, what they've done is restored [32:46] predators rather than restoring victims. [32:49] And so the emphasis on victims, it needs [32:52] to be higher and higher in the language [32:54] that they communicate publicly and [32:56] actions that they take. So that [32:58] restoration part of it to the victims, [33:00] again, victims, we didn't do enough for [33:03] you. Like I'm still wondering if Jubilee [33:06] has ever been contacted by Bethl and uh [33:09] at this point I I doubt she even wants [33:11] to hear from him. You know, it's like [33:12] almost too little too late. But still [33:14] acknowledgement of what she's gone [33:15] through. So I don't know. You might be [33:18] right. Maybe I'm being overcritical [33:20] there, but considering how things have [33:22] functioned in the past, it's like I want [33:24] that. [33:26] Okay, let's move on. Let's go. Uh wider [33:28] culture and ministry review. We've also [33:30] begun broader cultural and ministry [33:32] review with input from internal [33:34] stakeholders and external experts to [33:36] provide greater objectivity, [33:37] accountability, and independent [33:38] perspective. Areas currently under [33:40] review include leadership culture and [33:42] accountability, prophetic ministry [33:44] oversight and training, pastoral [33:46] standards and conduct, reporting and [33:48] escalation processes, platforming [33:50] practices, restoration processes, and [33:53] leadership reinstatement. uh reviewing [33:55] biblical theology and cultural framework [33:57] that helped shape our community and [33:59] culture including teachings related to [34:01] honor, accountability, restoration, [34:03] reconciliation, authority structures, [34:05] examining how these frameworks are [34:07] understood, communicated, and applied by [34:09] Bethl leadership and throughout the [34:11] Bethl community. Okay, I this part I [34:14] love like yes, these are the things that [34:16] led to everything you're into. um you're [34:20] reviewing these policies, these values [34:23] that are the and that's just your [34:25] values. They are the undergirling of [34:27] everything that fleshes out in your [34:29] community. So I'm sorry I'm a little [34:31] excited about that's the end of that [34:32] section though. I just wanted to quickly [34:34] make mention. Josh, do you have [34:35] something to add to that? [34:36] >> No, that's great. You know, uh the [34:38] specifically language around honor. Um, [34:40] you know, Danny Silk's book, Culture of [34:42] Honor, has really kind of repackaged um [34:44] this idea [34:47] where, you know, [34:50] back in the day, we there was language [34:51] of don't touch the Lord's anointed. [34:53] You're not going to see that language [34:54] explicitly used uh inside of Danny [34:57] Silk's book, but you will see language [34:59] of we have apostles and prophets at the [35:01] top. We have to honor their anointing [35:03] and honor their gift in order to have [35:05] that flow downward. And teachers, you [35:08] know, they're hyperritical and they want [35:10] to discern and man, they're just really [35:12] not that useful in the body of Christ if [35:13] they're not submitted to an apostle or a [35:15] prophet, which essentially creates a [35:18] closed loop system where people in the [35:20] church that have discernment, who want [35:21] to challenge, who want to well, I don't [35:24] see that in the Bible. Um, they're kind [35:26] of pushed down to say like, if you as an [35:28] individual with this discernment, like [35:30] really critical thinking skills, you're [35:32] probably a teacher. And if you're going [35:35] to criticize anything the apostle does, [35:37] you're not going to receive that [35:38] anointing downstream. So, it's really [35:41] training people to shelf their [35:42] discernment. Um, and I'm really thankful [35:45] that they're really looking at this [35:46] because I do think that this is a recipe [35:48] for disaster when you begin to see [35:51] things that are a little bit out of [35:52] step, out of line, things that that look [35:55] off. Um, you know, like the the the [35:58] Shawn B sort of situation. What if there [36:00] were people in the church who man they [36:02] suspected some stuff going on, but they [36:04] didn't want to get outside of that flow? [36:05] They wanted to honor that gift in order [36:07] to receive his anointing. [36:09] That's a dangerous thing. So, I'm I'm [36:11] thankful that they're looking at this. [36:13] I'm thankful that they're um [36:14] re-evaluating it. I hope that there are [36:16] some statements about Passion [36:19] translation, physics of heaven, culture [36:21] of honor. Now, that would be I think [36:24] probably