About the Lawsuit

Lady_Justice_SuitWith the amended lawsuit this week against Bill and IBLP bringing the total – and final – number of plaintiffs to 18, my friend Chris asked for a reaction.  Because we interact with Bill fairly regularly it is inappropriate to offer a detailed response at this time.  But my comment to Chris was:

Let’s see . . . We don’t like lawsuits, lawsuits are not a game, there will be no more plaintiffs added as this was the judge’s well publicized date to end that . . . And, after all the years, all the alleged enormous numbers of accusers, all of the full court press, three months of worldwide publicity, the possibility of real money to pick up participants, this is all they could come up with. Think about 50 years, tens of thousands of participants, Bill deliberately seeking out troubled youth to try to help all around the world, given the fact that by the laws of statistics some small percentage of those thousands would remain troubled, are liars and would jump at the chance to gain some publicity let alone some money . . . And THIS, ladies and gentlemen, is it.

And, of course, both Bill and IBLP will, by God’s grace, be vigorously defending themselves.

And I can’t help but think about a number of other named people who now get to have their names dragged through the dirt. Maybe issues that were fully resolved, I don’t know.

So, we shall see. May The Lord examine all involved, take charge, and allow mercy and truth to triumph.

If there are other questions, perhaps we can collect them here.  We will do our best to respond without breaking the rules when it comes to information we may have received which is not – yet – for public consumption.

344 Comments

  1. David David
    February 19, 2016    

    I have a question:

    Why did Bill Gothard, the man who taught for years that no Christian should ever sue another, have his lawyer send a letter threatening to sue these women and the RG “principals” for $1,000,000?

    • Moderator Moderator
      February 19, 2016    

      Why did Bill Gothard, the man who taught for years that no Christian should ever sue another, have his lawyer send a letter threatening to sue these women and the RG “principals” for $1,000,000?

      You appear to know more that we do. When was this done and to whom?

      HOWEVER . . . you will recall that we have stated repeatedly that Bill has refused to take that option off the table. It is our opinion that RG has wantonly, carelessly, and maliciously sabotaged Bill’s reputation and ministry for quite a number of years. Like proclaiming in many media outlets that 60+ women were accusing him of “sexual harassment and worse” . . . when there is no such number of women who allege that. The current lawsuit – being opened to MEN now, and with some dropping out from the last offering – might be a good clue. Promoting any account that was damaging to Bill without doing in some cases the simplest of vetting. What is strange is that I know that Kari Underwood, co-founder of Recovering Grace, and her husband both have law degrees . . . it does not take a crack legal mind to figure out that there may be a day of reckoning.

      So if that is true, and we can only confirm that Bill and his legal team have been caucusing on those kinds of options, it is no surprise. And as to Christians suing, I suspect you would agree that is a complex matter. Important people opposed to Bill have provided me with a number of logical explanations for why this is not wrong in all cases. One that makes sense to me is Paul appealing to his secular authorities for protection from those about to destroy him. Seems like that is what they are supposed to do.

      If, for example, you support the current lawsuit against Bill and IBLP, then you really can’t get too excited if Bill is motivated to respond, especially if the legal team responsible for his defense finds this essential.

      But I guess we will have to wait and see.

      • David David
        February 19, 2016    

        “You appear to know more that we do. When was this done and to whom?”

        A letter from Attorney Glenn Gaffney threatening a million dollar lawsuit against the victims and Recovering Grace was shared on the Recovering Grace facebook page and the Homeschooler’s Anonymous website.

        I’ll leave your other ramblings alone, as I know nothing I can say would alter your opinions. Let me just say I know Mr. and Mrs Underwood well, and you are right, they both have law degrees. As such, they would not be so stupid as to do what you are alleging. Nor would they be stupid enough (unlike this attorney) to threaten a million dollar lawsuit against you for libel and defamation, even though you keep publishing these baseless accusations against them.

        • Moderator Moderator
          February 19, 2016    

          As such, they would not be so stupid as to do what you are alleging

          That is interesting. See, as detailed in “New Math”:

          “June 24, 2015, “we’re aware of more than 60 women who have experienced sexual harassment and worse.” (Bev Burrell, speaking for Recovering Grace in http://www.worldmag.com/2015/06/bill_gothard_defends_himself_on_new_website, World Magazine)

          January 7, 2016: “According to Kari Underwood, founder of the Recovering Grace website, more than 30 women identified by name have recounted troubling interactions with Gothard that add up to a pattern of sexual harassment and abuse.” (http://www.worldmag.com/2016/01/lawsuit_brings_new_accusations_against_bill_gothard )”

          RG – Bev – is aware of more than 60 women who “experienced” sexual harassment and worse. Suddenly, RG – Kari – is only aware of 30 . . . not “experiencing” sexual harassment and worse, but rather “troubling interactions with Gothard that add up to a pattern of sexual harassment and abuse”. Why don’t you ask her what happened to the missing 30 women. And the sudden nuancing of phrases there to avoid actually accusing Bill of “sexual harassment and worse”. I want to know. See, truth is the absolute defense against a defamation lawsuit. So there is no need for nuancing.

          I also see stunning statements in the lawsuit, of one young man who claims to have seen Bill “sexually harass” over 150 women – that happened 20 years ago. What a statement, what a memory. I would hope that counsel would have guided him as to making statements that would be defensible in a court setting. You know, identifying the women, detailing this “sexual harassment” which we all know is defined not by the observer but by the participant.

          baseless accusations against them.

          I take that quite personally, David. Methinks I have provided a fairly clear basis. Again, the truth . . . the truth. In the end that is all that matters.

          • DancingJimmy DancingJimmy
            February 19, 2016    

            If this is the basis of the “case” against RG Principals, then they have nothing to worry about.

          • David David
            February 22, 2016    

            “I take that quite personally, David.”

            Good. Because it is personal. You are slandering friends. The Underwoods are fine people. Kind people who love the Lord, their families, and these women whose lives were forever altered by the despicable actions of Bill Gothard.

            So go ahead…keep doing mental gymnastics. There are dozens of explanations for those two articles, yet the only you choose to believe the one in which the Underwoods are blatantly lying in some sort of conspiracy to take down your dear leader. Like I said, I know them well, and while it is not beneath yourself or Bill Gothard to resort to intentional public slander, I know that they would never do such a thing for any reason whatsoever.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 22, 2016    

            these women whose lives were forever altered by the despicable actions of Bill Gothard.

            “The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going.” (Proverbs 14:15) Just curious how many of these women who accuse Bill of despicable actions you have actually spoken to. With the critical eye of a person whose reputation let alone fortune may be tied to their veracity. See, I know for a fact that a number are lying. Nobody seems to be able to explain publically where Jane Doe II disappeared to. Do you know? Are you willing to share? Of the ones not overtly lying, there are accounts blatantly colored by what the RG narrative has painted for them. This I also know for a fact for several of the others. I shake my head wondering at the willingness of David Gibbs III to commit his reputation to what he would know is an building of rotten beams. I hope you know me well enough by now to know that I almost never engage in hyperbole. It’s just not me. The same reason I have always been easy to find, contact, identify . . . for which I now get the honor of getting cited in the lawsuit.

            I have never spoken to Kari. I have spoken at length with her husband. So I know a bit of what drives them. I said the same to him directly. As to blatantly lying . . . I am fairly sure I know exactly how the “leadership team” came up with that indefensible “60+” number for women accusing Bill of “sexual harassment and abuse”. I BET they took every poster – real name or fake – that said “me too” and added it to the list. Talk about a basis for defamation. “Named women” is not much better. People say all KINDS of things in a blog . . . when you stand up and paint a picture to the press of a pervert based on statistics that cannot be defended, that is slander. Per se.

            I reserve that for a number of the folks whose tales they have featured . . . with some giddy delight. Yes, there is a completely open conspiracy to take down the “no longer dear leader”. If you deny it, I might call you a liar.

            If you have dozens of explanations, I would be eager to hear your top best 2-3.

          • David David
            February 22, 2016    

            ““The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going.” (Proverbs 14:15)”

            Wow, using scripture to belittle me. I wonder where you learned that? Oh, right. I just read Bill’s affidavit…he was a master at that. Using scripture to try to bully the board and Gibbs was quite a display of spiritual abuse. The judge will appreciate that Bill made it so easy for him to find examples of what has been alleged on the internet for years.

            “Just curious how many of these women who accuse Bill of despicable actions you have actually spoken to. ”

            Let’s just say that i have interacted with several more than you have. Definitely not all of them, but enough to know there is no conspiracy going on. You don’t fake tears and emotion and pain. Pretty sure the judge and/or jury will realize the same.

            “See, I know for a fact that a number are lying.”

            Okay, Alfred, let’s hear these facts. I want, actually dare you, to present one single FACT that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that all of these women are lying. Because I don’t think you can do it. If you could, you already would have.

            “So I know a bit of what drives them.”

            Again, would love to hear your all-wise psychiatric evaluation of what drives my dear life-long friends.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 22, 2016    

            Using scripture to try to bully the board and Gibbs was quite a display of spiritual abuse

            So weird. Scripture says what it says. If there is bullying, God does it. God – Jesus – did say that those that curse father or mother will “die the death”. David Gibbs III has been most disrespectful toward his father. This is no ordinary lawsuit, but one stepping up to oppose and embarrass his father. Maybe Jesus doesn’t care? Scripture suggests that He does. Bill was not out of line to point that out privately as a warning. Why did Gibbs feel a need to have to publicize it?

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 23, 2016    

            I want, actually dare you, to present one single FACT

            Of course I am not going any further in face of an active suit.

            Again, would love to hear your all-wise psychiatric evaluation

            If they give permission to speak publically of the conversations John and I had privately, I might.

          • Tyler Tyler
            February 22, 2016    

            Alfred… saying 60 in one place and 30+ in another is not a contradiction. How do you not see that? You may suspect that that shows some measure of disunity in accounts, but that’s easily explainable enough if Kari was being very careful or describing a particular type of abuse and Bev was discussing another. In any case, that is not a contradiction. 60 is 30+.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 22, 2016    

            that’s easily explainable enough if Kari was being very careful or describing a particular type of abuse and Bev was discussing another

            We should be doing this over in the section dedicated to it. But . . . Humor me and reread the comments.

            March 7, 2014, “As many as 34 women who worked for Gothard claim that he harassed them; four claim that he molested them,” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/conservative-leader-bill-gothard-resigns-following-abuse-allegations/2014/03/07/0381aa94-a624-11e3-b865-38b254d92063_story.html , which attribute to “an organizer involved in the whistle-blowing website Recovering Grace”.)

            June 24, 2015, “we’re aware of more than 60 women who have experienced sexual harassment and worse.” (Bev Burrell, speaking for Recovering Grace in http://www.worldmag.com/2015/06/bill_gothard_defends_himself_on_new_website, World Magazine)

            September 23, 2015, “60+ young women who experienced sexual harassment at the hands of Bill Gothard”, private message from Dr. Cornish to the Bill Gothard Facebook page moderators.

            January 7, 2016: “According to Kari Underwood, founder of the Recovering Grace website, more than 30 women identified by name have recounted troubling interactions with Gothard that add up to a pattern of sexual harassment and abuse.” (http://www.worldmag.com/2016/01/lawsuit_brings_new_accusations_against_bill_gothard )

            What do you think? The message of RG has been carefully controlled and directed, at least as far as the “leadership team” is concerned. If anything, Kari’s group is a superset of the others.

          • David David
            February 23, 2016    

            I do not understand why you are editing my comments to include your rebuttals. Let my comments stand on their own, and give your response in it’s own comment. Even RG, whom you despise, would not do such a thing.

            And I was right. You are all bark and bluster about having facts to prove that these girls are lying, but when asked to put up or shut up, you run the opposite direction. The truth is you have no facts.

            And the same goes with your judgement pertaining the Underwood’s motives. You had no problem posting excerpts of conversations you had with Dr. Cornish and judging his motives. Now you are suddenly concerned with violating confidences? Granted, I’m not saying you should do so, but I just wanted to point out that you have no qualms about doing so when it suits your purposes. Which leads to the logical conclusion, again, that you have nothing.

            “Why did Gibbs feel a need to have to publicize it?”

            Why did GIBBS feel the need to publicize it? Gibbs didn’t. Bill did. Bill entered over 150 pages of documents into the public record, knowing full well they would end up plastered all over the internet within days. Thanks to this huge misstep, the world can now see just how Bill Gothard operates, using scripture to try to manipulate his way back into power during the very time that he claimed to be repenting and seeking restoration.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 23, 2016    

            I do not understand why you are editing my comments to include your rebuttals.

            That was a goof, apologies. I must have hit edit instead of reply. Now fixed.

            The truth is you have no facts.

            No, that is not correct. And I assume you understand the sensitivities surrounding an active lawsuit. If you don’t, then run with whatever assumptions you must.

            You had no problem posting excerpts of conversations you had with Dr. Cornish and judging his motives. Now you are suddenly concerned with violating confidences?

            Mr. Underwood friended me on Facebook. That act comes with certain understandings and responsibilities. Dr. Cornish contacted the faceless, anonymous moderators of Bill’s Facebook page and made the statement given. I see a substantial difference.

            Why did GIBBS feel the need to publicize it?

            No, the letter that was sent from Counsel for the defendant to Counsel for the plaintiffs was not public. Bill’s email to Gibbs was not public. No, that was a deliberate act on Gibbs part. Maybe he thought it would help “public opinion”, bring in more donations.

            using scripture to try to manipulate his way back into power during the very time that he claimed to be repenting and seeking restoration.

            Let’s see. How LONG, in your mind, should Bill be repenting and seeking restoration? He has been actively involved in that process for the last two years . . . plus. His calls to talk to those offended have resulted in some contacts and some resolution. The main ones posting the accusations publically however have been essentially unwilling to do anything. Because – I think – their involvement has never been about reconciling with Bill so he can move on unimpeded but rather dragging him down as much as possible, hopefully until he disappears. I see the one woman that I knew about way back two years ago that Bill went with his advocate to visit in another country for the sole purpose of asking forgiveness for his insensitivities – which was granted – is actively berating him on multiple venues. See, I think that there is a point to what Paul said in Romans 12:18: “If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.” Sometimes it ain’t possible. Some folks have a different agenda than the name of the Jesus and the welfare and harmony of His church, you know, a personal agenda . . . and at that point there is not much else to do but move on.

          • David David
            February 24, 2016    

            “No, the letter that was sent from Counsel for the defendant to Counsel for the plaintiffs was not public. Bill’s email to Gibbs was not public. No, that was a deliberate act on Gibbs part. Maybe he thought it would help “public opinion”, bring in more donations.”

            No, I personally read Bill’s abusive attacks on the board and David Gibbs from the affidavit that Bill entered into the public record. Gibbs had nothing to do with it. You, Bill Gothard and IBLP are smearing the name of a good man who has done much to fight for Christian liberty in this country. Smear, smear, smear. Smear Gibbs, smear the victims, smear the Underwoods, smear RG.

            “How LONG, in your mind, should Bill be repenting and seeking restoration?”

            What does scripture say? Does scripture put a time limit on it? The fact of the matter is that Bill spent considerably more writing books about gut brains and drafting lawsuits against his former board than he ever did in repentance and reconciliation.

            “I see the one woman that I knew about way back two years ago that Bill went with his advocate to visit in another country for the sole purpose of asking forgiveness for his insensitivities – which was granted – is actively berating him on multiple venues.”

            Yes, because he did not do the things he promised her he would do as proof of his sincerity, and also did things afterward that he promised her he would not do. So, she may have forgiven him, but she still does not trust him because he has lied once again.

            “Some folks have a different agenda than the name of the Jesus and the welfare and harmony of His church, you know, a personal agenda.”

            Agreed, Bill’s agenda as stated in his affidavit has nothing to do with the name of Jesus, and everything to do with the name and kingdom of Bill and his followers.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 24, 2016    

            No, I personally read Bill’s abusive attacks on the board and David Gibbs from the affidavit that Bill entered into the public record

            Bill is not happy with the Board, that goes without saying. As far as attacks on Gibbs in the public record, are you referring to the Motion to Dismiss? One would not expect that to be complementary, right? I can personally testify to the excitement Bill shared with me as he was interacting with Gibbs, expressing how he – the lawyer of a trusted friend and the son of a much trusted advisor to the ministry – only wanted to see him restored as President so HE, Bill, could fix the problems with the accusers. I believed him, leaving me as shocked and sick to my stomach as anyone when Gibbs sued Bill and revealed his true intention all along. A “good man” would not do what David Gibbs did.

            Does scripture put a time limit on it?

            Yeah, it does. The “As-much-as-lieth-within-you” clause. And on the part of the accuser we read:

            “And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him.” (Luke 17:4)

            The standard for forgiveness is hearing “I repent”, basically “I am sorry”. Anything beyond this comes of evil.

            Yes, because he did not do the things he promised her he would do as proof of his sincerity, and also did things afterward that he promised her he would not do.

            So it seems to me that standard remains . . . if you have a renewed problem you go TO the person that tried to reconcile, whom you forgave, but that newly offended you and try to get it resolved. That young woman did none of that. I mean, she had witnesses to appeal to who would have gone to Bill with her. I find that very wrong. The Lord is the judge among all of us.

            Agreed, Bill’s agenda as stated in his affidavit has nothing to do with the name of Jesus, and everything to do with the name and kingdom of Bill and his followers.

            Those that accuse would have a double responsibility then to not commit the very crime they are complaining about . . . right? Be better . . . not worse.

          • David David
            February 24, 2016    

            “Are you referring to the Motion to Dismiss? One would not expect that to be complementary, right?”

            No, I’m referring to the letters and documents in the affidavit that accompanied the motion. Materials that originally were not supposed to be part of a legal proceeding, materials which show the true colors of a man not above using God’s Holy word to manipulate, berate, and abuse others.

            “I can personally testify to the excitement Bill shared with me as he was interacting with Gibbs.”