too much to ask for. Um you [36:26] know, lady, [36:27] >> it's not too much to ask for. No, I [36:29] think it's it needs to be [36:30] >> it's an unrealistic expectation is what [36:32] I mean. Is it is it too much asked for? [36:35] No. Like should we get that? Yes. But um [36:38] there I think that's like biting off [36:40] more than we can chew in some sense. Not [36:41] not us as as people on the outside. I [36:44] love it. But they they have drama after [36:47] drama and by doing those things they'll [36:48] probably create more drama. So like I [36:50] understand why they would like hey we're [36:52] handling this issue. I hope they address [36:54] those other issues but I hope that they [36:56] happen internally at least like at [36:57] minimum. You know, the physics of heaven [36:59] book was produced by um I think it's [37:02] Judy Franklin is Bill Johnson's [37:04] assistant and I believe reasonably um [37:08] yes I I believe reasonably this book was [37:09] published there was endorsement slapped [37:11] on the book um without careful thought [37:13] or attention but this book is synratism [37:15] it's teaching people to practice new age [37:18] practices and reclaim them for for [37:19] Christ in the church practices that [37:21] church have left or you know have found [37:25] unusable we should reclaim the new page [37:28] and, you know, see if they've discovered [37:30] something the church has not yet [37:31] discovered. It It's pretty wild stuff. [37:33] Um, Passion Translation, there's going [37:35] to be a a a video, I think, uh, soon [37:38] exposing some of the problems there. [37:41] We've already done tons of videos on it. [37:43] There's a ton of problems, but uh, it's [37:45] worse than you think. Then we [37:49] >> Go ahead. [37:50] Well, I'm just gonna say again, my [37:52] empathy here kicks in because I'm like, [37:56] you've you've these people have put into [37:59] writing a lot of your values and it [38:02] turns out that what they wrote and what [38:04] you guys valued harmed people. [38:10] It harmed a lot of people. Culture of [38:11] honor has harmed people. It is devalued. [38:14] the most critical thinkers in your [38:16] church that understand the scriptures, [38:18] the teachers. [38:20] It has platformed uh unpunishable has [38:24] has caused you to default to restoring [38:27] predators rather than restoring victims. [38:30] I mean, this this stuff harmed people. [38:32] And so [38:34] I I can only imagine what that's got to [38:36] be like to have to go to Danny Silk and [38:38] say, "Hey, this book that you spent all [38:40] this time writing." And I understand, [38:43] this is my take. Maybe I'm wrong, but I [38:46] think Danny just put into writing what [38:47] they all believed. Um, you know, he was [38:50] just able to uh capitalize on it. And [38:54] good for him. That's smart. Um, [38:58] but when you're capitalizing something [38:59] bad, that's not smart. That's bad. um if [39:03] you're if you're putting something out [39:04] there and you're able to monetize it and [39:06] it's actually a good thing that [39:07] everybody wins on, I'm like great. But [39:09] that's not what happened here. And so [39:10] now they're having to go back and [39:12] probably pull books off shelves and have [39:14] really hard conversations internally and [39:16] that doesn't happen overnight. And so [39:19] they the amount of time that's probably [39:20] required to do this and the amount of [39:22] hard conversations and having to explain [39:23] to people like, "Hey, [39:26] we can't sell your book anymore. in fact [39:29] our values that you wrote down. It's on [39:32] all of us here. And so I don't know what [39:34] it looks like to to to make it right to [39:36] all these people because in some way it [39:39] was the leadership that said yes to [39:40] those books that's also responsible. So [39:43] it's man, it's just that's that's just [39:45] got to be tough. I I [39:47] >> it's unfortunately work they have to do. [39:49] They don't get to to take a they get out [39:52] of jail free here on this. But man, I [39:54] it's just painful. No, I I think that's [39:57] where I said I find it unrealistic. Not [40:00] because I don't think they should do it. [40:02] I think they should. I just think that [40:03] Bethl historically has priorit [40:06] prioritize the feelings of people that [40:08] they're in community with uh over public [40:11] statements that protect larger groups. [40:14] So, it may be the case that internally [40:16] they have some dialogue. They stop [40:18] promoting stop publishing Culture of [40:20] Honor. Not that they're publishing it, [40:21] but selling it in their bookstores. Same [40:22] thing with Physics of Heaven. Same thing [40:24] with Passion Translation. And like it [40:26] may be the case that those things begin [40:28] to take place internally. I think that [40:31] would be great if it happened [40:31] internally. I think it would be better [40:33] if there were some public statements [40:35] that said, "Hey, I think that these are [40:38] unintended consequences of things that [40:40] were said in this book, and we want to [40:41] avoid those sorts of things." Miller, I [40:44] know you've got to wrap up soon, so I'm [40:45] going to pump it over to you, and you [40:46] can um you know, finish out. [40:49] >> Yeah. Okay. Public ministry [40:51] accountability BSSM as a formation [40:54] environment including leadership [40:55] culture, power dynamics, spiritual [40:56] authority, student experience and the [40:58] systems and structures that shape [40:59] community life and development [41:00] platforming. One of the biggest things [41:02] we want to acknowledge is that our [41:03] platform carries real weight and [41:05] responsibility to be used consistently [41:06] with our other biblical principles. We [41:09] also understand that restoration and [41:10] reinstatement are not the same thing. Uh [41:12] I was talking to Ron Caner about this. I [41:14] love that language. Ron is the one who [41:16] first mentioned that. He he said [41:18] restoration is about or the statement [41:20] says restoration is about healing, [41:21] repentance, redemption and helping [41:23] someone be made whole with again in [41:25] Christ. Reinstatement is about returning [41:27] someone to his previous position of of [41:29] leadership, influence and responsibility [41:31] which requires rebuilding trust with [41:33] those impacted, those they led and those [41:35] responsible for oversight and [41:36] accountability along with demonstrating [41:38] the fruit of repentance which reflects [41:39] godly character, wisdom, and [41:40] accountability. We should always pursue [41:42] restoration, but reinstatement must be [41:44] approached with wisdom because grace [41:46] offers forgiveness, but it does not [41:48] remove the need for stewardship, [41:49] consequence, and rebuilding trust. As we [41:51] review platforming, we want to follow [41:53] our clear biblical standards for public [41:55] ministry leadership. Scripture calls [41:57] leadership to live above approach and to [41:59] show self-control, faithfulness, [42:01] humility, integrity, and care for those [42:02] they lead. Public ministry influence is [42:05] responsibility, not a right. uh in 1 [42:07] Peter 5 2-3 reminds leaders to shepherd [42:10] God's flock, not lord over those [42:12] entrusted to them, but to be examples to [42:13] the flock. We will not make decisions [42:15] about platforming based solely on [42:17] rumors, pressure, or unverified claims. [42:18] At the same time, credible concerns may [42:21] lead to further review. Discernment [42:22] through appropriate reporting and [42:24] accountability processes. If there are [42:27] uh proven patterns of behavior that do [42:29] not align with biblical standards, we [42:30] cannot continue to platform, endorse, or [42:32] support that person for ministry [42:33] leadership here. During this time, we [42:36] also want to be clear about our [42:37] relationship with some outside ministry [42:38] leaders we have worked with or [42:40] platformed in the past. We believe [42:41] clarity is important uh part of [42:43] accountability and we want our church [42:44] family and community to understand our [42:46] current relationship level of support [42:47] and status regarding these individuals. [42:49] Following internal review and [42:51] discussion, we've made the decision to [42:52] confirm publicly that we no longer [42:54] platform the following individuals. Todd [42:56] Bentley, Mike Bickl, Shawn BS, Bob [42:58] Harley. Specifically regarding Bob [43:01] Hartley, Bethl took action after [43:02] concerns were raised in previous years. [43:04] restricted his ministry involvement, [43:05] informed our church community, and later [43:07] limited his access to Bethl's campus. As [43:09] part of our current review, we want to [43:11] clearly state that Bob Hartley is not [43:13] endorsed, platformed, or permitted to [43:14] serve in ministry influence at Bethl. [43:17] Okay. The last little section is [43:19] personal matters. We'll come back to [43:20] that. This is probably the area that I'm [43:22] This is going to get me a little fired [43:24] up here. So, Josh, I'll let you go first [43:26] and I'll try to tone my my voice here. [43:29] Well, it sounds to me like this first [43:31] paragraph is a great paragraph. And [43:33] maybe I