            This doesn’t make Bill’s accusations true. Remember, this is the same Bill Gothard that was all excited (even publishing in a newsletter) about the Drake Hotel becoming a center for world leaders to come and learn his teachings. Turned out to be a huge albatross. Bill’s perceptions are by no means the standard of truth, and I think the affidavit will prove to show not that Gibbs is dishonest, but that Bill Gothard is narcissistic and delusional.

            “The “As-much-as-lieth-within-you” clause.”

            That verse has nothing to do with repentance, reconciliation, or forgiveness. Definitely does not put a time-limit on it.

            “if you have a renewed problem you go TO the person that tried to reconcile, whom you forgave, but that newly offended you and try to get it resolved.”

            No, not when that person is a serial abuser who has just showed you once again that he has not changed and that his only interest in pseudo-repentance was to go back to the board and tell them he was doing what they said. The woman’s husband is protecting her from an evil man, and she is doing her part to warn others.

            “Those that accuse would have a double responsibility then to not commit the very crime they are complaining about . . . right?”

            Well, at least you don’t deny what I said. That speaks volumes.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 24, 2016    

            No, I’m referring to the letters and documents in the affidavit that accompanied the motion.

            And I must confess that this is the first time I actually read this. I got it from the HA site. It is worth reading. I was refraining on commenting on some of the facts I knew . . . but I see that most of them are right there. May I ask WHAT you exactly have a problem with, David? Seems to me it makes the facts fairly clear . . . not only about Gibbs and his reprehensible behavior but also about some of the women and their testimonies that RG has committed to. Specifically from Gretchen who was thereby thrust into the national spotlight and thereby has done Bill incalculable damage with her lies. The HA links are here:

            Bill’s Motion to Disqualify and Sanction
            IBLP’s Motion to Disqualify and Sanction
            Bill’s Affidavit
            Roger Blair’s Affidavit

            As stated, I can confirm in a peripheral way the things Bill stated about his interactions with Gibbs. Why, there is my FOIA request. Yes, I sent it to Gibbs directly at Bill’s request since at the time we thought it to be Gretchen – lying about her age. Within seconds, Gibbs had another woman to sue Bill with. You can see why it actually gets a tad personal.

            No, not when that person is a serial abuser who has just showed you once again that he has not changed and that his only interest in pseudo-repentance was to go back to the board and tell them he was doing what they said. The woman’s husband is protecting her from an evil man, and she is doing her part to warn others.

            Please help me find a biblical mandate for any part of what you just said. I read:

            “Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.” (Matthew 18:15)

            “Debate thy cause with thy neighbour himself; and discover not a secret to another: Lest he that heareth it put thee to shame, and thine infamy turn not away.” (Proverbs 25:9-10)

            Well, at least you don’t deny what I said. That speaks volumes.

            I am only confirming that the honor of an individual is seen in going to the offender, not attacking them publicly. If you complain about supposed dirty tactics, better not engage in them.

          • David David
            February 25, 2016    

            “May I ask WHAT you exactly have a problem with, David?”

            I’ve already answered that question. The way the Bill repeatedly tried to manipulate and bully the board, even drafting a lawsuit…completely hypocritical for the man who said Christians should never sue. Also, the manipulative letter he sent to Gibbs saying that he should die because he dared stand up against his father in defense of these women. As I recall, even Jesus contradicted his parents when the Lord’s work was on the line.

            “Yes, I sent it to Gibbs directly at Bill’s request since at the time we thought it to be Gretchen – lying about her age.”

            As I recall, you posted that accusation about Gretchen publically. Are you now admitting that you accused her falsely of lying about her age?

            “Within seconds, Gibbs had another woman to sue Bill with.”

            That sounds like a grave error on your part. Are you sure you’re actually helping Bill? Or just uncovering more victims? Because this would be the case of a girl who never went public with her story on RG or had any involvement in this allege conspiracy you’ve concocted in your mind.

            “Please help me find a biblical mandate for any part of what you just said.”

            I believe it’s right after the passage where God gives permission for spiritual leaders to abuse a women, fly to a foreign country to feign repentance, lie about them again, and then act offended when the women still doesn’t trust him.

            ““Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.” (Matthew 18:15)”

            How is it that you never quote Matthew 18:17? This young woman is way past step one.

            “If you complain about supposed dirty tactics, better not engage in them.”

            So is Matthew 18:17 just dirty tactics?

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 25, 2016    

            the man who said Christians should never sue.

            I have in hand a Wisdom Book that discourages it . . . but does not prohibit it. What else do you have to back that up, if I may ask?

            As I recall, you posted that accusation about Gretchen publically. Are you now admitting that you accused her falsely of lying about her age?

            I don’t recall publically posting anything other than what I just said. She either lied about her age . . . or she lied about giving a report to the Hinsdale PD. Three FOIA requests and one personal visit later the HPD emphatically, personally assured me that the report they gave me is the only one they have received accusing Bill of anything. Dr. Cornish said in a PM to the moderators of Bill’s FB page, “I investigated the police matter, and what Mrs. Wilkinson said was true. The Hinsdale Police were notified by an anonymous third party and contacted both her and us in February of 2014. Due to statute of limitations, no further investigation was opened.”

            So . . . which is it?

            That sounds like a grave error on your part.

            Naw. We are not worried about the truth coming out. From where I sit it represents the first official, government assessment of these “molestation” claims, EVEN if it were exactly as stated (which I suspect it is not). You can see in the report that Melody was put up to this by RG and reluctant to have her claims investigated. There was a reason. I am sad that she complied with Gibbs to insert herself into the lawsuit now. Whatever he promised her, I hope she remembers it.

            No, this is personal because Gibbs also marginally took advantage of me, based on all the reasons expressed in the motion to dismiss and Bill’s affidavit. I sent a friendly email as Bill asked and called him “Brother Gibbs”. Of course I never heard back . . . other than from his associate months later as she was checking me out . . . a day or two prior to the amended lawsuit going out where he named me and began casting evil light on me.

            So is Matthew 18:17 just dirty tactics?

            No way! It is the way to go. Hence, if the young woman has, in the presence of witnesses, forgiven Bill and then later feels another crime is being committed, she is bound by Jesus to go to him directly – with the witnesses – and confront him. That is so obvious as to defy opposition. The witnesses will be able to recall exactly what he said and what, if any, stipulations were placed on him to grant said forgiveness. *I* think failure to follow those clear steps, instead immediately going public with more slander is a crime against the Lord of the Church, something He will deal with Himself.

          • Larne Gabriel Larne Gabriel
            February 25, 2016    

            You write:
            “No way! It is the way to go. Hence, if the young woman has, in the presence of witnesses, forgiven Bill and then later feels another crime is being committed, she is bound by Jesus to go to him directly – with the witnesses – and confront him.”

            Part of the repentance process includes restitution, just look at the OT Pentateuch regarding property loss or injury. There is a requirement to compensate others for their loss. Possibility in this case it was an action Bill promised to fulfill and failed, like writing a letter or posting a new statement on his website that was to be approved by those involved. These are some of the issues we dealt with that Bill failed to accomplish. In some case he promised action had been taken and that proved to be a lie, when I doubled checked with the recipients of those actions. Just look at some of the December and January post where Bill want to revisit his statements in Denver and make excuses why he made them. Are these the actions of a Godly man, in James 5:12 it says: “But above all, my brothers, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or by any other oath, but let your “yes” be yes and your “no” be no, so that you may not fall under condemnation.” Why did Bill feel the need to change his statements? Because the truth was interfering with his new ministry.

            Alfred writes:
            “No, this is personal because Gibbs also marginally took advantage of me, ”

            Alfred you have done the same thing to me. Recently you use my name in a personal email to one of 1980 women as a point of interdiction, trying to open dialoged with her. You have used several things I corresponded with you personally in your statements and used that information out of context. You have stated “I believe Larne would agree”, which I would not. Now you are getting a taste of what you too have sowed. the difference between you and those of us that have been offended is our information is first hand and your is second hand through Bill the offender. You have been marginalizing anyone who has spoken against Bill since you started DG and even on RG. You call them all liars, deceptive and you have used various slurs against the women. You have no idea what they have endured behind closed doors. Bill is a master manipulator and he is manipulating you.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 26, 2016    

            Part of the repentance process includes restitution, just look at the OT Pentateuch regarding property loss or injury.

            And in one sentance you completely unraveled your insistence that, for you, taking money from Bill to recommpence those hurt is not a primary purpose. You do add the “not necessarily financial” caveat below . . . but I am at a loss as to what other “restitution” you think Bill should make . . . say to the woman that Bill and Dr. Murphy flew to another country to see. She insists that she placed stipulations on Bill, but refuses to have Dr. Murphy follow up with Bill to see it, whatever it is, done. That IS the context of your comments, right?

            Somehow it ALWAYS comes back to money. Are you tacitly approving this lawsuit, Larne?

            Recently you use my name in a personal email to one of 1980 women as a point of interdiction, trying to open dialoged with her.

            I can’t believe you are even trying to do this, Larne. My conscience is completely clear . . . yes, I mentioned you because I HAVE interacted with you extensivly, far more than anyone else. I never implied you put me up to it, provided the contact, in fact, was completely clear with her that Bill told me to contact her. Do you feel I should have asked your permission? You are the one who pulled away . . . I was sharing things with you on a daily basis because I respected and trusted you, details that were sensitive and not even normally appropriate for someone who would consider themselves a Bill opponent . . . and would have shared this as well prior to making the contact. You are not just in trying to blame me for anything here.

    • Mandi Mandi
      February 20, 2016    

      Because he does not want the truth to be know. It is that simple.

  2. rob war rob war
    February 19, 2016    

    Strategic lawsuit against public participation or SLAPP is illegal in IL Alfred and that is what this million dollar suit is. I highly doubt that you didn’t know about this and that this was coming down the pike. The Facebook post by RG is all over the internet now and honestly it looks like bullying and intimidation by Bill and his lawyer. Speaking out is freedom of speech and SLAPP is most only going to slap Bill in the face.

    • Moderator Moderator
      February 19, 2016    

      Speaking out is freedom of speech and SLAPP is most only going to slap Bill in the face.

      Do just a little research, Rob. Freedom of speech has very little – some say no – bearing on defamation as courts have upheld repeatedly. SLAPP is focused in on critique of the government, being a good citizen, etc. This ain’t that. Good question to ask yourself: what about Bill’s situation would need to change for you to agree that RG would need to worry. Or, put another way, paint me a picture of what a candidate who defames Bill would do.

      • Pam Pam
        February 19, 2016    

        Explain defame. I understand it to be defaming by slander. In which case, if the stories are true, that’s not slander.

        • Moderator Moderator
          February 20, 2016    

          if the stories are true, that’s not slander.

          Correct! The truth is absolute protection against a lawsuit for defamation. Take “The Cabin Story”. It didn’t happen. Gary Smalley told me so. And others that RG could, maybe did check, with too. Continuing to tell the world it did is defamation. That one story has done incalculable damage to Bill’s reputation, support.

      • DancingJimmy DancingJimmy
        February 19, 2016    

        “what about Bill’s situation would need to change for you to agree that RG would need to worry. Or, put another way, paint me a picture of what a candidate who defames Bill would do.”

        In other words Rob, Alfred wants you to help Bills lawyer with the case against RG.

        “Freedom of speech has very little – some say no – bearing on defamation”

        And this is an untruth. The First Amendment factors HUGE in Defamation cases. The First Amendment Rights of the Defendants have a lot- some say almost 100% – bearing on legal liability for defamation.

        I’m not saying that these are parallel facts, but in Hustler Magazine Vs Falwell, a landmark defamation case that the Supreme court ruled unanimously in favor of Hustler, there was a lot of First Amendment Discussion. In fact almost all defamation cases turn on the point of where the First Amendment prevails against other rights. Bill Gothard is a public figure, and RG is a media organization, thus the legal standards appropriate to both will apply. And no, “we think you are lying” is not a winning legal argument.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell
        Also see New York Times V Sullivan

        Public Figures rarely succeed in defamation cases because the burden on proof is so high.

        And you should do your research. Bill’s threat to sue the plaintiffs (and RG principals) is classic Anti-slapp behavior. In fact it was these sorts of threats that gave rise to California’s Anti-slapp laws, which many states have patterned theirs after.
        http://www.casp.net/california-anti-slapp-first-amendment-law-resources/statutes/c-c-p-section-425-16/

        And I might add, in almost all cases, a successful motion to strike on anti-slapp results in an award for attorney’s fees. Bill has a hard time with the idea of paying his own lawyer, so the idea of also having to pay the other sides lawyer is something he would do well to consider.

        Government activity has little -some say no- bearing on anti-slapp lawsuits.

        Which is something you would have discovered if you’d have done a little research.

        • Moderator Moderator
          February 20, 2016    

          The First Amendment factors HUGE in Defamation cases

          Hustler notwithstanding, that is NOT true!

          http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/civil-litigation/defamation-character-free-speech.html

          “People cannot say whatever they want and get protection for their comments by tacking on a couple of qualifying words. The U.S. Supreme Court has said that a statement is an opinion that merits protection when it is (1) about a matter of public concern, (2) expressed in a way that makes it hard to prove whether it is true or false, and (3) can’t be reasonably interpreted to be a factual statement about someone. (The Supreme Court case is Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., 497 U.S. 1 (1990).)”

          This has to do with matters of “Public Concern” . . . NOT trying to take down a hated religious figure. No, NO . . . You can’t propagate lies and get away with it.

          And you should do your research. Bill’s threat to sue the plaintiffs (and RG principals) is classic Anti-slapp behavior.

          So, do you even know what you are talking about? You sound like you are repeating something you read on a blog. SLAPP is bad, anti-SLAPP is good.

          • DancingJimmy DancingJimmy
            February 20, 2016    

            You stated the First Amendment has nothing to do with Defamation. That’s a patently false statement. One could say it’s defamatory toward the First Amendment.

            I’ll point you to a section in the link that YOU posted to prove that YOUR assertion is untrue.

            http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/civil-litigation/defamation-character-free-speech.html

            “Because First Amendment issues can provide significant barriers to defamation claims, it is important to consult with an experienced personal injury attorney to determine whether you have a viable claim — or, on the other side of the defamation lawsuit coin, whether statements you made may be entitled to free speech protection.”

            Oh, and also read the section on Public Figures.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 20, 2016    

            Oh, and also read the section on Public Figures

            I have done my homework, Jimmy. Public figures do win defamation lawsuits. You have to prove actual malice, evil intent, vs. just carelessness. That’s it, that is the added burden. RG is an organization openly dedicated to knocking Bill out of business. Their intent is to do him harm, take way his money, influence, authority as punishment for harming the principals of that group and their friends and family. Proving motivation by malice would be a walk in the park.

    • Moderator Moderator
      February 20, 2016    

      SLAPP stands for “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation” (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation). Big people launch frivolous lawsuits against little people to shut them up. They don’t expect to win, just make life miserable for people who can’t afford a lawyer. Illinois anti-SLAPP neutralizes that threat. Has NOTHING to do with actual defamation, lies, designed to harm someone. As always, the truth, the truth.

      According to http://www.illinoislawyerfinder.com/articles/legal-information/the-legal-profession/suing-for-defamation-of-character-illinois,

      “Most jurisdictions recognize “per se” defamation which typically include the following:

      1) Attacks on a person’s professional character or standing
      2) Allegations that an unmarried person is unchaste
      3) Allegations that a person is infected with a sexually transmitted disease
      4) Allegations that the person has committed a serious moral crime

      Usually, the plaintiff bears the burden of proof and as such, must establish by a “preponderance of evidence” that the defendant’s statements were false at the time they were made.

      Public figures who sue for defamation have to prove an additional element: that the statement made was done with “actual malice.”

      Do you see anything in there that clicks? Accusations of “unmarried person unchaste”, “serious moral crime”? RG has accused Bill of all of that. Authoritatively, recklessly. Telling or suggesting authoritatively to the world repeatedly that Bill has molested children is defamation per se. A wiki account for which RG is the only source telling the world that 4 women claim Bill molested them for which there is no corroboration is defamation per se. Telling the world for the last two years that Bill was caught in a remote cabin late at night with a secretary in lingerie on his lap despite having proof from the original source for almost the entire time that that never happened is defamation per se.

      And by an organization whose entire controlling committee is made up of people openly on record as blaming Bill for ruining their lives and their families . . . Malice is quite apparent.

      No, this would not be a SLAPP . . . In fact, the garbage in this lawsuit is so thrown together that I can’t be the only one to wonder if this is simply a convenient way to continue to savagely slander Bill under the protection of a legal procedure – THAT would be SLAPP. Look, unnamed Jane Doe II gets to insert rape as an accusation against Bill (and Dr. Copley, as a 7 year old, BTW, if you do your math, and her father, and her relatives, and unknown strangers as a sex slave), then . . . disappears?

      I am so tired of it.

  3. Pam Pam
    February 19, 2016    

    If IBLP and Gothard believe themselves to be innocent, then I guess this will go to court. I’ll assume there will be no deal made to settle this out of court. Because surely they wouldn’t settle if they were innocent.

    Concerning your point about the math: If you look at what you quoted, Bev states “…we’re AWARE (emphasis mine) of more than 60 women…” and Kari states “…more than 30 women IDENTIFIED BY NAME…” (emphasis mine). These do not contradict each other at all. It would seem plausible that women could come forward anonymously in one way or another to communicate their stories. Both Bev and Kari could have spoken to many different women separately. There are many different scenarios to explain those difference in numbers. But, regardless of the exact number of people who have told of their dealings with Gothard, there are 18 who have come forward to file a lawsuit.

    You seem quick to call them all liars. But I’m curious; just who have you interviewed to search for the truth? You’ve asked the man himself, but his testimony doesn’t count because who would admit to such things. You claim your kids work there and have seen nothing. And you’ve seen nothing either. But, you are not all knowing and certainly have not been everywhere. Because you haven’t seen it, you can’t believe it. That’s a really flimsy basis for your opinion that he’s innocent. I find it compelling that these girls all tell some of the same things, like they were Bill’s “energy giver”, he liked to play footsie, and so on. There’s no way they could have all got their stories straight over decades that this has been happening. ( I know what you say about Bill playing footsie as a grandfatherly gesture. In order for me to believe that, you need to find me some men who do that and have them post here. Because EVERY man I’ve asked about this ALL tell me that is not something you do as a fatherly affirmation.)