should have let you give your [43:35] two cents before I said, "Hey, this is [43:37] good because you're real passionate [43:38] about this." Um, but this language of uh [43:43] reinstatement versus restoration is a [43:46] really really good statement. Like it's [43:48] the first time we're hearing them admit, [43:51] first time I'm hearing them admit uh [43:53] that there's a difference between this [43:54] culture of honor and unpunishable sort [43:56] of approach where man, it's it's God's [43:59] heart to get everyone back in the [44:01] pullpit, back into leadership. That's a [44:03] great move. I love that. And I love that [44:05] they're pointing people back to trust [44:07] and accountability and fruits of [44:09] repentance. That's extremely important. [44:11] Um I kind of wish there was more being [44:15] communicated here. Um, this is the first [44:17] time Sean is being brought up in this [44:18] letter. They've made public statements [44:20] about him. That's fine. [44:22] Those are some of my initial thoughts. [44:24] Jump in. [44:26] >> I also differentiation. [44:29] >> I know. I really do like that [44:31] differentiation between restoration and [44:33] reinstatement. [44:36] Finally, uh, the problem is you didn't [44:38] tell me what reinstatement is going to [44:40] look like. Will you reinstate people who [44:42] have sexually abused? They've misused [44:44] their power to sexually groom and [44:46] sexually abuse people. So, you don't you [44:49] don't tell me enough about reinstatement [44:51] and what you believe about that. Um, I [44:54] I'd like to know that because that's [44:56] going to help me make a decision whether [44:57] or not my kid gets to come to your [44:59] ministry school or whether I can endorse [45:00] people going to your church. That right [45:03] there is such a huge thing. It also you [45:05] you haven't told me anything about your [45:06] theology of punishment. From what I [45:09] understand, Bethl has an underlying [45:11] belief that God's justice is not [45:13] retributive, it's restorative. It's not [45:15] punitive. That's a big problem. That's a [45:18] huge problem. And I think it undergurs [45:20] the reason why you believe people are [45:22] unpunishable. Um I I I just don't I [45:26] don't it doesn't tell me enough. And and [45:28] that's where I really get hung up. That [45:31] theology has has done so much damage. [45:35] Um, and Adig continues to and it's it's [45:38] been exported everywhere. Uh, where [45:41] people think it's totally fine. They [45:42] should be reinstated. So, tell me more. [45:44] What do you actually believe about [45:46] reinstatement? I understand that [45:47] forgiveness is available for everybody. [45:50] And you you use words there that are [45:52] helpful, but I still don't know actually [45:54] how it fleshes out. And that is key. And [45:57] so, now you've told us who you're not [45:58] going to publicly endorse. That's great. [46:00] But there's also some names mention uh [46:02] not mentioned. One big one, uh, Sean [46:05] Foy, why is he not in there? How is it [46:08] that you cannot publicly make a [46:11] statement about someone like him who is [46:13] clearly grifting? Um, again, there's a [46:16] lawsuit that's going to come forward. [46:17] Are you going to wait for that lawsuit [46:18] to pan out to make that decision while [46:20] in the meantime, I mean, the fact is the [46:23] relationship there, everybody knows [46:26] behind the scenes, his burns have burned [46:28] more bridges uh than any war. Um, [46:33] there's just so much to that. There's [46:34] other people I'm going there's got to be [46:37] more names than that. Uh, I I think it's [46:40] important. [46:41] >> Michael, can I push back a little bit? [46:44] >> Yeah. Just the idea of like who you're [46:48] going to restore and how you're going to [46:49] do it. They're not at the point in that [46:51] process where they even know. I don't [46:53] think they've been under this impression [46:55] for the longest time that honor culture, [46:58] you know, unpunishable culture is we [47:00] always get that leader back in the [47:02] saddle. Now, for the first time, they're [47:03] admitting like, look, I don't know if [47:05] that's the case. Um, I don't know if uh [47:09] that's always the requirement that [47:11] people need to be reinstated. So, hey, [47:14] we're we're going to commit to look for [47:16] fruit before we make those decisions. [47:18] Um, and we're going to approach it with [47:19] wisdom. I think that might be as best as [47:22] they can offer at this moment. I think [47:23] they have to really critically think who [47:25] they're going to reinstate and how [47:27] they're going to go about that process. [47:29] Um I don't know if this letter it's [47:31] appropriate to give all of those details [47:33] because they might then commit to [47:35] something that they don't quite have [47:36] formed yet. Um they might wait for this [47:39] guy to find out, yep, this is a bad [47:41] situation in this investigation. Now [47:44] we've got to figure out what we're going [47:45] to do with it. Um is that fair? [47:49] >> Well, I don't know. you tell me. Uh, [47:52] if you don't know, that's a problem, [47:53] right? That means I don't know yet feel [47:56] safe. [47:58] I don't know if I can endorse you yet [47:59] because you don't know. But if you're [48:01] saying, "Hey, Michael," let's just state [48:02] it differently. Let's just say, "Hey, [48:05] you guys need time to draw conclusions [48:07] on this." And when you have that time to [48:10] draw conclusions, you'll make those [48:11] conclusions known. I can get that. I can [48:13] get behind that. That's good. You're [48:15] going to take that time to figure that [48:16] out. I I still I need to know that you [48:19] know at some point. [48:22] That's that's it. And I'm saying that [48:23] because for the person who's easily [48:25] persuaded by this statement, they go, [48:27] "Look at all they did." And and look [48:29] that they're they're they're throwing [48:30] out the unpunishable. I'm like, "Well, [48:32] they haven't quite done that yet. [48:34] They're just evaluating it." Um they're [48:36] just acknowledging that maybe there is a [48:38] difference between restoration and [48:40] reinstatement, but they haven't told us [48:42] how it fleshes out yet. And so uh that [48:45] matters for the person because I want [48:47] the person who is easily persuaded. I [48:49] want the person that is a Bethl [48:51] supporter and is rooting for them as I [48:54] am. I want them to to think through [48:55] that. So that that's probably I mean [48:58] it's fair to say they don't know and [48:59] let's give them some time, but it's also [49:01] fair to say they need to know. And so [49:04] when you do know, just promise at least [49:05] you're going to let us know exactly what [49:07] that means and how that fleshes out. Is [49:09] it appropriate in this letter to be [49:10] like, you know, we're not going to [49:13] reinstate predators of children. We're [49:16] not going to reinstate, you know, [49:19] because again, if you if you say things [49:20] like, [49:22] I won't reinstate people of clergy [49:23] sexual abuse. Okay? Someone fell into [49:26] adultery when they were youth pastor in [49:28] their 20s and they fell in adultery, you [49:31] know, with someone who was a year older [49:33] than them but was a youth leader. Are we [49:34] going to go clergy sexual abuse and then [49:36] this guy, you know, 15, 20 years later? [49:38] Now, I think it's still on the table [49:40] like maybe maybe they shouldn't be in [49:41] ministry. But I'm just saying what if [49:43] they're afraid of saying we're not going [49:45] to reinstate anyone with clergy sexual [49:47] abuse because if anyone commits sex in [49:50] church, it's like clergy sexual abuse. [49:52] So, it's like [49:53] >> maybe they're trying to prevent [49:54] themselves from being painted in a [49:56] corner. I'm I'm just asking like the [49:57] question like why why mention all the [49:59] people you won't won't reinstate because [50:01] that'll be used against you later. [50:05] maybe maybe uh instead of specifics uh [50:08] regarding like in this case we won't in [50:10] this case I mean it's not like we have [50:11] those public statements well some of [50:13] them we do um but but just simply [50:16] acknowledging some people will never be [50:18] reinstated [50:20] there are some cases that just can't be [50:21] reinstated [50:22] >> the reason I'm saying that is because [50:24] the underlying theology of unpunishable [50:26] is that we're unpunishable there's never [50:28] going to be anything retributive and and [50:30] that's where I go no no absolutely not [50:33] there's actually retribution for the [50:35] unrepentant. Um, so [50:39] >> that's where I'm [50:40] >> when you see this line about [50:42] >> restoration versus restitution. [50:45] >> Yeah. Reinstatement versus restoration. [50:48] You're going [50:50] >> I needed to hear something that say [50:51] there are people who cannot be [50:53] reinstated. Like that would that would [50:54] give you confidence. I I I I [50:57] >> in the same way in the same way our [50:59] culture doesn't reinstate a person who's [51:01] committed financial fraud who was a [51:03] financial planner or an accountant [51:07] you know they lose that right or a [51:09] person who's a you know