    You claim you want the truth. Dig deeper then. Go after the details. Do your own investigation, but this time without help from the fox.

    • Moderator Moderator
      February 20, 2016    

      I find it compelling that these girls all tell some of the same thing

      When you have a well organized group like RG driving it along that is quite easy to understand!

      Bill playing footsie

      He did NOT play footsie! He tapped feet like he tapped shoulders. Turning that into “footsie” is dead wrong.

      Do your own investigation

      I laughed, sorry. I have been doing nothing else for a decade. I got a call from a very nice, respectful David Gibbs researcher days before this hearing wondering if I was working for Bill. I assured her we are and have always been completely independent. Bill has more than once wondered if we should be doing this website. He does NOT coordinate what we do, he does not pay us, contrary to assertions in the new version of the lawsuit. I guess I am his “faithful follower”. I scratch my head as to what that was all about. Unless they will try to pin our words on Bill. Which won’t fly.

      • Pam Pam
        April 11, 2016    

        I’m commenting really late I realize, but I thought I could drop it and I find that I can’t. This is about the foot tapping behavior. So first of all, he admits it. But to WHOM does he admit doing it? Were there any men that received foot tapping? Were there any older people, men or ladies? Has the moderator been foot tapped by Bill? Has the moderator ever seen Bill foot tap anyone? And what does Bill say about this foot tapping as far as when it took place, in private sessions with people or out in the open? If it is innocent and not sexual in nature, then one would expect it to happen to a lot of people and out in the open. If the moderator was not a witness to such behavior, then I would think he could not state as fact that it wasn’t “footsie”. Its only Bill’s word. And if he only taps the feet of the young ladies he is counseling and in private, then that does sound like sexual harassment

  4. SJR SJR
    February 20, 2016    

    I know for absolute certain that some of the postings on RG are fabricated. I know the person, place, and circumstances that are referred to. Given that, it brings all of RG accusations into question. ~ SJR

    • Tyler Tyler
      February 22, 2016    

      Could you go into detail there? Because that’s awfully vague and anonymous for being on a website that’s all hooplah about ignoring anonymous or vague stories.

  5. rob war rob war
    February 20, 2016    

    The published lawsuit itself is damning enough on Bill, far more so than any of the previous stories on RG. RG is more than stories about Bill by girls. A majority of it talks about his teaching and the problems with it and how his teaching and ideas have negatively affected those that tried to follow it. You keep going back to the “cabin story” but that story was before 1980 and before all these girls and even now 2 men came forward and are currently involved with the current lawsuit. The cabin story was also carried by your friends at MCOI. Maybe you want them to retract it too? In reality and looking at all the previous talk about pre-1980s issues, the cabin story is really a combo of several different incidences between a number of different witnesses including Gary, Norma and Tony G. But one combo story doesn’t negate all the others, especially those in the law suit which people are now willing to swear to be true in a court of law. Looking at your blog here which was also mentioned in the law suit, I don’t see the outpouring of love of Bill and his teaching. While you want to point to the thousands that have attended through the years, where are all those people and why aren’t they coming forward for Bill and on your blog? Yet there are a number of others besides RG, that do speak up about the problems with Bill and his teaching. If his teaching was so great and good and wonderful, where are the thousands that you claim love Bill? I don’t see them and basically all you have attracted are on the negative not at all the positive about Bill. You can’t prove your point that only a hand full are in the lawsuit, therefore it’s just about a few disgruntled people. The burden of proof for Bill isn’t there because the thousands that have attended have walked off and away because his teaching didn’t work and is unbiblical to begin with. Threatening people with million dollar lawsuits is bullying and if Bill is so pure as the fresh driven snow, then he’ll have his day in court to prove such to the world and wouldn’t be threatening others for a million dollars. But, this looks more like a desperate attempt by Bill to continue to cover up his sins. But the big problem for Bill is that the cat is out of the bag and what is in that law suit that people are now willing to go to court and swear to is very damning about the moral character and actions of Bill Gothard.

    • Moderator Moderator
      February 20, 2016    

      “The published lawsuit itself is damning enough on Bill, far more so than any of the previous stories on RG. “

      Oh, I know. They can’t say it in a lawsuit if it isn’t true, right? Can you explain where the most damning account, Jane Doe II, went? I mean, that was the money tale, details of Bill raping her, bonus of Dr. Copley raping her. No, Bill didn’t contact her. Any ideas? See, THAT is why this nation has defamation laws. That is reprehensible. There is lots of information available on her, lots of corroboration. Too bad Gibbs didn’t ask around before smearing Bill and Copley with her lies.

      There are several others that I know Bill can prove are lying or at least materially exaggerating. At some point you can’t help wonder if Gibbs intended to deal Bill and IBLP a mortal blow just by filing the suit, hit and run. The Lord knows. I don’t know what Bill should do, but his lawyer seems to think that a counter suit is the only way to remove this garbage. I cannot blame Bill for taking that seriously.

      “the “cabin story” but that story was before 1980”

      You seem to forget that that tale is still featured in RG, compete with aerial photos of the cabin where it didn’t happen, screen shots of the Bill Wiki when it too featured this account, before the Wiki people scrubbed it and clamped down on the page. The lawyer told me that every day that account is up the defamation statute of limitations clock starts anew. I wonder if Mr. Gibbs explained that to RG.

      “the cabin story is really a combo of several different incidences between a number of different witnesses including Gary, Norma and Tony.”

      Tony was not involved in this other than take copies of Gary’s notes and emails, and also give it top billing. Gary and Norma have corrected the account to the form found in our “Did He Do It?” article. There is nothing else.

      “Looking at your blog here which was also mentioned in the law suit, I don’t see the outpouring of love of Bill and his teaching.”

      You are so wrong. I hear from them all the time. Very few are willing to get bludgeoned as much as I am, but they are so grateful.

      “You can’t prove your point that only a hand full are in the lawsuit, therefore it’s just about a few disgruntled people.”

      “Disgruntled” is a kinder word than I would use. So, where are all these thousands of accusers, Rob? One man in the new suit says he personally observed 150 women being “sexually harassed”. Where are they? Where are the 60 let alone the 30? I don’t think they exist. After all the publicity RG has received, all the press, TV . . . Where are they? RG has been leveraging for such an action for years, the dream come true. Out of the shadows and into the light. You tell me if this lawsuit suggests that these statistics they have been presenting are valid. I say not. And if not, they are guilty of defamation and must give account.

      “people are now willing to go to court and swear to is very damning about the moral character and actions of Bill Gothard.”

      I hope they have all thought it through in the manner you assume. Lawsuits cut both ways, Rob. I know for a fact that good people have been maliciously slandered.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        February 21, 2016    

        Apparently Bill Gothard has filed a motion to disqualify David Gibbs from the RG lawsuit on ethical grounds. This is from the IBLP website. So we shall see what effect that has on developments.

        David K

      • DancingJimmy DancingJimmy
        February 23, 2016    

        I have given you and Bill’s lawyer code names. “Sanballat and Tobiah”. Praying that the “Nehemiah’s” over at RG aren’t distracted from their work by your threats and intimidations. Just like Sanballat and Tobiah did against Nehemiah.

        And lots of people….the ‘Millions” who’ve gone to the Basic Seminar…are watching…and noticing the disconnect between “Bill the teacher” and “Bill the Practitioner”.

        Bill doesn’t eat his own cooking. I’ve been following RG’s posts since the beginning. That’s been one of the central messages of RG’s postings over the last 5 years. This sexual abuse stuff was a sideshow to the main point. And with this one threat to sue to prote, Bill just publicly invalidated the Basic Seminar, Life Purpose manual, and many other of his Publications, and validated the central message of RG.

        Bill has not only defamed himself with his own actions, he has opened himself up to a charge of witness intimidation as well. I’m sure once Attorney David Gibbs gets past this Chicago gangster style attempt to get him thrown off the case, he will be exploring that with the judge.

        Waiting to to see how you explain to me how wrong I am.

        • Moderator Moderator
          February 23, 2016    

          I have given you and Bill’s lawyer code names. “Sanballat and Tobiah”.

          As long as you don’t mind me calling you “Alexander” and Gibbs “Tertullus” – could also go with “diabolus”=”false accuser” – I am fine. Or we could just drop the name calling.

          This sexual abuse stuff was a sideshow to the main point

          THANK YOU for acknowledging the obvious. Again, read the following snip from a letter written back in 1983 by Dr. Rademacher, leading public critic of Bill’s doctrine, to Ruth Gabriel:

          1983 Radmacher Letter to Ruth

          That expresses most clearly what Recovering Grace and its predecessors are all about. Bill must be stopped. At all cost. How to do it? One says this, another that. In the end one arises that says, “The only way he is going down is if we can smear him as a sexual pervert.” And all agree. And thereafter busy themselves with the primary task of finding something, anything in Bill, the bachelor, the one that has spent his entire life working closely with young people, intense counseling, often with very troubled individuals . . . anything that will smell like “sex abuser”.

          So . . . as Recovering Grace arises, one of the first orders of business is to collect such tales. Folks post ads on “Crossings” to collect stories of abuse in ATI/IBLP. Since the beginning RG dedicates an entire MONTH each year as “Sexual Assault Awareness Month” (http://www.recoveringgrace.org/2012/04/gracenotes-sexual-assault-awareness/) – amazing, since the topic is allegedly “Recovering Grace”, that is, countering Bill’s legalistic doctrine. Apparently SOMETHING is weighing on their minds as it relates to people becoming aware of “sexual assault” in the context of IBLP and Bill. Time to talk about being abused before ATI. Abuse in ATI at the hands of relatives. How Bill didn’t take it seriously enough. And, hopefully, any that will testify to being abused BY Bill or staffers, staffers like Bill’s brother in the 1970s. Holding girls hands really long as he speaks to their heart, his foot and shoulder touches, which he has done forever, suddenly get new names, like “footsie”, with sexual implications. ANY account of Bill sitting really close to a young lady as he counsels her becomes “sexual harrassment”. The operators are careful to keep a running tally of ANYONE who says that Bill did any of that . . . and . . . suddenly you have the ability, with a bit of twist of the facts, to announce that “30” and then “60” women have “experienced sexual harassment” at Bill’s hands. Powerful stuff for a public media that hates conservative religious types and thinks they are all hypocrites to start with.

          On top of that, if they were thinking it through they would know that in ANY organization the size and duration of IBLP there will be some number of involved people who have lost their moral compass and are willing to fabricate or exaggerate tales that meet the needs of a large organized approving group. Especially if there might be money involved. IF they were righteous they would weed those accounts out. If not, they might respond with unbridled delight each time an account like that presented itself and proceed to look for ways to use it. If they appreciate the accounts might be questionable it would suffice to say “4 unnamed women accuse Bill of molestation” . . . and then steadfastly refuse to allow any scrutiny. The statistic does the job so effectively.

          It worked!! Bill was driven from IBLP and has been living alone, in relative seclusion, without income, without staff, working from his kitchen table as his office, dependent on the likes of yours truly and retired folk from other nations and states that fly in for short periods of time to even do his email. It makes some of us really unhappy. And, so, if we can we shall do our part to reverse this evil.

          And remember, the lawsuit was not Bill’s idea. Now that it has been thrust upon him, the legal avenue is the one that carries the events of the day. Ultimately it is not the cleverness of the lawyer or missteps on the other side, but the purpose of the Lord that will determine how this lands. I am experienced enough to know that He does not always resolve things fully on earth in the way we expect . . . and that He searches out both sides of an issue, rarely finding purity on any side. But we must do what is before us and leave the ultimate results to Him.

          • DancingJimmy DancingJimmy
            February 23, 2016    

            I really hope you didn’t hurt yourself jumping to all those conclusions. But you demonstrate that you learned the First Commandment of Gothardism taught in ATI Culture.

            That is to “Judge everyone and their motives and intents.” Judging on appearances is fine, in fact preferable. When challenged on it call it “discernment” and shake your head slowly while saying how “grieved” you. Really lay down the manipulative guilt trip.

            Before you deny this, remember the Wisdom Book exercise where you are to go sit outside a grocery store, observe all the people going in and out and make judgements…err….”discernments” based solely on appearances. In direct opposition to Scripture.

            Matthew 7:1-2 King James Version (KJV)
            “Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.”

            1 Samuel 16:7 “For the Lord does not see as man sees;[a] for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.”

            And I’ll save you the trouble of replying. You will say that “outward appearance” is the “manifestation of the heart”.

            To concede that point brings up the question on who gets to interpret and on what standard is the “outward appearance” judged on?

            Bill based all his “outward appearance” judgements on his own 1950’s standards, and called them God’s standards. Like somehow God had been working for thousands of years to get the “perfect cultural standard”, and finally brought the Apostle Bill to the scene to proclaim “It Is Finished”.

            What Narcissism.

            Bill threatening a lawsuit and then saying it “wasn’t my idea” (Through you of course, the Prophet Alfred) is disingenuous at so many levels. Bill has plenty of choices. But like a former pastor of mine used to say, “You can chose your choices, you can’t chose the consequences of your choices. ” Again, he taught in many Seminars exactly what to do in this situation. He is not doing it. The World is watching. Closely. What’s left of his credibility is on the line, and he won’t salvage it with the legal process. In fact, the day he files that lawsuit becomes the last chapter in the book about Bill Gothard titled, “Everything he taught, he disavowed at the end”.

            Bill is reaping what he sowed. God sent many Prophets to him over the decades to call him to account. LIke many of the Old Testament Kings, Bill did the 20-21st Century equivalent of “killing and running off” these prophets. Scripture is full of examples of God finally “laying on the punishment”. Bill is suffering the consequences of his own action.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 23, 2016    

            Bill threatening a lawsuit and then saying it “wasn’t my idea”

            Bill has routinely been threatened with lawsuits . . . not an uncommon topic on RG in the weeks, months, years leading to this action driven by Gibbs, right? So, no, the lawsuit that first targeted IBLP and then Bill directly was not his idea. I am curious what you would do if faced with a motivated group of people determined to railroad you out of existence, who gathered together a lawsuit of lies and exaggeration to drain every last drop of money and honor out of you. Determined to make sure you could never walk out in public again, reviled the world over because the court incorrectly decided against you. Especially when there are millions of alumni of yours that look to you for advice, who consider you a bit of a spiritual father, at least a trusted counselor . . . who don’t know what to think. The damage to be done to them is far greater than anything Bill suffers directly. There comes a point where it becomes irresponsible to not respond. Again, Paul had his life threatened by the Jews . . . he chose to obtain protection from the civil authorities as his work was not done.

            ”discernments” based solely on appearances.

            “And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and profane, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean.” (Ezekiel 44:23)

            “But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.” (Hebrews 5:14)

            A couple of verses on discernment . . . so . . . can you do that without examining a thing? Exercised senses . . . how do you exercise yours? Of COURSE it is not all outward . . . but you look at the outward, and you perceive the inward. I dare you to try to discern anything without looking, hearing, observing.

            The World is watching. Closely. What’s left of his credibility is on the line, and he won’t salvage it with the legal process

            See, I just disagree with you. Unless Paul lost his credibility when he appealed to Rome? You are not engaging me on a primary point.

            Bill is reaping what he sowed.

            Your assessment. Again, would you have said the same about Job? How about Jesus?

            “He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God.” (Matthew 27:43)

            LOOK at where all of Bill’s efforts toward holiness and the fear and the knowledge of God and His word got him! Abandonment. That is ultimately for the Lord to sort out.

            “My zeal hath consumed me, because mine enemies have forgotten thy words.” (Psalm 119:139)

          • Larne Gabriel Larne Gabriel
            February 23, 2016    

            Your write regarding a Radmacher letter”
            “THANK YOU for acknowledging the obvious. Again, read the following snip from a letter written back in 1983 by Dr. Rademacher, leading public critic of Bill’s doctrine, to Ruth Gabriel:”

            First off Alfred you are using this letter out of context as you have at least some of the other letter you possess written by the seven. I was on the phone conversation with Ruth, Dr. Radmacher, Gary Smalley, one of the other women and a Rev. Hagenbaugh.( http://www.recoveringgrace.org/2014/02/1983-transcript/ ) As a theologian he and Rev. Hagenbaugh were very much interested in the sexual aspect of the scandal because they felt it stemmed from Bill’s hermeneutical error and false doctrine that lead to the abuse and scandal. If you want the background Dr. Radmacher shared with us, Bill’s late sister Joan and brothers Steve and Dave and told Dr. Radmacher they had information on Bill that was going to expose the truth about his actions. Additionally beside the family discontent Bill was under intense pressure for some in the Christian community to be accountable for his action leading up to and after the scandal. In reading the whole transcript it is about how to deal with Bill and his failure to repent. The Radmacher letter you quote is just clarifying to Ruth and the rest of us the emphasis he was putting on the effort. He was not taking up Bill’s offenses to us but Bill’s offenses to God. If you are going to use a letter use it in the correct context.

            You write:
            “It worked!! Bill was driven from IBLP and has been living alone, in relative seclusion, without income, without staff, working from his kitchen table as his office, dependent on the likes of yours truly and retired folk from other nations and states that fly in for short periods of time to even do his email. It makes some of us really unhappy. And, so, if we can we shall do our part to reverse this evil.”

            From my perspective the position Bill is in today is a result of God’s judgment for Bill’s unrepentant sin so I would be careful about your comment of “reverse this evil” because you are talking about God’s earthly judgment. 2 Peter 2, Titus 1 Bill is reaping what he has sowed.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 23, 2016    

            As a theologian he and Rev. Hagenbaugh were very much interested in the sexual aspect of the scandal because they felt it stemmed from Bill’s hermeneutical error and false doctrine that lead to the abuse and scandal.

            I remain baffled how “hermeneutical error” leads to sex. I mean, if you believe that all women exist for men’s pleasure – from the Bible – I guess I could see that. Otherwise, it comes across as a slur of one theologian against another he despises.

            I would be careful about your comment of “reverse this evil” because you are talking about God’s earthly judgment

            And as I have responded to you a number of times, that cuts both ways, Larne. I look at Job . . . do you see “God’s earthly judgment”? I mean there was no other way to take it . . . so the “friends” thought. In the end the Lord rebuked them severely for their presumption.

    • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
      February 22, 2016    

      Dear sister Rob,

      You raise a fair question about proportion. If Gothard is worth defending, why is not the high volume of attacks against Gothard on RG offset by an equal volume of defense on DG? Gothard’s ministry has done me good, so why don’t I defend Gothard as vehemently as his accusers accuse him? Obsessions like Ahab’s for Moby Dick and RG’s for Bill Gothard require a lot of energy to sustain.

      Somehow the RG’ers expend enough energy to hurl harpoons at their prey. And somehow the DG’ers expend enough energy to parry some of the thrusts. It is impressive motivation on both sides, and more attention than I am willing to devote to the controversy.

      I don’t know whether the majority of RG content is academic rebuttal of Gothard as you say, but of course the sexual content is the attention-grabbing (and headline-grabbing) stuff.

      You may be right about Gothard’s accusers being willing to accuse in open court under penalty of perjury but such willingness is only hypothetical until they actually do it. Of course this has not happened yet. A delay is likely because IBLP is trying to get Gibbs disqualified from the case on ethical grounds.

      Sincerely,
      David K

      • readerrabbit readerrabbit
        February 22, 2016    

        To perhaps, shed some light on your question^^^, David. One of the purposes of RG is to provide a safe place for those who were under the teachings of BG to find healing and work through some of the impact of warped theology and a legalistic view of God, as well as abuse. It has been a community for people to share their journey and even their pain from on- going damaged family relations, and attempt to impart a Biblical mindset. Read through all the articles and comments and you will see that not all is about bringing a man to account for abuse, but finding camaraderie with others processing the same issues. There are some very edifying accounts of a journey from Pharisaical judgment to a grace-filled life.
        As I understand it, when Alfred’s comments repeatedly diminished the victims, he was banned from the site. So understandably, not many people would transfer over here. Indeed, I know many, many believers that became aware of BG by virtue of being in a church that began to get out of balance with extra-biblical standards, that regular visit RG to read the articles and gain a better perspective of and freedom from certain cult- like influences in their life.
        I suspect there are many more who occasionally visit here, as I do, but no longer comment. I made a few remarks on an article and was shocked at the moderator’s response. You can read where a few others tried to defend/support me, but it became clear that this is not a safe place for me to share my story, even as I tried to shed light on the predatory nature of grooming and how easy it is for an innocent woman to be caught off guard.
        If you want to gain a better understanding and empathy for “the other side”, read the RG articles that are not as focused on the sexual abuse. Read the comments from repentant and still-grieving parents who drove their children away by holding them to a set of standards in their attempts to be godly by the IBLP definition, and yet somehow missed Jesus There is still much damage, and yet God has faithfully used it for His glory and as part of the sanctification process.
        Hope that helps. I felt like your question was sincere and not just a stab at those who have been victimized.

        • Moderator Moderator
          February 22, 2016    

          not all is about bringing a man to account for abuse, but finding camaraderie with others processing the same issues

          You would be dishonest if you didn’t admit that the camaraderie of abuse and suffering routinely rises up to curse the Deplorable One, wishing in various ways for him to be brought to justice, pay for his sins . . . to suffer. Anyone who cares about Bill noticed it repeatedly . . . endlessly . . .

        • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
          February 23, 2016    

          Thanks for the gracious reply, sister. Say, are you Rob War’s wingman? You two seem to patrol these Gothard websites together! And I like your cute pen name. I used that Reader Rabbit software back when my kids were little squirts in ATI. Yes, I hope I am being sincere (neutral and open-minded) when I comment.

          As for stabbing the victimized, I wonder if a lot of blame is not being misdirected. I was an ATI father long enough to take three trips through the Wisdom Booklets, and if ATI harmed my kids, that was much more my fault than Bill Gothard’s. I was ruling my house; Gothard was not. Perhaps the former ATI kids should create a website titled, “Recovering from my conservative Parents.” Yes, my kids wore ATI-ish clothes and abstained from rock music back then. My parenting is more liberal now, but both the credit and the blame for the effects of those ATI years should be mine, not Gothard’s.

          Yes, I have read some RG material from former ATI parents who criticize Gothard. At the worst, the parents were suckers, not victims. I’ve been a sucker as often as the next man, but not in ATI. (Now that is a dangerous claim. What if one of my adult children finds it here and rebuts me?)

          But I like your point about God bringing good out of error. Is that not what the Gospel is all about?

          Peace and Love,
          David K

          • readerrabbit readerrabbit
            February 24, 2016    

            Ha! ^^ No, I don’t know Rob War and have only made a few comments here, which I’m sure were overly wordy. Yes, our family loved Reader Rabbit too, and I’m not sure my 4th born would have learned to read without it, or maybe it was more for my survival. :).
            No doubt most of us feel like suckers for buying into (literally) IBLP teaching. I was once part of a ministry/vocation that required attendance at the seminar, so I went probably 10 times, not to mention Advanced, financial etc. I benefited from the Word of God I heard there (as God’s Word promises), but it was also heavily mixed with the Word of Gothard, which was definitely laced with his extra-biblical- principles vs Gospel. I needed encouragement to depend on Christ alone for living the Christian life vs my own stinky flesh’ s efforts. This really derailed my walk of faith as it promoted a perspective of outward performance and focus on a checklist of legalistic rule keeping. Of course, Galatians warns us not to let this happen, but when in the middle of likeminded people, it was easy for me to get off track. Perhaps others have been able to unconsciously spit out the bones, but I had only been a believer for 4 years and my zeal suppressed several doubts I had concerning interpretation.
            To be sure, I could get off balance and cater to my old man, completely on my own, but a constant diet of the seminar pretty much brainwashed me and countless others into pridefully believing that we were the true spiritual believers because we adhered to a higher standard.

            I saw several church splits that were directly related to the US vs THEM mentality spawned by BG’ s teaching. And then we perpetrated the error on our own children, raising a generation that made pleasing people with outward trappings an idol vs responding to a holy God moment by moment with a heartfelt love.

            I heartily wish I had never been exposed to his teachings. The benefit I gained from exposure to the Word of God, mixed with error, would have been better achieved with a systematic inductive study of God’s Word rather than a focus on a man whose applications do not stem from exegetical study.
            If I have a glass of pure, clean water and introduce one drop of arsenic, I would be foolish to continue to drink from it, no matter how harmless it appears. And if a suspicious vehicle enters our neighborhood, our social media groups are quick to post a BOLO motivated by a desire to warn and protect those who are unsuspecting. I believe that is the heart of many who have worked their way back into a Grace-filled view of God.
            That being said, God is still sovereign over my foolish mistakes. If I step in a cess pool, it is ultimately my responsibility, but shouldn’t the one who dug it, filled in with yuk and hid it the middle of a beautiful garden be called to some account? Of course, the most excellent news is, if I stumble in enough times, it becomes much easier to sniff out the stench and learn to walk more circumspectly on a safer path.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 24, 2016    

            I benefited from the Word of God I heard there (as God’s Word promises) . . . I heartily wish I had never been exposed to his teachings . . . I step in a cess pool

            So, what was it? Did the Word of God, which you correctly stated was pretty prominent, provide a blessing . . . or not? How do you go from benefitting to . . . cesspool? Methinks there is more to the story? Bill gets blamed for an awful lot that ends up being the fault of we, the participants. “The foolishness of man ruins his way, And his heart rages against the Lord.” (Prov. 19:3) We mess up, but the Lord gets the blame. And sometimes those that speak in His Name.

      • rob war rob war
        February 23, 2016    

        Brother Dave,
        Most of the articles on RG concern Bill’s teaching. That is likewise true of the two books about Bill “Gothard” from 1976 and “Matter of Basic Principles” Venoit’s book. I think you can see from your own interactions on RG that you were treated very well, had friendly conversations with others and even walked down memory lane from the 1970s. There are many more blogs like RG that discuss Bill’s teaching as well as similar teachings that are much more shrill. All together on the internet, there is much more against Bill than for Bill and if there were so many thousands that attended and were “helped”, where are they now?

        • LynnCD LynnCD
          February 23, 2016    

          To David and rob war: there are millions who only attended the Basic Seminar multiple times, perhaps, from years ago, who had no clue about the first sex scandal, Bill’s libelous defamation of Tony, whom he appointed to investigate matters, and others, such as Gary, who were treated badly, etc.. These people found much good in the seminar and probably ignored Gothard’s teaching on music and a couple other items. Remember, those were the days when most evangelicals thought going to movies was sin, not merely an unscrupulous waste of time, that any partaking of alcohol, even one glass of wine at dinner, was sin, that women who wore pants to church were in sin, etc.. My point is there were many Christians with legalistic tendencies who had no problem with much of Gothard’s advice at the Basic. I, myself have been disabused of many evangelical legalistic notions, including Gothard’s.

          These millions of people, who only attended the Basic years ago, have in large part moved on, as far as I can see. Others, not enamored with Gothard’s teaching, but who greatly enjoyed “19 Kids and Counting,” were at first furious at ANYBODY talking about the Duggar situation. Then, when Josh was shown to be a serial adulterer, I have not heard the call to shut up discussing this debacle. Josh was, after all using funds given to the FRC for his adultery, via Ashley Madison. That is a public matter. The fact that the Duggars are so closely associated with Gothard, rightly or wrongly, does not sweeten public opinion of Bill. But very rightly, people now see published materials on abuse which ask the abused if they did anything to cause the abuse. I have read the comment threads on non RG sites where this teaching is being exposed, and it is way beyond rob war’s polite word “shrill.” If computers could scream we would be deaf from all the (especially childhood sex abuse victims) crying out against this aspect of the abuse teaching.

          I did not raise this point to discuss the abuse teaching. I am only pointing out there seems to be a lot of pain expressed from victims (not IBLP) and those millions of people who may have gleaned something from the Basic know better than to talk when others are so upset.

          • February 23, 2016    

            PS
            The short version of my comment: Certain currents have converged in public fashion to render Bill and IBLP radioactive. This also includes the one statement Bill made admitting to touching hair and feet that crossed a boundary and were wrong.

            There will not be a huge supportive outcry, because of this. Just my opinion.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 23, 2016    

            Certain currents have converged in public fashion to render Bill and IBLP radioactive.

            Inasmuch as any of this is driven by longstanding prejudices against Bill and what he stands for – vs. anything he might have done – it is wrong and needs to be corrected. Jesus was accused of all kinds of awful things. So was Paul, to the point that “honorable women” (Acts 13:50) opposed him violently (and I see a picture of your face when I read that). At some point the radioactivity starts to dissipate rapidly. We shall see.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 23, 2016    

            These people found much good in the seminar and probably ignored Gothard’s teaching on music and a couple other items.

            There is a sizeable minority of believers that are completely in agreement with Bill on music and “a couple of other items”. They remain the “silent minority” . . . that are simply used to mainstream Christianity belittling their convictions, much as you did here . . . you know, the “legalistic” slur. No, they have not “moved on” – “disabused”, to use your term. You just won’t find them banging on the Internet much – would that surprise you?

            materials on abuse which ask the abused if they did anything to cause the abuse

            I am curious. You have a loved one . . . that ends up in the hospital beaten within an inch of their lives because they walked into Compton and laughed at the blue bandana a fellow loitering on the street corner was wearing. Would YOU ask – with some grief – what he was thinking, or would you loudly complain to the overworked police about their gang problem? Who in turn would laugh back at you. Victims DO have fundamental responsibilities – that go hand it hand with their fundamental rights. Pretty obvious. Those responsibilities vary according to age and other things . . . but they are real. Comes with taking ownership for myself without being dependent on others who may or may not ever come to justice or see it my way.

          • February 23, 2016    

            Regarding the Compton gang example, it does not apply. I was thinking more of the statutory rape, incestuous or not, testimonies, also of those now speaking out who were severely beaten in anger, or witnessed a mother take a severe beating for a child (one known person on RG has testified to that).

            Regarding my “slur” of legalism. It is not a slur. I can’t find one Scriptural command forbidding a woman wearing what we used to call a pant suit to church. There are believers who said and may yet say such things are sin. I cannot find one Scriptural command that forbids going to see something such as “Big Hero Six.” Or even better, “War Room.” If one has a personal scruple about such things, fine. It is quite another matter to forbid these things to all Christians at all times, which I have heard some Christians do.

            Scruples or legalism. Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch. They do not solve the problem of the sin nature. If they had, what SG did pre 1980 would never have occurred.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 23, 2016    

            I was thinking more of the statutory rape, incestuous or not, testimonies, also of those now speaking out who were severely beaten in anger, or witnessed a mother take a severe beating for a child (one known person on RG has testified to that).

            Bill has NEVER told a child to not speak out about an abuse . . . nor told them it was their fault they were abused.

            I can’t find one Scriptural command forbidding a woman wearing what we used to call a pant suit to church.

            How about this?

            “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man” (Deuteronomy 22:5)

            Before you howl back, consider this authoritative source on the History of Pantsuits, complete with a picture of Hillary Clinton (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantsuit):

            “The pantsuit was introduced in the 1920s, when a small number of women adopted a masculine style, including pantsuits, hats, and even canes and monocles.”

            So, see, it really does technically violate the Scriptures. Scripture is silent on so many things – we are expected to apply general principles to stay “Scriptural”. And lest you allege that silence is an indication of divine indifference, consider this:

            “Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.” (1 Corinthians 10:31)

            If the most ordinary stuff of life is to be done overtly to God’s glory, music and clothing and entertainment are all included. THAT is not legalistic.

            “If one has a personal scruple about such things, fine. It is quite another matter to forbid these things to all Christians at all times, which I have heard some Christians do.”

            Let’s read what the Lord has to say on that:

            “For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs . . . But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died. Let not then your good be evil spoken of: For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men. Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.” (Romans 14:2,15-19)

            ending with:

            “We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves.” (Romans 15:1)

            That sounds like the Lord expects the strong – such as yourself – to serve those who are “weak in the faith” and as a result have scruples. So, practically, that sort of sounds like everybody falls in line, at least as long as it is an issue.

          • February 23, 2016    

            I guess we ought to tell Scottish men to sop wearing those feminine looking skirts they call kilts, too.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 23, 2016    

            I guess we ought to tell Scottish men to sop wearing those feminine looking skirts they call kilts, too.

            Did kilts ever start out life “pertaining to a woman”? If not, not a problem. The problem is people who start cross dressing, which is how pantsuits started life – that was worthy of death in the OT.

            Don’t worry . . . I am not death on pantsuits – other than the fashion “What Not To Wear” aspect . . . but you asked the question and those that do have a problem with it have a Scriptural foundation.

          • rob war rob war
            February 23, 2016    

            From someone that lived through the first sex scandal blow up in a Church that heavily promoted the seminars, I guess I have a hard time believing that people didn’t know. The aftermath of the scandal and subsequent failed law suit was the slow and quite backing down and away which I think is one reason Bill reinvented himself in the ATI program. I agree with Roger Olson’s patheos article about Bill Gothard which he stated and I agree that in the 1970’s, Bill was probably one of the biggest influences in evangelicalism. I think Roger placed Bill in third place. I also think about “where are they now” seminar attendees of that time have in large part dissipated. Attending the seminar was quite a heady spiritual experience to begin with. Usually people attended with others from their respective Churches, everyone was saying “yea, yea yea” without much thought. The material was very overwhelming. There was no balance in objections. Bill’s influence can be seen in many other similar types of teachings mostly isolated now to fundamentalism than evangelicalism. But the assertion by Alfred that so many thousands were greatly helped and are the silent majority is not reality. I also think many dropped many aspects of his teaching because in the long run, they didn’t work and caused more problems, especially in family life and raising children.

        • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
          February 23, 2016    

          Hi, sister Rob. I know about the Venoit anti-Gothard book, but never read it. I hope I didn’t miss too much.

          As for the dearth of Gothard defenders versus attackers, I made a comment on 1/22 above. Now that I read it again, it comes across a little snarky. I may have overdone the Moby Dick analogy. Sorry about that.

          David K

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            February 23, 2016    

            Sorry about the typo. My comment about Gothard defenders was posted on 2/22, not 1/22. Wrong month.

            David K

          • rob war rob war
            February 23, 2016    

            Brother Dave,
            no offense taken at all. My comments are my own on this site and RG and elsewhere. I am not in cahoots with anyone nor has anyone asked me to post here or elsewhere.
            peace

          • rob war rob war
            February 23, 2016    

            If you can get your hands on a used copy, the 1976 book “Gothard” was very well done and a different view (not exactly pro) about Bill and his teaching. It raised concerns about the body of teaching that is not snarky or sarcastic as the Venoit book is and considering the time it was written and reading it now, a little prophetic. You can buy it on Amazon used and at a very reasonable price.

        • February 24, 2016    

          @robwar: I did not attend a seminar until 1981, although I had friends who attended in college. The churches I went to prior to 1981 were not familiar with Gothard, and neither were most people in my then place of employment. I know your perspective is different, but Bill Gothard had only a fraction of the name recognition in the culture as Billy Graham, for example. So I can easily see how thousands of seminar attendees after 1981 would have very little information about the sex scandal. I did not learn about it until years later when a Gothard follower told me that Bill quickly fired all the offenders.

          • rob war rob war
            February 24, 2016    

            No problem Lynn! :) It is always interesting how different views are often influenced by how and when and where they attended the seminars.

  6. Beth Beth
    February 23, 2016    

    Having looked over Bill’s legal submission to have Gibbs removed from the case, I was quite taken back. As to other issues, including charges of abuse and false teaching, I won’t discuss here.

    First, should Gibbs be removed. Probably, YES.