licensed [51:11] professional counselor loses when they [51:14] break HIPPA and break confidentiality [51:16] they lose their their counseling license [51:18] like we need to know that that is also [51:20] true in in cases of certain cases and [51:23] you don't necessarily have to name every [51:24] case where it's true that they can't be [51:26] reinstated or they're going to lose [51:27] their credentials. Um, we need to at [51:28] least know that you will do that at some [51:30] point. And right now you're saying I we [51:33] cannot endorse these ministries. [51:35] Good. That's man that's is I just only [51:39] one time in all of Bethl's history did I [51:41] see that prior to Bethl getting exposed [51:43] for failing to do that which which was [51:46] it Jeremy Westfield or or [51:49] Yeah, something Westfield. Jason [51:52] Westerfield. That's what it is. That's [51:53] the first time I heard that. the only [51:54] time I heard that until the last couple [51:56] years. So, [51:59] >> that's helpful, Michael. Thank you for [52:00] clarifying that. Uh, do you want to read [52:02] the rest of the statement? We'll close [52:03] out. [52:05] >> Yeah, personal matters. We also want to [52:07] address partnerships and employment [52:09] matters. Uh, California Constitutional [52:11] Privacy Protections limits what [52:13] employers can share about their [52:14] employees. Therefore, we are unable to [52:16] publicly discuss or disclose personal [52:17] matters involving current or former [52:19] employees. We recognize that for some [52:21] these limitations can contribute to [52:22] concerns around transparency. However, [52:24] this restriction does not mean we are [52:26] indifferent and active or unwilling to [52:28] address serious concerns when [52:29] allegations involve staff. We handle [52:31] them thoroughly through appropriate [52:33] reporting, review, investigation, and [52:34] accountability processes. We also [52:36] recognize that past issues may have [52:38] impacted members of our church family [52:40] and understand that previous experiences [52:42] may have affected trust in both [52:43] leadership and reporting system. In [52:45] response, we have continued to [52:46] strengthen our reporting pathways, [52:47] oversight, accountability processes to [52:49] deliver clearer, safer, and more [52:51] consistent responses. Please keep [52:53] praying for us as we continue God's [52:55] presence, purity, power, integrity, [52:56] humility, godly character, [52:58] righteousness, and healthy church family [52:59] with humility and love. Bethl Church [53:02] senior leadership and team of board and [53:04] board of elders. Um, [53:09] I I'll say one quick thing, Josh. um we [53:12] obey the laws as Christians until those [53:15] laws prohibit us from doing the moral [53:17] right thing to do or those laws require [53:20] us to do immoral wrong things. Um, and [53:24] in the case of publicly making known uh [53:27] in order to warn the church about former [53:30] employees who also happen to be [53:31] predators, I go, "If California law [53:34] prohibits that, I break the law because [53:37] scripture demands that I expose." Um, [53:42] and so I understand why you're doing it. [53:44] Uh, again, there are times where it's [53:47] appropriate to break the law. Um, and [53:49] that's where it requires obedience to [53:51] God first. Who is your primary [53:53] authority? Is it scripture and Christ or [53:56] is it United States government, local [54:00] government, um, California government? [54:03] Um, because I can see a place where I [54:05] break that law if it means protecting [54:08] other people from predators. So, [54:14] >> yeah. [54:14] >> Yeah, I think that's I think that's [54:16] fair. Um I I I'm [54:19] I think that there's a way to do both. [54:22] So like um in our membership paperwork [54:26] and it would be something that I would [54:28] encourage people to get into their [54:30] bylaws of an organization. It would be [54:33] something that you would want to people [54:35] to sign like an employment contract and [54:38] talk about those sorts of things so that [54:40] if and when public correction needs to [54:42] take place. So, like in our membership [54:44] paperwork of our church, we have, you [54:47] know, statements that they're going to [54:48] submit to Matthew 18, church discipline [54:49] kind of thing. That's one of the [54:51] requirements to be a member if and when [54:53] something egregious takes place. We've [54:55] never had to do that publicly. Been a [54:56] church for 3 years. We're not eager to [54:58] do it. We're not like, "Woohoo, let's [55:00] exercise church discipline, kick people [55:02] out, and, you