    The main issue I saw in that collection of documents, was Bill’s heart. All that was evident was HIS kingdom, HIS life work, HIS rights as founder, HIS programs. HIS alumni, all the resources that HE developed, HIS crowds of thousands from 30 years ago.

    What ever happened to “do justly, love mercy, walk humbly.” What ever happened to “if you hold on to your life, you’ll lose it”?

    That one document revealed so much to me. And nothing that it revealed was GOOD.

    Regardless of whether current accusations are true, this document revealed heart. And that is possibly one root issue.

    • Beth Beth
      February 23, 2016    

      I’ll add to that list: HIS incompetent board that can only do well if HE tells them what to do.

      • Moderator Moderator
        February 23, 2016    

        I’ll add to that list: HIS incompetent board that can only do well if HE tells them what to do.

        There is nobody on the face of the earth today that can do what Bill did. IBLP did not just happen – it is the direct result of 50 years Bill’s very unique approach to solving “Basic Youth Conflicts” from God’s word. That is the draw . . . not the great programs, the conservative positions, the super good deals. Without Bill – particularly in opposition to him – I am at a loss as to how IBLP will long survive. IF that is true, and many of us believe it to be so, then this is not a statement of arrogance but of reality.

        • Beth Beth
          February 23, 2016    

          And herein lies the problem: “There is nobody on the face of the earth today that can do what Bill did. IBLP did not just happen – it is the direct result of 50 years Bill’s…”

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 23, 2016    

            “There is nobody on the face of the earth today that can do what Bill did.

            Scripturally, look at the “Faith Hall of Fame” in Hebrews 11. It was all about individuals . . . that made their mark . . . and were to a great extent irreplaceable. At least, that is how folks looked at them. The Lord seemed to not discourage that.

    • Moderator Moderator
      February 23, 2016    

      What ever happened to “do justly, love mercy, walk humbly.” What ever happened to “if you hold on to your life, you’ll lose it”?

      So, let me quote the example from Paul’s life:

      “And when he was come, the Jews which came down from Jerusalem stood round about, and laid many and grievous complaints against Paul, which they could not prove. While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all. But Festus, willing to do the Jews a pleasure, answered Paul, and said, Wilt thou go up to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these things before me? Then said Paul, I stand at Caesar’s judgment seat, where I ought to be judged: to the Jews have I done no wrong, as thou very well knowest. For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die: but if there be none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may deliver me unto them. I appeal unto Caesar. Then Festus, when he had conferred with the council, answered, Hast thou appealed unto Caesar? unto Caesar shalt thou go.” (Acts 25)

      Since Paul was not afraid to die . . . why fight this? Why go so far as to involve the secular authorities? What made this different from Paul being willing to suffer for Jesus sake and die?

      • Beth Beth
        February 23, 2016    

        I don’t have a problem with all of this going to Caesar. I just struggle with everything being about one man. The heart of every matter is a matter of the heart.

        • Moderator Moderator
          February 23, 2016    

          I just struggle with everything being about one man.

          Can you give me some Scriptural backup for your concern?

          • Beth Beth
            February 23, 2016    

            Oh my. Let me rephrase :)

            One man who feels that it’s all about himself.

            I don’t say this with sarcasm or guile or wishing Bill harm in any way. I have been greatly impacted by him. Been paid by iblp for the last 14 yrs – until very recently. And my name is not Beth.

            I am just expressing what I see.

            I wish Bill very well. I just wish he could see. And you :)

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 23, 2016    

            One man who feels that it’s all about himself.

            Again, I second his opinion. If it is objectively true, then it is not humility for him to deny it, “Beth” :-)

            I wish Bill very well. I just wish he could see. And you

            Thank you . . . and I you. I suspect a lot of shock for all of us when we finally see and know, even as we are known.

          • Beth Beth
            February 23, 2016    

            I should clarify. I wish Bill WELL in that I wish him sincere TRUTH even if that comes thru very hard means. Truth is more valuable than a good reputation, or a big ministry, or donations, or anything else.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 23, 2016    

            I wish him sincere TRUTH even if that comes thru very hard means.

            Ah, sort of a backhanded complement or blessing! I understand. As long as you wish the same for yourself, it is completely appropriate. If you would prefer to not learn by very hard means, maybe wish him a tad of mercy as well. And he has been through very hard times. At times I don’t know how he keeps going at times. When you sit next to him and analyze all that has happened, if you care about him at all it is enough to break your heart. I know the Lord is just . . . and kind . . . and it is to Him we cry.

          • Beth Beth
            February 23, 2016    

            Oh! We all need mercy and I absolutely pray that for Bill. I need it most of all. And learning the hard way – the very hard way? I’ve walked that road. Very recently even. And found that the sweet fellowship with Christ that comes on the other side is a precious gift.

            I don’t know what will come of all that has been going on – on all sides of the current issues. But I known that God alone knows all things. And loves us enough to guide into truth.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 24, 2016    

            God alone knows all things. And loves us enough to guide into truth

            Thank you for that. You are so right.

  7. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    February 24, 2016    

    Dear Rob,

    I guess you saw my 2/23 wisecrack about teaming up with readerrabbit. Even if you two did coordinate your web browsing, that would be perfectly innocent.

    Thanks for the tip on the Gothard book. I remember seeing that book in the CBD catalog more than two decades ago. I might check it out. But the Venoit book does not interest me. Like my fellow Methodists, the Apostles’ Creed is my yardstick of orthodoxy. That makes orthodoxy a pretty big sandbox. If Venoit devotes his book to proving that Bill Gothard has strayed outside the boundaries of evangelical orthodoxy taught at Wheaton College, I would shrug. That standard does not interest me. Maybe even C.S. Lewis failed that standard by smoking tobacco, drinking beer, and rejecting feminism.

    If Venoit proves that Bill Gothard is a quirky midwestern evangelical compared to a middle-aged southern white boy like me, I need not read the Venoit book. I already noticed.

    I can tell for myself that Gothard’s material falls within the boundaries of the Creed. That makes it “merely Christian,” to use the term which Lewis made famous among us evangelicals.

    But if the extreme sexual accusations are true, that matters more. I guess the lawsuit may settle that question. It may prove that Gothard was a hypocrite because acted like a creepy teenaged boy a couple of decades ago. (Gothard has already admitted that.) I myself have done worse, but Mrs. Knecht forgives me. That’s a relief! But she is getting suspicious, now that I am trading comments with women on Gothard websites. Uh, oh!

    All for now sis,
    David K

    • rob war rob war
      February 24, 2016    

      The Gothard book was written by a Lutheran. The Vernoit book comes from a very strong Calvinist/reformed point of view which as a former Methodist myself, rubs me very wrong so I totally understand where you are coming from. The Gothard book is a much different approach and is more thoughtful and raised his concerns in a much more gentler manner and his Lutheran background is not obnoxious at all.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        February 24, 2016    

        Thanks for elaborating, Rob. But I can handle Calvinism. I nearly joined my local presbyterian church back in the day. Learned the Westminster Shorter Catechism, etc. It’s okay.

        But I joined a local Episcopal church instead. The Anglican Thirty-nine Articles looked much like Calvinism-lite. That’s okay, too. Am I boring you yet?

        David K

        • rob war rob war
          February 27, 2016    

          No, not bored. I know that there is a difference between reformed theology in general and then TULIP based 5 point Calvinism which is really a subset of reformed theology. It is the later that I find very extreme and unhealthy and which takes God’s sovereignty to the point that God becomes the author of evil or causing evil. In other words, if something happen, it must be God’s will. Bill Gothard implies this sort of thinking in many of his points, especially his ideas on design, dealing with irritations etc. Ariminus theology which is what I was raised in is closer to Catholic theology which balances God’s sovereignty and free will. Venoits come from a strong Calvinist view so to me, them writing about Bill and complaining about his teaching is like the fox trying to guard the hen house. Bill definitely teaches in many of his points that bad things that happen to you is God’s will and way to form your character. So if a 11 year old girl is raped, Bill teaches that God willed that to form her character ( as well as blame the girl). That’s TULIP teaching to the extreme. The better and healthy and more Biblical view is that rape is evil and not God’s will for anyone anywhere and at any time but does happen because we live in a fallen world full of sin. God can bring healing a wholeness out of evil and sin but does not will evil and sin. Many many years ago and this made the news, there was a missionary couple doing missionary work in Columbia in an area where there was fighting between drug war lords. The man was flying a plane and the plane was shot at by drug lords which killed his wife and baby. So this guy then gets on TV and tells the world that it was God’s will and that God even directed the bullets into his wife and baby’s heart. Now if you follow this sick kind of theology, more power to you, but eventually one has to step back and realize this is warped and makes God the author of evil. This also takes the man off the hook in making a bad choice to take himself and his family in an area with fighting.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 27, 2016    

            God becomes the author of evil or causing evil. In other words, if something happen, it must be God’s will. Bill Gothard implies this sort of thinking in many of his points, especially his ideas on design, dealing with irritations etc.

            The difference between Bill and many others is that he actually believes what he professes. You know, that God is both loving and almighty. A Calvinist believes that God does not love some people, which Bill emphatically rejects. So, rape of a child in a universe controlled by a God that loves her and who knows everything and who in no time at all or effort on His part can stop it a billion different way HAS to have a definite loving purpose by God . . . Or He is a liar. Bill is different in that he tries to explain that purpose. This is what has drawn so many to him, he “creatively explaining the sovereignty of God”, as some have expressed.

          • rob war rob war
            February 27, 2016    

            Alfred, I won’t be able to give a complete reply, but I want to say a couple of quick things to your response. Not all reformed or Calvinists accept or believe in double predestination which is what your are talking about with God making people He hates. While Bill did not subscribe to that part, his some of his teaching and ideas line up with the extreme robotic God’s will part. Gotta go.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 27, 2016    

            some of his teaching and ideas line up with the extreme robotic God’s will part.

            Being as I am one of the most ardent foes of any type of interpretation that has God forcing us by manipulating our wills directly I would be eager to understand what you are referring to. In fact I believe Bill to be emphatically into “personal responsibility”, he bringing so many more things down to points that we have control over than the average evangelical theologian.

          • LynnCD LynnCD
            February 28, 2016    

            rob war, Bill utilizes the work of Sprio Zodhiates, an Arminian theologian, in much of his writing. His old definition of grace, especially his remark years earlier of “the faulty definition of unmerited favor,” puts him squarely against Calvinists and AFAIK, most Arminian teaching, leaning much more toward Pelagianism, which Augustine refuted. Bill backed off from that older definition a long time ago, and agreed to use the term “unmerited grace.”

            Bill seems to teach the concept of “prevenient grace,” which is God giving us the desire and power to do His will, including for salvation. Prevenient grace is an Arminian concept not found in Scripture, just as some Calvinists insert their presuppositions on Scriptures. Grace resisted will result in no more grace. So if you resist the grace to turn to Christ, you remain unsaved. This is clearly Arminian, not Calvinistic in flavor, if not an exact match. Just saying Gothard cannot be described as a Calvinist. We used to discuss this years ago on the Yahoo Gothard_discussion list, and that was the general understanding, although we did not get into the nuts and bolts of Arminianism vs Calvinism per se.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 29, 2016    

            DG has a 15 part article What Is Grace that seeks to distill Bill’s understanding of that crucial topic. While he did not write it, he did read it and offered no corrections.

          • rob war rob war
            February 29, 2016    

            Reply to Lynn, what source can to site that Bill was influenced by Dr. Sprio Zodhaiates because that is a new one for me. Arminianism does not lean to Pelagianism or even semi-pelagianism even though many die-hard Calvinist make that their standard accusation. In making this, you are also accusing John Wesley of the same thing since he would be the biggest well known proponent of Arminianism and that is the dominant view in Methodist and Wesleyan Churches. Bill was a fan of Charles Finney who denied original sin (a part of Pelagianism) and seemed to be the father of modern American revivalism.

            I think we could all argue back and forth all day about the meaning of Grace. I think in all fairness to everyone involved no matter what Church they call home is the Wikipedia article about Christian Grace which fairly goes into all the definitions by Catholic, Orthodox, Lutheran, Reformed etc with similarities and differences. We can go around and around and quote Bible verses till we are blue in the face but that won’t get us anywhere.

            Where I see reformed or Calvinist influence in Bill’s teaching fall not so much with definitions of Grace but with his views on God’s sovereignty and that bad things that happen to us must have been God’s will for us because they happen. This comes out in his principals of design and “irritations” etc. The article on RG by the seminary student in 1975 kinda pointed this out. Alfred here talked about Joni Earikson Tada and how she claims to have been greatly helped and even “healed” by Bill’s teaching. I’m old enough to remember her and when she was a big deal in the 70-80s with her first book and movie. I’ve been all over her current site Joni and friends, she right now makes no mention of Bill, he is not listed even as someone she recommends to read and she has only one quote by Bill buried in her blog. But what she very much appears to be is a die hard 5 point Calvinist with John MacArther, John Piper, Lorraine Boettner etc as her favorites. While I think she is a shining example of how God can use handicapped people and her ministries draw attention to those needs, you cannot tell me that God’s will for her life was for her to break her neck diving into a pool. This happen because one can’t dive into a shallow pool and not expect something to be broken and hurt. Proverbs says “the sun shines on the just and unjust”. God made a physical world govern by physical laws and it is foolish for Christians to think that they are exempt from physical laws that govern the world and if something happen like it has for Joni, then it must be God’s will for their life or else God would have prevented it. While maybe this brings comfort and meaning, this thinking puts God in the position of being the author of evil and bad things. My example to Alfred earlier was a rape of an 11 year old girl. Because something evil and terrible like this happen, is that then God’s will because God allowed it? This is a very dangerous road to go down.

          • February 29, 2016    

            Thanks, Alfred, I did read a lot of it, but my point was that Gothard would not be classified even as a four point Calvinist, because, in addition to limited atonement, Bill does not teach irresistible grace and never has. I can see where he would agree with total depravity, and part of perseverance of the saints in that he believes in eternal security. 1.5 points does not a Calvinist make. I called IBLP years ago and asked about eternal security, btw.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 29, 2016    

            1.5 points does not a Calvinist make.

            Probably not. Have not really been following the discussion. As stated, I know Bill is much into personal responsibility, to a far great extent than most. I have never heard anything from him that suggests a perspective of predetermined “fate”, predestination, etc. That most definitely includes “irresistible” anything, at least as far as our decision-making is concerned.

            I have believed and implied that you had no personal experience with either IBLP or Bill or ATI. I was obviously wrong.

          • February 29, 2016    

            rob war, the fact that Gothard’s theology is more Arminian than Calvinistic should in no way be construed as a put down of Arminian theology.

            Both the older Arminians and Calvinists affirm the sovereignty of God; they differ in how what is called “the decree of God” is ordered. I know they bark and snap at eac other to laughable extremes, and I don’t feel like debating it.

            As to Gothard and Dr. Zodhiates, here is one link, but I have read others: http://lifeinconflict.blogspot.com/2008/11/definition-of-grace.html

          • February 29, 2016    

            Zodhiates work is available in other versions, but note Gothrd’s statement on this page, referring to “many conversations” with Dr. Zodhiates. The fact that Zodhiates puts his imprimature on Gothard’s page (previous comment) on grace is more crucial, IMO, but this is another example: http://www.thekjvstore.com/kjv-hebrew-greek-keyword-study-bible-wide-margin-edition.html

          • February 29, 2016    
          • rob war rob war
            March 1, 2016    

            Thank-you Lynn for the links, I have looked at all of them. I have often asked before what theologians Bill has used. It is apparent that he has used this guy for his Greek meanings since that seemed to be Dr. Z’s speciality with his Greek background.

          • rob war rob war
            March 2, 2016    

            Lynn, you quote St. Augustine in your elaboration about Calvin’s teaching. While Calvin may have quoted St. Augustine the most after the Bible to prove his ideas, St. Augustine is not a proto-calvinist, despite what some Evangelicals and Calvinists want to believe. Dave Armstrong, a Catholic apologist has pointed this out in a number of his articles. Larry D Sharp in Evangelical Quarterly, Vol 52, 1980 pp 84-96 pointed out in “The doctrine of Grace In Calvin and Augustine” that Calvin quoted St. Augustine but his teaching of Grace, original sin and total depravity go well beyond. what St. Augustine actually taught. Larry Sharp is one of your guys. Calvin rejects all early Church Fathers but one and even with St. Augustine, he only used him as a springboard to his own ideas. Bill’s ideas and definition of Grace match closely with Pelagius. which denies original sin and considered Grace the ability to obey God. It’s an incomplete definition because it doesn’t acknowledge that one does not earn Grace because it is a free gift and unmerited.

          • March 2, 2016    

            rob, IBLP and ATI statements of faith for years have stated the affirmation of original sin. You just have to google IBLP original sin to read the statement of faith. That, and the fact that Dr. Zodhiates approved Gothard’s revised definition of grace where he taught that grace is unmerited. Gothard cannot be described as Pelagian. He believes in original sin. The most you can go is Semi-Pelagian, but I think the statements he makes are closer to Arminian, which is the theology of Dr. Zodhiates.

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            March 12, 2016    

            Hi, sister Rob. I just noticed your reply from 2/27. Sorry for being pokey. Thank you for walking through the theology stuff with me. I made the “bored” wisecrack because I became conscious that I was droning on about my personal religious history.

            I see that others have taken up your theological points, so I won’t wade into that.

            Peace and love,
            David K

  8. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    February 24, 2016    

    Here is a second-opinion request. Has anyone out there read the 1976 Gothard book which Rob War recommended to me on 2/23? Does anyone else recommend it?

    Sincerely,
    David K

  9. February 25, 2016    

    Alfred, regarding your challenge to David that IBLP taught Christians were never to sue anybody, I have a letter from IBLP from years ago. I wrote for some materials and paid by cash or check the old fashioned way. I asked about a legal matter I had just heard IBLP had had a favorable ruling on.

    I’ve told this story before. Some young judgmental twerp in the mailing office “discerned” I was a suit minded person. (I have many faults, but that is NOT one of them.) This person sent me the materials I requested, and added in a blurb from IBLP materials (ie, not a typed or written custom reply) that a Christian should NEVER sue anybody. It finished with a testimony of a woman who had some problem but didn’t sue, who got about 600,000 $ for something (can’t remember) but a “cranky” husband was part of the story.

    IBLP most definitely taught that Christians were never to sue. And IBLP very wrongly “discerned” I was a suit minded person.

    • Moderator Moderator
      February 25, 2016    

      This person sent me the materials I requested, and added in a blurb from IBLP materials (ie, not a typed or written custom reply) that a Christian should NEVER sue anybody.

      Do you by chance have that? I know he discouraged it. I mean . . . Bill could have sued years ago to clear his name. But there was space between him and the baloney and he felt that ignoring it would be the best policy. People thought I had to be on Bill’s payroll on “Metochoi” and then RG . . . but nothing was further from the truth. Bill still is not convinced that this type of social media is profitable to engage in – of course I completely disagree.

      At this point those lies and exaggerations have come to the point where alumni the world over are grieved and confused. Satan makes hay in those kinds of situations. Bill now feels a direct responsibility to meet those fiery darts, ready to destroy him, IBLP first, and then as many of “the sheep” as the devil can get. Attempts over the past 2 years to bring the accusers together with Bill to talk and work it out have emphatically failed . . . through no fault of his. I have been involved in this attempted process – a joke. Now this evil lawsuit is looking to finish him and IBLP once and for all. When Paul was backed into a corner where his life let alone his ministry was being threatened by motivated enemies, he appealed to the legal authorities. There is nothing unscriptural about that. In this case, the remedy, as his legal advisers have told him, is a counter suit, which the government will enforce.

      • LynnCD LynnCD
        February 25, 2016    

        No, I don’t have it, but it shocked me so much that I remember the words “never sue.” Don Veinot also claims this is some thing Bill has consistently taught – and that Bill threatened to sue Don. The specifics can be read here: http://midwestchristianoutreach.org/?p=7218

        • LynnCD LynnCD
          February 26, 2016    

          I should say, “I received a letter.” The Veinots may have materials, but my letter most definitely used the phrase “never sue.” I was taken aback at the time, to say the least about it, which is why I remember it. Don makes the same assertion on the MCO blog – you could ask him about it. He said it was an ongoing teaching of IBLP.

          • Sandy Sandy
            February 26, 2016    

            The point, Alfred, is not whether LynnCD or anyone else believes it’s okay for Christians to sue other believers. Her point is that Bill has taught one thing as absolute, yet doesn’t apply it to himself. No one seems to recall Bill saying that it’s okay if someone is “seeking to destroy you.” Wouldn’t his teachings about giving up rights contradict that?

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 26, 2016    

            Her point is that Bill has taught one thing as absolute, yet doesn’t apply it to himself.

            Now, I have been asking for proof of that, so far none has been presented. So . . . can you help me?

          • Sandy Sandy
            February 26, 2016    

            *I* cannot help you. SHE – and others – have indicated that this teaching was without conditions. MY point was that you were contorting HER point into whether lawsuits are okay or not, which it wasn’t.

            And I was raising an additional question about defending oneself from destruction versus Bill’s teaching about giving up rights. Can you elaborate on that?

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 26, 2016    

            *I* cannot help you. SHE – and others – have indicated that this teaching was without conditions

            Ah, back to color commentary mode. I thought you knew where that came from. I don’t. Yet.

            And I was raising an additional question about defending oneself from destruction versus Bill’s teaching about giving up rights. Can you elaborate on that?

            That is simple. The difference is between rights and responsibilities. Rights enable us to live the life we choose, are optional, may be surrendered . . . responsibilities are given by a higher authority and are non-optional. I have a Biblical right to honor and love from my kids which I must surrender . . . I have a responsibility to train my children to respect me and ultimately the Lord, with some force as necessary. Property rights must be surrendered . . . We have the responsibility to protect the property that belongs to God and is held by us In trust (parables about the “talents”).

        • Moderator Moderator
          February 26, 2016    

          I don’t have it, but it shocked me so much that I remember the words “never sue.”

          Help me understand. DO you believe it is OK for Christians to sue other believers in some circumstances . . . this being the reason you were shocked? For his part, I know Bill takes extreme positions to make points, leaving the nuancing to other times. Noone can deny that lawsuits between believers are forbidden in principle . . . but seeking legal protection from those seeking to destroy you is not. Bill feels this situation to be the latter, since it is the only means available to him to stop these unjust attempts to, well, destroy both him and IBLP. The legal firm representing him is making those recommendations – he already lost one very good lawyer because he decided to pull a punch that was demanded as part of the process, rather attempting to reconcile privately. We are strongly recommending to him, as a result, to proceed exactly along the lines given him by his counsel. Where we sit, this lawsuit mess was opened by others who have clearly proven that they are not interested in actually reconciling with Bill and IBLP, propelled by an organization that has vengeance as its ultimate goal. At this point it appears it must be settled in that unforgiving venue they selected and lobbied for.

          • David David
            February 26, 2016    

            “We are strongly recommending to him, as a result, to proceed exactly along the lines given him by his counsel.”

            Are these counselors basing their advice on God’s Word or man’s thinking? Just curious…

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 26, 2016    

            Are these counselors basing their advice on God’s Word or man’s thinking? Just curious…

            I think they are very good lawyers in the state of Illinois, which is why Bill hired them. And what he needs right now, would you not agree?

          • David David
            February 26, 2016    

            “And what he needs right now, would you not agree?”

            I’m sure he needs legal counsel, certainly. Just wondering if they were believers who operate according to God’s principles or lawyers who operate according to the carnal thinking of man.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 26, 2016    

            lawyers who operate according to the carnal thinking of man

            I will leave that to you to figure out. When I am attacked by a vicious gang I want a big burly policeman with lots of big guns, whether personally godly or not, to protect me.

          • David David
            February 26, 2016    

            “When I am attacked by a vicious gang I want a big burly policeman with lots of big guns, whether personally godly or not, to protect me.”

            That analogy breaks down pretty quickly. When you hire a legal defense, they serve as your representative. Every action that these attorney’s take will have Bill Gothard’s name on it and will be representative of his wishes. One would think that he would want such representation to by those who have God’s Word at the center of their lives.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 26, 2016    

            One would think that he would want such representation to by those who have God’s Word at the center of their lives.

            I just haven’t seen that as a pressing requirement for legal matters. Kind of like hiring a guide into the wilderness . . . you are mostly concerned about the ability to get from point A to point B safely.

          • LynnCD LynnCD
            February 26, 2016    

            “DO you believe it is OK for Christians to sue other believers in some circumstances . . . this being the reason you were shocked?”

            The reason I was shocked is the way the paper was worded was to imply that I was a suit minded person. That was sent to me because I asked about the recent victory IBLP had in some suit. Can’t remember the date or the particulars. I have not and am not weighing in on this current lawsuit at all as to the rightness or wrongness of it.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 26, 2016    

            Can’t remember the date or the particulars. I have not and am not weighing in on this current lawsuit at all as to the rightness or wrongness of it.

            I have always appreciated your ability to stay relatively objective as we have walked through some of this stuff.

          • Sandy Sandy
            February 26, 2016    

            You “want a big burly policeman with lots of big guns, whether personally godly or not, to protect [you].” Is it okay if his/her reflexes are so quick that they shoot before you pray? I personally am all in favor of competent swift reflexes, but you said this a while back about how a godly person should expect to be protected in case of assault, in “first & second” order (my emphases):

            “The victim must avail themselves of that authority, [God-ordained authority to rectify the situation with the strong preying on the weak.], FIRST by crying out to God who has angels dedicated to exactly that purpose, SECOND to run to the family, church, and government authorities – not necessarily in that order – to get help. It is my conviction that a great many victims will stop being victims at the moment that declare their authority and power in Jesus Christ and confront evil. That is what God commands us to do with spiritual evil – the devil and his minions – and it applies to the lesser physical lackeys as well.”

            Yes, it’s a silly question, but you seem to have all the answers for one being sexually assaulted, but it’s pretty clear the big guns (which certainly can BE God’s agent of our protection) are pretty darn handy in time of need. Sexual or not, assault is assault, so no need to go there.

          • Moderator Moderator
            February 26, 2016    

            it’s pretty clear the big guns (which certainly can BE God’s agent of our protection) are pretty darn handy in time of need. Sexual or not, assault is assault, so no need to go there.

            Was completely tracking. Big guns ARE most helpful when attacked. Obviously the first call is to the Lord . . . Burly policemen are actually His agents.

            “For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil . . . For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.” (Romans 13:3-4)

            Assault is assault, no argument there.

  10. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    February 26, 2016    

    Dear readerrabbit,

    I just saw your 2/24 post. Please make no apologies for wordiness. If you happened to do the Pudewa writing program with your youngsters, you may remember Pudewa’s thousand-word girl. She wrote long essays, in contrast with the boy student who wanted to get the writing assignment done quickly so he could resume building forts outdoors. So I alternate my fort-building with reading essays by thousand-word women.

    Anyway, that must have been a rare occupation which required Gothard seminar attendance.

    Stinky flesh? Please don’t be too hard on yourself. We Christians are permitted (encouraged) to use deodorant.

    I agree that the Galatian epistle warns against rule-keeping. I may be out of my depth as a layman, but don’t you sense that the main point was telling bacon-eating gentiles that Christianity was not just judaism on steroids? Rather it was the consumation of God’s covenant with Abraham. Everybody gets blessed by the Gospel, not just the circumcised.

    I am sorry to hear about those church splits. My own large church recently got rid of the pastor on the stated grounds that he could not sustain average Sunday attendance close enough to a thousand! It had nothing to do with Gothard, but that lame claim illustrates that we sinners find ever-more creative ways to sin.

    I may be a bone-spitter, but I still think Gothard’s Basic Seminar material is pretty good. Some of the Advanced seems mystical and girly. I mean when it claims that God speaks to husbands through wives. I don’t count that as anti-Christian, just an interesting theory which is supported by anecdotal evidence. Maybe that is one of the bones you were spitting. If so, does Mr. Rabbit know your opinion? If you are discreet, perhaps you can utter some prophecies in the Rabbit house which just happen to fall to your advantage!

    I get your point about peer pressure from like-minded people. But I wonder if we don’t use “like-minded” too narrowly. We should spend time around people who believe the Creeds, but who also believe that our opinions are mistaken. Mrs. K believes the Apostles’ Creed as devoutly as I, but she also thinks some of my opinions are wacko.

    Till next time,
    David K

    • readerrabbit readerrabbit
      March 1, 2016    

      Yes, I agree that like-minded is interpreted far too narrowly, especially in a legalistic world. I think of legalism attempting to please God by holding myself (and others!) to a set of standards vs yielding moment by moment to the Lord. Conformity to externals may be one reason that home schoolers are so easily caricatured with long denim jumpers etc.and are often not comfortable or willing to be around those “not committed to courtship or some other trivial man-made standard. Basic Christian doctrine /creeds should be enough as a starting point for fellowship. But alas…

      I Peter refers to believers as living stones, which is quite different from bricks, that at first glance might fit together easier and perhaps not require as much skill from the mason to build a wall. I personally prefer the beauty of an old stone wall, with knobby differences in shape and color, over the conformity of a brick wall with cookie cutter bricks. I like to imagine that love is the mortar that holds it all together. Kooky analogy, I know. In my experience, if we are only around others who act and believe identically to us, then we are rarely put in a position to have to love(apply lots more mortar in the gaps) through the differences.

      My indoctrination in the teaching of BG encouraged a superior than thou attitude toward others who did not adhere to all the steps and principles I was committed to follow. I could certainly have been so prideful all on my own, but that is the attitude that the IBLPers were characterized by as we did not try to mortar well with the rest of the Church. Little wonder I want to distance myself from his teaching. Even when there was truth present, it got all muddled and tainted by the “mystical “stuff, particularly in the Advanced and supplemental booklets.
      Gratefully, Mr. Rabbit is not as wordy as I am. His giftings are much more in servant leadership and encouragement. He doesn’t hesitate to give direction in our home, but often turns my questions back on me. “Have you prayed about it? What do you think God wants you to do?” He’s especially good at pointing me to Jesus.
      FYI, When you teach in a Christian school, it’s easy to accept IBLP attendance as par for the course.

      • Moderator Moderator
        March 2, 2016    

        I think of legalism attempting to please God by holding myself (and others!) to a set of standards vs yielding moment by moment to the Lord

        There is Legalism again, that non-Scriptural word that means SO many different things to different people. *I* think the closest Scriptural concept that makes sense is Jesus decrying of “majoring in minors”, elevating little things – like tithing mint and potatoes out of your garden or straining your drink so no unclean gnat might be drunk – and ignoring the big things, like love and righteousness and taking care of widows. The lesson there was NOT to stop tithing the mint and potatoes . . . but to do that AND handle the big things.

        As far as “being separated” from others . . . what does this mean to you?

        “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you. And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.” (2 Cor. 6:14-18)

        There is a separation from darkness, devil, unbeliever, idols . . . before the Lord will “receive us” in a practical way.

        How about this?

        “I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.” (1 Cor. 5:9-11)

        • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
          March 6, 2016    

          Moderator, I like your term, “non-scriptural.” I guess it caught my attention because of the contrast with “unscriptural,” which of course is a term which we evangelicals favor when we want to smear someone. Non-scriptural sounds more charitable because it does not necessarily mean anti-scriptural.

          But I’ll bite on the 1 Corinthians passage. I hope we do not have to be absolute with that separation. It might remove us not only from “the world,” but possibly even from our own church if only we knew all the hidden goings-on among us. It inclines me toward a baptized version of don’t-ask-don’t-tell. Fornicator? Covetous? Railer? Check, check, check. I had three of the five listed offenses on my record, to some degree and at some time. Sixty percent. It is a good thing that I was interviewed by nobody but myself before Holy Communion this morning. I am Discovering Grace.

          Peace,
          David K

          • Moderator Moderator
            March 6, 2016    

            It inclines me toward a baptized version of don’t-ask-don’t-tell. Fornicator? Covetous? Railer? Check, check, check.

            Well . . . Obviously we are not dealing with sinless perfection. BUT, it does involve those that have lost the battle in any of those areas to the point that they are known by these handles . . . One known as a brother who is also known as a “fornicator” or “railer”. The section is equivalent in judgement to Jesus’ “level 3”, meaning he was approached multiple times , with authority, and refuses to repent.

            I am glad that you, and I, are discovering God’s grace, grace greater than all our sin.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        March 5, 2016    

        Hello again, Mrs. Rabbit,

        It was nice to visit my Mac on a Saturday morning and read your 3/1 reply. (Especially on an early spring morning such as we are having in Tampa just now.) Not only was your 1 Peter analogy un-kooky, I thought it was beautiful. When I led basic training in ALERT more than twenty years ago, I taught from 1 Peter. But it never occurred to me to use such an analogy. Too bad. The Northwoods conference center had a stone facade which I could had used to make your point about love. In fact, you might even have carried the point a bit further. I am quite certain that you and Mr. Rabbit got together because you were complementary like stones, not identical like bricks!

        Yes, it makes sense that a Christian school administrator may have admired the Gothard seminar enough to require attendance for his faculty.

        It is funny you should mention our conservative evangelical denim-jumper sorority. My eldest son attends college with a devout muslim man, and they recently compared notes on those cultural tics which arise in the most conservative branches of both religions. The poor fellow has a crush on a pretty muslim girl in the class, but is distressed because she wears clothes which reveal her ankles! That is too worldly for his taste.

        Here’s to living stones,
        David K

  11. February 27, 2016    

    Hi,
    Has Bill committed to making public the video of any deposition he participates in as well as copies of his answers to any interrogatories the Plaintiff’s send him? Obviously some names and financial information need to be redacted, but it would establish that his answers under oath are consistent with his public statements and it would establish his willingness to cooperate with discovery process.

    • Moderator Moderator
      February 27, 2016    

      Has Bill committed to making public the video of any deposition he participates in as well as copies of his answers to any interrogatories the Plaintiff’s send him?

      Bill has not committed to anything that I know of other than trying to reconcile with his accusers. Which is currently not possible. Beyond that he will be following the advice of his lawyers as it relates to the lawsuit.

  12. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    April 17, 2016    

    Brethren,

    It has been a couple of months since this article was posted last winter. Is there any news concerning the suit itself? Last I heard, there was some question whether Gibbs was qualified on ethical grounds to bring suit.

    Sincerely,
    David K

    • Moderator Moderator
      April 17, 2016    

      Since Gibbs stopped putting all of the documents out on the Internet things have been quiet :-) Lawyers have been busy with back and forth affidavits regarding the “Motions to Dismiss and Sanction” with the current hearing scheduled for May 2nd. That is all there is to report at present.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        April 17, 2016    

        Okay, so apart from the routine legal traffic and a 5/2 hearing, we could say that it is “all quiet on the midwestern front.” That’s a mercy.

        David K

        • Moderator Moderator
          April 18, 2016    

          The quiet before the storm. No matter what happens 5/2, things will get interesting thereafter.

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            April 18, 2016    

            Isn’t that like the reputed Chinese curse, “may you live in interesting times”?

            Just an attempt at humor,
            David K

          • Moderator Moderator
            April 18, 2016    

            “may you live in interesting times”?

            Nothing about Bill Gothard is ever ordinary. For those that have followed his ministry – as I have for over 40 years – it has been “interesting” every step of the way. The heights have been unparalleled . . . and the events of the past several years have been crushing. The final analysis will be the Lord’s, but it has been – and continues to be – a privilege I thank God for. As Bill has often said, “God writes final chapters”. The final chapter has not yet been completed. Just yesterday he called, about as excited as I have ever heard him. God had – with the touch of His hand, at 2AM – solved a significant problem, and provided a stunning key to solving another. He tends to spin things positive and in an encouraging way, but these two events were remarkable and could not be written off in that way. I have seen the Lord step in time after time, when all seemed lost. This alone has encouraged our little team tremendously. So we all continue to look to Him to solve and heal . . . and speak, in ways He has up to now not spoken.