know, get people on a a [55:05] track of exposure." We we've not we've [55:08] not needed to come publicly before the [55:10] church as commanded in Matthew 18 or in [55:12] 1 Corinthians 5. Um you know rebuke an [55:15] elder before all. So the rest stand in [55:17] fear from 1 Timothy. Not had to do that. [55:20] Um so and I'm thankful thankful to the [55:23] Lord that we haven't had to do that yet. [55:25] H. However, I think that you can have [55:27] bylaws in place as a religious [55:29] organization that keep you exempt from [55:31] other sorts of laws that people have [55:33] cons consented to the fact that if [55:35] they're caught in a certain sin and or [55:39] uh are placed under discipline or [55:41] excommunicated from the church that it [55:42] gets publicly shared with the church. [55:45] Um, if they can disclose that, I I think [55:47] that you're actually safe and protected. [55:50] Um, so I think it allows you to do both. [55:51] It allows you to maintain your religious [55:54] freedom as an organization to be [55:56] consistent with what is commanded in [55:57] scripture. And I think that would [55:59] protect you. So if you're a church in [56:00] California and you're afraid of this, [56:01] but you want to obey scripture, you [56:04] don't have to just fall on your sword [56:06] and defy the government and get [56:08] penalized, fined, and sued. You can [56:11] lightly rework your bylaws right now. [56:13] Have people sign an employment contract [56:15] that consents um to certain kinds of [56:18] disclosures when necessary. and uh if [56:21] that's a person who doesn't want to work [56:22] there because they have to sign that [56:23] kind of disclosure, it's not the kind of [56:25] person you want working there anyway. [56:27] So, it would likely help you in your [56:28] hiring process. So, those are those are [56:31] my two cents on that. [56:33] >> So, one thing I still would like to [56:36] hear, somebody needs to make a statement [56:37] about what Jen Johnson said publicly [56:39] that has now been sort of expuned from [56:41] the internet that people grab clips of. [56:43] Um, and it was that statement about how [56:46] we're going to let the courts handle [56:47] that. Um, we we need to know. Bethl, do [56:51] you agree with that? Um, because that's [56:53] not in your statement. It it sort of [56:56] implied that some of the people that are [56:58] like Mike Winger, who's publicly [56:59] exposing these things, um, is going to [57:02] be sued. And if you didn't mean to imply [57:04] that or if she spoke out of turn and she [57:06] was wrong, please state that. Uh, also, [57:09] why haven't you talked to him? [57:12] Maybe there maybe there is [57:13] conversations, but that I know of. I [57:15] don't think Chris Valatin has ever had a [57:16] conversation or Danny Silk has ever had [57:18] a conversation. Look, you needed a Mike [57:20] Winger to point out your failures. [57:23] I think you owe him a debt of gratitude [57:25] and maybe a conversation. Um, so those [57:29] just the last things uh that are still [57:31] kind of sticking points that are [57:33] >> Make sure to give John Mark Baker his [57:34] due too. I mean, [57:36] >> yeah, [57:37] >> I don't think anybody would have known [57:38] about Shawn had it not been for John [57:40] Mark. So, I mean, there's just guys out [57:42] there. [57:42] >> Jeff Simons and John Mark Baker. Yeah. [57:44] Again, I don't think they have to talk [57:46] to every critic on the planet. I'm just [57:47] saying, look, uh [57:50] I think there needs to be conversations. [57:53] >> Yeah, they did at great cost to [57:55] themselves what you guys should have [57:56] done. [57:59] >> Yep. Yep. Yep. Okay, guys. Thank you so [58:01] much for tuning in to this episode of [58:02] Remnant Radio. Michael, you don't got [58:04] nothing else to say, right? Guys, thank [58:05] you so much for tuning in this episode [58:06] of Rim Radio. We'll see you next time. [58:08] Hope you enjoyed this video. Hope it [58:09] helps you think critically uh about the [58:12] these sorts of public statements. We [58:14] hope this episode has been edifying and [58:16] encouraging to you. We'll see you in the [58:17] next time uh the next episode of the [58:19] Romant Radio. We typically air programs [58:21] on Mondays and Wednesdays from 4:00 to [58:22] 5:00 p. p.m. Central Standard Time. [58:24] We'll see you guys then. Bye.  ## Highlights - Occasionally relies on "we've done episodes on this" without providing direct evidence - Note: 🔍 Fallacy: Appeal to Authority #fallacy/appeal-to-authority - Some characterizations of leaders could be seen as attacking character vs. actions - Note: 🔍 Fallacy: Ad Hominem #fallacy/ad-hominem