            Thanks for your participation.

  13. Moderator Moderator
    April 29, 2016    

    Date change: The hearing scheduled for Monday, May 2nd was today moved to Tuesday, May 3rd.

  14. Moderator Moderator
    May 3, 2016    

    The hearing was held this morning at 9:30am, lasting about an hour and a half. Both teams of lawyers presented their positions and the judge asked fairly pointed, intelligent questions. In the end he took it “under advisement” and will issue a ruling on the Motion to Dismiss the Gibbs law firm in writing within 1 week, by May 11th. A new court date was set for May 24th to discuss the Motion to Dismiss the entire lawsuit.

    Based on what we heard we remain cautiously optimistic. We continue to cry out to the Lord.

    • rob war rob war
      May 6, 2016    

      How do you know this, were you there personally yourself in court?

      • Moderator Moderator
        May 7, 2016    

        We were.

        • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
          May 9, 2016    

          I am glad to read a personal, first-hand, on-site eyewitness report. I was afraid we were going to be stuck with hearsay only. Standing by until the next installment after 5/24.

          Sincerely,
          David K

          • Moderator Moderator
            May 10, 2016    

            Look for the next installment today or tomorrow at the latest. Something big will happen, one way or the other.

          • rob war rob war
            May 12, 2016    

            and there verdict is?

          • Moderator Moderator
            May 12, 2016    

            I heard just in the last half hour that the decision has been delayed to the 20th. That was 3rd hand, so we shall see.

  15. Moderator Moderator
    May 11, 2016    

    As we continue to wait for the ruling, this is the transcript of the hearing last week, courtesy of HA: https://homeschoolersanonymous.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/03-may-2016_cs.pdf

    • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
      May 12, 2016    

      According to this transcript, the judge intended to issue a written opinion no later than yesterday, May 11, right? I did not read the transcript very closely, but I picked up on the May 11 target for a written opinion.

      David K

      • Moderator Moderator
        May 12, 2016    

        Bill’s lawyer had heard nothing as of this afternoon. One of our team subsequently approached someone else involved in the case and received the answer just given, that the decision was delayed until the 20th. When we know more, we will provide it.

        • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
          May 14, 2016    

          Yes, I saw your remark on the adoption thread about the judge possibly polishing his prose to fortify it against appeal. That makes sense. Perhaps another week will move things along. Tick, tick, tick.

          With bated breath,
          David K

  16. Moderator Moderator
    May 20, 2016    

    We just heard via the grapevine that the judge postponed the ruling again, this time until the 31st.

  17. Moderator Moderator
    May 23, 2016    

    We heard – via HA – that the ruling was handed down and David Gibbs III has been disqualified from the case. There is a hearing next week Tuesday, May 31st, on the disposition of the case going forward.

    The link to the ruling on the HA site: https://homeschoolersanonymous.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/iblpgothardopionletterdisqualifyingdavidgibbs05232016.pdf

    • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
      May 27, 2016    

      Okay, so the Gibbs exit settles one question. Next question for 3/31 is whether the entire suit goes forward or gets tossed. May the best man win.

      One down, one to go,
      David K

      • Moderator Moderator
        May 27, 2016    

        Next question for 3/31 is whether the entire suit goes forward or gets tossed. May the best man win.

        I doubt it will be that simple. At the very least the plaintiffs will declare their intentions going forward. They do have current representation, a local personal injury attorney that Gibbs brought in when the suit was filed. From the defendents’ side, I would expect they will be asking the judge to apply other sanctions on the suit based on portions, exhibits and the like that they would feel would be prejudicial due to Gibbs’s – I am sorry – shenanigans. Additionally, I know there is at least one other motion planned or filed relating to the merits of the claims themselves. 05/31 could be monumental, or it could be very short, setting a new date for attorneys, plaintiffs to prepare further . . . or something in between.

  18. Moderator Moderator
    June 1, 2016    

    Yesterday a status hearing was held. I was not there, but I understand that the plaintiffs fired the remaining lawyer(s) from the Gibbs team . .. . . Or they quit. Regardless, the judge gave them until July 5th to secure new counsel or the case will be dismissed.

    • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
      June 10, 2016    

      Thanks for the update, brother. I was getting curious. Never heard of a status hearing, though. Whatever.

      David K

      • Moderator Moderator
        June 10, 2016    

        You tell me:

        Status Hearing

        • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
          June 13, 2016    

          Wow, I count seven attorneys withdrawn. Happily, I keep my distance from attorneys. But unless those guys serving pro bono, that must have been an expensive squad of lawyers. I wonder how much they cost, and who bore the expense?

          Yes, I know: “Knecht, how dare you elevate money over principle?” I dare to do it when I have insufficient money to hire lawyers, which is always!

          Your cheapskate,
          David K

          • Moderator Moderator
            June 13, 2016    

            Oh . . . that was only page 1 :-)

            Page 2

            Page 3

            Now . . . this is very un-instructive . . . somehow I suspect that every entry does not represent a lawyer . . . or?

    • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
      July 5, 2016    

      Okay, today is July 5. Is there any news from the lawsuit?

      Inquiring minds want to know,
      David K

      • Moderator Moderator
        July 5, 2016    

        A lot of people are waiting. We have heard nothing yet . . . so we keep looking to the Lord.

      • Moderator Moderator
        July 6, 2016    

        We just learned that the plaintiffs have retained a local lawyer, from Chicago, who specializes in workers compensation and personal injury. I have a name but I will wait until further confirmation. Next Wednesday, July 13, is the “Status” hearing on the lawsuit.

      • Moderator Moderator
        July 6, 2016    

        I did receive confirmation. The law firm is Myers & Flowers, specific lawyer Frank Cesarone.

  19. Moderator Moderator
    July 13, 2016    

    Hearing was held today (07/13) for the new law firm to engage. They were granted until August 15th to prepare their version of the suit. Two plaintiffs dropped out: Jane Doe II and John Doe I. After the August 15th hearing will be a month for responses, motions, etc. . . . with a hearing to move ahead end of September (will get the exact date). No new plaintiffs will be added, regardless.

    • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
      September 30, 2016    

      The end if September has arrived. Any news about the lawsuit?

      David K

      • Moderator Moderator
        October 3, 2016    

        According to the court docket there was some activity on Sept. 21. More than likely the lawyers for the two new defendents entered motions with respect to the charges. The hearing on Sept. 29th was cancelled. The new hearing on Nov. 30th will, apparently, be conducted for the purposed of ruling on the motions that have been submitted to dismiss the various allegations on a variety of grounds.

        • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
          October 3, 2016    

          Okay, so the next major scheduled lawsuit event occurs at the end of next month?

          Until then,
          David K

        • Moderator Moderator
          October 3, 2016    

          Yup. Could be quite important. I am guessing the time is for the judge to make some significant decisions.

  20. Moderator Moderator
    July 14, 2016    

    Clarification: “End of September” is 09/29/2016, the date scheduled for a hearing on whatever modified form the new law firm presents the lawsuit in.

  21. Moderator Moderator
    August 22, 2016    

    Update: The revised lawsuit was submitted this past Wednesday. A father/son team from Kentucky appears to be taking a primary role. Interesting to me – and apparently primary to the type of tack that they are intending to take, is the following statement that I believe is made for every one of the 17 plaintiffs:

    “[plaintiff] was suffering from a condition that caused her/him to repress the memories of abuse and/or [plaintiff] did not know her/his injuries were caused by the abuse.””

    So . . . EVERY last one of them is now claiming “repressed memories” to explain how they failed to complain or report their alleged abuse . . . continue to be happy friends of Bill’s , in many cases . . . until their minds were enlightened by Recovering Grace, in many cases 20 years later. Or the possibility of a lawsuit with a big payout? In any case, we shall see how that plays out as we continue to look to the Lord.

    • Sandy Sandy
      August 22, 2016    

      I’m not familiar with the suit, but just want to point out to you, Alfred, that your generalization – “EVERY last one of them is now claiming ‘repressed memories'” – contradicts your statement immediately previous: “… caused him/her to repress the memories of abuse and/OR … did not know … injuries were caused by the abuse.” (emphasis mine)

      I have no knowledge of how many claimed what (or even the source or validity of that “and/or” statement), but as long as that statement is credible and it has an “or” in it, please don’t generalize about the repressed memories. It’s all too obvious that you blow off the idea of repressed memories, which is offensive enough, but please realize that “not knowing that injuries were caused by abuse,” though seemingly all in the same bucket to you, really has nothing to do with repressed memories, and is a completely different scenario. Please don’t be so quick to generalize, sir.

      • Moderator Moderator
        August 23, 2016    

        Well . . . in either case, it indicates that whatever happened, every plaintiff, with no exceptions either didn’t think it was an issue to anyone, or they didn’t think it was an issue to them when it happened and for many years following. I think that is fairly clear. “Repressed memories” is a legal position of convenience they hope to drive any amount of misinformation through, since no plaintiff – not one – had any clue that whatever they are now alleging was a problem, in most cases for 20 years. Up until seconds before someone directed them to Recovering Grace. I mean . . . even in the most extreme cults, SOMEBODY figures out there is a problem at some point, and bails, and yells. Strange . . . that, according to this lawsuit, not a single plaintiff figured it out on their own? Not until someone with a large agenda meticulously redefined a bunch of things for them that they had felt to be one thing . . . to be something else?

        There are times . . . I tremble to ponder what some folks will have to answer to Jesus for what they are attempting to do or allowing others to use them for. Eternity will tell all. Perhaps the Lord will also tell it before them. That is His call.

        • Sandy Sandy
          August 24, 2016    

          “Repressed memories” MIGHT at times be “a legal position of convenience,” or they might be what they’re described to be – memories that have been repressed. There you go generalizing again, Alfred.

          You generalize about RG, too, as if it’s the only avenue of support for former Gothardites or the only source of information about harm that has been done in Gothardom. It’s NOT, by far.

          Then you complain that victims didn’t come forth sooner, which is explained by their claims that they didn’t realize at the time what was happening, while you blame them for not knowing there was a problem. Smh!

          • Moderator Moderator
            August 25, 2016    

            Oh, Sandy . . . I presume you are as incapable of considering other possibilities as I, apparently, appear to be to you. ALL 17 plaintiffs?! Suddenly are all declaring that they couldn’t figure out what was going on until about 4 years ago? Now how can that be even reasonable? And now, all of a sudden, several of them discover that Bill fondled their breasts. They forgot about it in the first 2 iterations of the lawsuit, as David Gibbs wasn’t sharp enough to help them remember . . . but better, more astute lawyers helped them get their memories back. Just in the last 2 months.

            Recovered memories DOES sound like a way for a lawyer to try to sneak some, what would otherwise be considered, incomprehensible conflicting facts past a judge and then a jury. Jogged memories is also consistent with a group of people who got together about 5-6 years ago to find a way to overthrow Bill as punishment for the pain they believe he inflicted on them and their families. Not one of them personally claimed any sexual damage or mischief, but quickly went on a focused campaign to find such accounts with which to smear Bill. And with enough suggestions and psychological pressure . . . it comes together. The end justifies the means.

            I get it. What I do not get is, based on what I know about some of the plaintiffs, how they can stand to what is in the lawsuit as scripted by the lawyers with a clear conscience before the Lord. Payday, someday . . . for all of us. The perfect Judge of all will not miss a thing – nothing Bill has done . . . and nothing done against him.

    • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
      August 24, 2016    

      So is this father-son team connected to the law firm you mentioned back on 7/6? Namely Myers & Flowers?

      David K

      • Moderator Moderator
        August 25, 2016    

        Myers & Flowers are a local personal injury firm, perhaps brought in because the intended lawyers, Mark Bryant – with fellow lawyers Joseph Roark and Emily Roark – and son David Bryant were not yet licensed to practice law in Illinois. Since all five have now been added to the case, I presume those steps were taken care of. Meaning, I do not believe this is a relationship other than of convenience.

        For the record . . . sounds like David Gibbs is taking legal steps to get a piece of the pie, whatever that may be. This for services rendered. And he had an associate – AND someone else also from a local law firm. A plethora of lawyers needing to be fed.

        • rob war rob war
          August 26, 2016    

          Where did you get this from? I would think if a lawyer was removed from a case due to ethic violation that he isn’t owed anything. Can’t G III give it a rest and move on with his life.

          • Moderator Moderator
            August 27, 2016    

            No, I was told by several folks on the “defense” that Gibbs is filing paperwork . . . to get a piece of the pie. A “lien” is, I believe, what they call it.

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            August 28, 2016    

            That’s a thought, Rob. Leave bad enough alone?

            Unfortunately, sometimes lawyers deserve the lawyer jokes.

            But there are exceptions. In a Tale of Two Cities, the lawyer was the unlikely hero in the end. “Tis a far far better thing I do than I have ever done before.”

            What the Dickens,
            David K

          • rob war rob war
            August 29, 2016    

            Brother Dave,
            “What a Dickens”! That is brilliant, I needed the chuckle of the day. But seriously, is he “owed” anything after being found in violation of lawyer “ethics” and kicked off the case? I guess lawyer ethics is in the same mode as military intelligence but we’ll try not to go there. He got spanked, I think the better is to take his sore rear end and call it a day and move on with his life and try to put his thinking and theology back together. Yes, what a dickens.

  22. Moderator Moderator
    August 29, 2016    

    Just a general comment . . . which I don’t need to make . . . but I am going to anyway. Two new defendants were added in the newest filing, including Dr. Ken Copley. In reading some of the comments over on Recovering Grace, it would be fair to point out that neither of them are “public figures”. I have spoken at length with Dr. Copley, and he adamantly, vehemently . . . with some compelling proof . . . denies the allegations of his daughter. The other accuser, Jane Doe II, the one that claimed that Dr. Copley raped her when she was 7 years old, something like that, has disappeared, being dropped from the case since the 2nd iteration (this is the 3rd). Based on a number of facts, which include two investigations apparently conducted by the authorities of her claims years ago, I am sure none of that happened.

    Regardless . . . He is not a public figure. Before you accuse him publically or speak of these unfounded allegations as fact, take note that such statements carry no protection against libel. Besides being just wrong. I am aware of some financial losses he suffered in the wake of this, and if he is as innocent as I understand him to be, those are legal and material losses.

    So . . . “innocent until proven guilty” is a good way to proceed.

    And for the record, he was never dismissed from IBLP.

    • rob war rob war
      August 29, 2016    

      I’m not following Alfred, what does “public” figure have to do with it anyway? The case is a matter of public record and he was named in it with some pretty horrible allegations. Now, if he is innocent, then he should be talking to his lawyer about it and not to other bloggers like yourself who is turn are going on line with his defense. If he thinks he has a libel case, it would be more due to with the allegations in the lawsuit, not what people are discussing on RG. Now that he is a named defendant, I would think he shouldn’t have or use others like yourself and not matter how well meaning, to get out his message that he is innocent. The board members likewise named in the suit are not public figures either. I’m not following your thinking here.

      • Moderator Moderator
        August 30, 2016    

        Things stated in a lawsuit cannot be in themselves a basis for a defamation case, i.e. he could not sue “Jane Doe II” specifically for lying in the lawsuit. But smearing someone’s name in public, even if just “negligent”, IS cause for such a claim. Negligence would be publicly discussing untruths as facts as though you had verified them, EVEN if you believed them.

        Public figures lose those protections – you can be “negligent” in discussing slanderous information irresponsibly, just not “malicious”, deliberately trying to hurt that public figure with false information. Unlike Bill, Dr. Copley is a private citizen. He has already suffered specific financial damage because of allegations made against him on blogs, because people have read those blogs and believed them and took steps that harmed him. That IS a basis for successful lawsuits. I have no idea if that were even a course he were interested in, as we never discussed it. But it is fair warning. This is the reason that news outlets are always so careful to say “alleged” in front of accusations that have not been proven true.

        • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
          September 2, 2016    

          That is an interesting explanation, and probably common knowledge to people in the law field. Of course the rest of us are accustomed to the scrupulous use of “alleged” in the news, as you say.

          Ever see the old Henry Fonda film, “Twelve Angry Men”? That’s a good example of justice attained against all odds. May justice be done in the Gothard case.

          Peace,
          David K

          • Moderator Moderator
            September 3, 2016    

            Have not seen it, looked it up, very interesting.

            Yes, there is a very deliberate reason for the use of “alleged” . . . and it defers to unresolved legal pleadings as the source, not personal knowledge. So if you want to blame someone, you have to blame the lawsuit, which, of course, can’t be sued. Deciding the allegations are correct and presenting them as facts, that is quite another matter and a viable basis for a defamation claim.

          • rob war rob war
            September 3, 2016    

            I haven’t seen the movie versions of that book, I thought it originally was a play but understood the story to be more about jury deliberations and that one juror felt the 18 year old boy was innocent of stabbing his father to death while the other 11 jurors initially felt he was guilty. The one juror then went about convincing the others that the boy was truly innocent. My understanding was that this story was more about the power and psychology of convincing others against the odds. I’m not sure since this wasn’t a true story, what evidence the State had against the son in this particular crime and if it was more circumstantial in nature.

          • Moderator Moderator
            September 6, 2016    

            Not sure of all of David’s meaning . . . but inasmuch as it involved someone that a group of people just needed to be guilty to satisfy their sense of balance and order and identity in the world – bring closure to a troubling problem – I appreciate the reference.

          • rob war rob war
            September 7, 2016    

            Well, maybe Brother Dave can elaborate, but my guess is that his point was that one person can convince others of the innocence of someone. I think from what I’ve read of this and this isn’t based on a true case, was that the evidence was more circumstantial against the son stabbing his father. Maybe Brother Dave can clarify. I don’t think you’re comment that the juror needed to find him guilty is fair. This was a capital case and if found guilty, he was to be executed in the story.

          • Moderator Moderator
            September 8, 2016    

            I think my comment reflected the salient point of the play/film, as I understood it. Racial stereotypes, cultural norms demanded that the young man was guilty. 11 men answered the call to do what was expected. One refused, because the facts did not match the assumptions. My comparison: The world is full of examples of supposedly righteous individuals, preachers and such, that are proven to be sexual deviants, often for years. When reports surface that appear to link Bill to that, the collective consciousness goes, “There goes another one!” and demands the hammer to fall. Prejudices abound . . . against someone who preached such a high standard for so many years. A few of us have spent a decade looking and digging and asking . . . and . . . we can’t go there. The facts do not add up. We are hoping that we can also change some minds . . . with the facts.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        September 5, 2016    

        Of course our topic has moved on, but why insist on either-or when it comes to accusations against Copley? No doubt he hired a lawyer to defend himself in the lawsuit. But if a blogger were sympathetic or at least neutral, wouldn’t you grant him an interview to deny false accusations against you? Even if it were useless for your court defense, wouldn’t you appreciate any non-adversarial forum for declaring your innocence? I sure would! If my lawyer warned me to shut up, of course I would. Otherwise I would be proclaiming my innocence far and wide.

        Why not defend yourself both in caesar’s court and the court of public opinion?

        Until proven guilty,
        David K

        • Moderator Moderator
          September 6, 2016    

          There are many things in the “Court of Public Opinion” which can help or hurt. Defaming someone’s name, damaging them with FALSE information is never helpful. Even casting a private individual in a “bad light” that damages their reputation is also prohibited by law – IF FALSE. The truth is completely protected by law, even if damaging.

          These discussions become a bit of a savage game at times, where the accused essentially become a matter of sport to armchair bloggers, of no consequence other than to make merry. You know, “Elephants don’t have no feelings.” I happen to know Dr. Copley, count him as a friend, have heard his discussions of these matters. I am absolutely convinced he is guilty of no crime. There is quite a back story here . . . if the claims against him are not tossed in short order, I will be mightily surprised. IF that is the case, then every statement against him, smearing his name, naming him as a molester is defamation. Defamation “per se”. What people do is their own business – I find it irresponsible and, well, legally foolish.

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            September 6, 2016    

            I am glad to hear a personal, first-hand account favorable to Ken Copley. I never got to know him, but we met when I was volunteer staff for ALERT back in 1994-95. I was impressed. Copley seemed like a man who was equal to the task of helping troubled youth. It is gratifying to hear that my positive impression was correct.

            Like the rest of us, brother Copley is under orders to forgive. And false accusers are under orders to repent. But as you say, that is the business of others, not us.

            May the best man win,
            David K

  23. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    August 29, 2016    

    Hello Rob,

    Thanks for acknowledging the humor in my Dickens quip. But if I am comparing Two Cities characters, perhaps the lawyer in this case is like Jerry Cruncher the grave robber. Nothing grotesque was beneath Cruncher if he could scrounge up some more money thereby. He was almost a caricature of greed. But Two Cities is a tale of redemption. Hopefully Gibbs and the rest of us will be better men by the time the present Gothard drama ends.

    Faith, Hope, and Love,
    David K

  24. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    September 9, 2016    

    What does Fonda’s Angry Men have to do with Gothard? No need for me to elaborate. Rob and Alfred pretty much covered it.

    Both dimensions apply. We all believe in the presumption of innocence. At least for ourselves. But sometimes a Henry Fonda character must ask the right questions before our neighbor gets his presumption of innocence. Like Fonda, I don’t know whether the accused man is guilty or not. But Gothard deserves his presumption of innocence.

    Perhaps Gothard’s story will be called, “”Five Dozen Angry Women.” Gothard’s angry women seem even more formidable than Fonda’s angry men! I’m just glad they weren’t wroth with me!

    Your un-angry brother,
    David K

    • Moderator Moderator
      September 9, 2016    

      :-) The number of “angry women” is very, very small. Which, I think, was quite surprising to Gibbs, and part of the reason his gamble flopped. He figured that once he had cobbled together enough “stuff” to declare a critical mass, the hoards of “angry women” would come rushing in to join the suit. After months of trying and enormous amounts of free publicity . . . what we have is all they could produce. And . . . I will be amazed if several, if not a plurality, of the claims are not dropped in short order. The stretches of imagination to even get to where we are now is breathtaking. The current tack of “repressed memories” is designed to make 20 year old claims live again . . . and the abuse remains focused on hugs and foot tapping . . . and, sorry, making up a few details along the way to make it sound sexual.

      I was told early on that the correct event for Bill would be to face a room full of “angry fathers”. I immediately signed up to facilitate that and asked for help. The further response was that, well, the fathers that were known were simply not interested in pursuing this. If I had a daughter was suffering life-long debilitating problems because of sexual improprieties of a man I trusted, *I* would pursue that to my dying breath. So . . . once again one begins to see what the true nature of this witch hunt really is. May the Lord see and do the right thing for all parties involved.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        September 9, 2016    

        The angry fathers is a phenomenon I never considered. You raise a good point. I sent my own daughter as an eighteen-month volunteer for IBLP about a dozen years ago. Had anything gone seriously wrong, I would have felt betrayed. Instead, it was all positive. At Oak Brook, my daughter found me a good son-in-law. So it was win-win. No anger here.

        Pleased to be un-angry,
        David K

      • rob war rob war
        September 10, 2016    

        I have no idea what “angry fathers” have to do with anything in this case. These are adults bringing this case on their own. Whatever you were “told” Alfred seems to be based on opinion not fact. Angry fathers, non-angry fathers or in-between is meaningless. I think in a number of the situations, there has been a break down with the parents and an estrangement. This is a red herring that doesn’t mean a thing. If you and brother Dave want to look at so called “numbers” where is the so called lovers of Bill and the stories of wonderful and great things that kids that went to work at IBLP had with him? I don’t see those people. But there are plenty of blogs not just RG that have the opposite experiences with Bill. If Bill is the greatest thing since sliced bread and pure as the fresh driven snow, then why didn’t the board bring Bill back on when he resigned in 2014? You are ignoring this “fact”.
        non-agry and just the facts please.

        • Moderator Moderator
          September 10, 2016    

          “Angry women” matters, of that we are all in agreement. And I have always alleged the number is very, very small. Consistent with the debris that comes from any large, 50 year mininstry that is trying to counsel. Statistics bear me out. “Angry fathers” matters a lot in IBLP as the fathers – and mothers – are the reasons young women – and young men – were placed so close and so long with Bill, either for growth or for counseling. If parents do not feel betrayed – super betrayed – based on what their children are telling them, that is significant. The “outrage” of parents that I see is consistent with reactions to news stories . . . as opposed to personal grief, what they have heard from their offspring. Because, like David, what they have heard up until these “repressed memories” have kicked in of late has been mostly if not entirely encouraging. There would be at least a handful of very angry fathers, no matter how you slice it . . . where are they?

          And as to the Board, the entire tsunami of events swept over them just as it did everyone else. Almost the entire Board changed personell . . . and given the recent weakness of IBLP long before the current vendetta, they, hanging by a thread, decided to seek to survive without their 80 year old founder rather than invest enormous amounts of time and money to dig deeply into this. Eliminate the possibility of criminal activity, and then drop the rest. Inasmuch as this encouraged the current lawsuit they may have come to regret it. As they freely admit, they pleaded with Bill to not resign. As far as I can tell – and I have spoken extensively to a number of them – none of them believe that Bill did the moral things alleged in the lawsuit. It really, again, appears to have come down to . . . survival, building something new out of something that was already in serious trouble.

          • rob war rob war
            September 10, 2016    

            Alfred,
            Again, if Bill is as pure as the fresh driven snow, then the board would have brought him back as was the deal that you have implied previously. They already made statements on their web site that they found he wasn’t “criminal” but not blameless.
            I think that speak volumes. Again, if there are so many happy happy people that just love Bill to the moon like you do, where are they?

          • Moderator Moderator
            September 11, 2016    

            “Again, if there are so many happy happy people that just love Bill to the moon like you do, where are they?”

            By way of analogy, let’s take someone we KNOW is “pure and the fresh driven snow”, no faults that we can lay a finger on . . . the apostle Paul. How did it end for him?

            “At my first answer no man stood with me, but all men forsook me: I pray God that it may not be laid to their charge.” (1 Tim 4:6)

            Let’s see . . . he was publically accused . . . and NOBODY stood up for him? Interesting. But people, the people he saw saved, had given his life for, were still secretly on his side, right?

            “This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me;” (2 Tim. 1:15)

            Seriously?! EVERYBODY turned against him?

            What about his reputation in the world?

            “Being defamed, we intreat: we are made as the filth of the world, and are the offscouring of all things unto this day.” (1 Corinthians 4:13)

            Defamed in the world . . . considered the “offscouring of all things”?

            The entire world had turned against Paul. And presumably “for cause”. There are reasons those in Asia turned away . . . there were discussions and rumors to make him the “offscouring of all things”.

            So the scenario you see is no per se condemnation of Bill. He is actually in very good company.

            As to the Board . . . it is my opinion that if Scriptural steps had been followed, it would be different. I have a hard time blaming them, it has been a nightmare, especially with a truckload of misinformation let alone outright lies being paraded about and accepted as truth. Regardless, Scripture makes clear demands on those that would bring accusations against a leader of God’s people, both by means of verification, and by means of actions in light of verified sins. The fact is that committed enemies of Bill – let alone the devil – engineered a perfect storm for the sole purpose of taking him down. Bill is not perfect, but he is not guilty of the fundamental crimes laid at his feet.

        • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
          September 10, 2016    

          Rob, of course you know what fathers have to do with allegations that their teen daughters were molested. If your daughter were molested, wouldn’t you expect Mr. War to get involved, fast and furious? You bet he would! And I hope you had a father who would intervene to protect you from a creepy man, whether you were a teenaged girl or a grown woman.

          As to a critical mass of public support or condemnation of Gothard, that topic has run its course elsewhere, though you make a strong point about the board.

          This point was about a different “dog that didn’t bark,” the hypothetical fathers who were indifferent to the hypothetical molestation of their teen daughters.

          The hypotheticals are stacking high enough to get nosebleeds. Likely as not, the court has access to claims and facts which we do not have. Let’s see where the “preponderance of the evidence” lies in the coming weeks.

          Your Fierce Father of Daughters,
          David K

          • rob war rob war
            September 11, 2016    

            Brother Dave,
            You need to reread the testimonies from the different girls on RG. There were mixed results from the parents of many of them. One of them does contain the testimony that the father confronted Bill. Some of the parents disowned the girls, as in Gretchen’s case. I think another one, one of the Rachel’s that is in the lawsuit, did suggest to their her that she be “less friendly” to Bill which seemed to work. Now remember these are now adults and they are bringing this on themselves, fathers are not involved. It is a red herring issue and a double jeopardy because there was pressure on all these kids to give a “positive report” back home. Likewise, many of them didn’t fully understand what they were experiencing. I think you also need to realize that going back to parents with a “bad report” that the man that everyone was idolizing was behaving badly in private. I think the better would be if someone touched me, is to slug the man or kick him where it counts and that will end it. But considering the emphasis in ATI/IBLP of submission submission submission for the females, popping someone off for touching etc. probably wasn’t something that crossed anyone’s mind especially with Bill.

          • Moderator Moderator
            September 11, 2016    

            There were mixed results from the parents of many of them

            And, again, I am not seeing it. The parents of “the 14” are either absent entirely – no comment – or staunchly supporting Bill. Involvement in ATI is a very personal and invested thing. There is no such thing as a casual ATI parent. All of them feature one, usually both, that are quite radical in commitment. These children represent the investment of a lifetime, often involving surrender of any number of life advantages to engage in what is seen as the best possible training. That simply precludes a neutral or muted response to the scenario being proposed in the lawsuit. If you are in it, you will know what I am saying is true.

            And for the record I do not at this moment know of a parent that believes that Bill molested their girl. That is – for me – most telling.

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            September 12, 2016    

            Wow, Rob, You scared my right out of my smug self-congratulations. There I was calling myself fierce, and you taught me a whole new dimension of fierce. On 9/11 of all dates!

            The old-fashioned female retaliation toward a horny man was a slap in the face. But I shudder to think about the receiving end of your wrath. First the knuckle sandwich, then that devastating kick to the groin. I’ll be bent double for a while just thinking about it!

            Maintaining my Florida-to Michigan distance,
            David K

            p.s. but I see your point. You’re right about the anti-gossip bad-report teaching. Hopefully people can distinguish between gossip and legitimate cries for deliverance. But maybe sometimes not.

          • rob war rob war
            September 14, 2016    

            Brother Dave,
            I think if more females popped the perv in the nose, there would be less of this nonsense. I would hope you alpha-type males would encourage your wives and daughter some self-defense, that would be the better. Maybe we need more alpha-females that are not going to be afraid to take on the alpha-males that can’t keep their paws to themselves. But, I am afraid that all this demure submission type of teaching and ideas surpresses basic self-defense. Not sure if Mrs K and daughters K have it in them. I hope so. I’m sure if my daughter had Bill try to play footsie with her, he would get a kick that he will never forget or even be able to stand up again. Never mess with a soccer player, she has a big boot.
            soccer mom sister Rob

  25. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    September 11, 2016    

    Brother, your point about the abandonment of Paul is well taken. But Paul himself would (and did) freely admit that before he was the great Paul, he was the loathsome Saul, Chief of Sinners. Was Paul’s abandonment connected to his rap sheet as Saul? That’s a stretch.

    Yes, I know. We invite scoffing when we compare Bill Gothard to the Great Apostle. But you’re right. Some people who deserve loyalty get abandoned. Maybe others who deserve abandonment get loyalty. (This is beginning to sound like Ecclesiastes, right?)

    Finally, Gothard’s innocence and his popularity are two separate questions.

    Neither innocent nor popular,
    David K

  26. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    September 12, 2016    

    Brother Alfred,

    I think you’re mistaken about casual ATI fathers. I’ve known plenty. ATI is like homeschooling in general. For every alpha-male patriarch, there is at least one passive dude who outsources both parenting and homeschooling entirely to mommy. Both parents vary widely in quality. You get the whole spectrum from white-collar professionals to trailer trash. Many are good parents, others, not so much. Bill Gothard’s vision for ATI families was always loftier than the reality. But that’s okay. You can call Gothard either visionary or delusional. I prefer “visionary,” that quality without which people perish.

    Drinking from the half-full glass,
    David K

    • Moderator Moderator
      September 13, 2016    

      I am sure that is possible, although that has not been my experience. Maybe Southern California breeds a different level of radical . . . you know, all in, or all out. Bill’s vision was always lofty, truth there. That is what attracted a lot of parents, parents who were really concerned with the compromise they saw around them, not sure what to do about it. Buying in to a lofty vision gave great purpose, a reason and hope to have a large family in a day where there were many young people that rebelled against both parents and the Lord.

      Interesting word, “delusional”, which I understand. Paul allowed that what he was presenting – a tough standard with great promised but currently unrealized rewards – would seem insane. “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences. . . . For whether we be beside ourselves[KJV for ‘insane’], it is to God: or whether we be sober, it is for your cause.” (2 Cor. 5:10,11,13)

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        September 13, 2016    

        Ha! I forgot about that “beside ourselves” term. Good point.

        I was with the southern California ATI community while in the military, but that was a good while ago. Pleasant memories, though.

        Former Californian and present Floridian,
        David K

        • Moderator Moderator
          September 13, 2016    

          I probably wasn’t paying attention when I should have. You are a lot deeper invested than I realized. Your comments and perspectives are always appreciated.

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            September 15, 2016    

            I dunno, brother. Thanks for the kind word, but I can’t claim a deep investment when it comes to the Gothard lawsuit, etc. “Formerly,” I was pretty active in this and that. I’m a former long-term ATI father, former officer-in-charge of ALERT Basic Training, and former military officer in Southern California. You’re the man doing all the heavy lifting with this website. I just visit on the occasional weekend and evening opportunity.

            Until next time,
            David K

  27. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    September 12, 2016    

    Dear Rob,

    Though it has been a while since I read the claims of the women on RG, I cannot see what purpose would be served by reading them again. They are allegations, not facts. The accuser bears the burden of proof. The claimants have not submitted to an adversarial cross-examination. So the jury is out in every sense of the term.

    I know neither the claimants nor Alfred, nor Bill Gothard, so I cannot vouch for anyone’s character. But some of the claims sound pretty mild to me and others sound absurd. I want to reserve judgment pending due process of law.

    Still neutral,
    David K

    • Pegasister Pegasister
      September 15, 2016    

      Do you remember ANYTHING of what you read on RG? Those “allegations” have witnesses from across the spectrum who both support and oppose Bill Gothard. The same behavior patterns have been documented for years, long before I was born. (I’m 19.) Yeah the jury is still out–everyone is innocent until proven guilty. But in this case I think the “burden of proof” has pretty much been met. How many people have to say “I can confirm Meg/Gretchen/etc’s story” before you’ll agree? The OT law Gothard loves so much only requires two or three witnesses to bring a case to court. RG has dozens, if not more, who have written their stories or offered their contact info. That would more than qualify the case for the OT Jews and should give all of us today reason to consider this seriously, instead of brushing them off as “allegations”.

      • Moderator Moderator
        September 16, 2016    

        How many people have to say “I can confirm Meg/Gretchen/etc’s story” before you’ll agree?

        OK, I will bite. I am not aware of a single person who can confirm Gretchen’s story, she being the one leading this lawsuit. Do you know of any? Not interested in people who confirm that she existed, was at HQ during the time she alleges … but any part of her allegations of misdeeds, or even in whom she confided during the time frame it was allegedly happening. She said she gave a police report, but the police have assured me on three different formal occasions that no such report was ever given. And I know of some that contradict key aspects of her story.

        And … I have sought long for second hand witnesses that have observed any of the other allegations, other than things like holding long to hands – which was done in front of large groups or deliberately in front of open windows.

        So, by all means, bring it on.

        • Pegasister Pegasister
          September 16, 2016    

          Why did I come back here…

          First of all, that comment was not directed to you but to Mr. Knecht. As dismissive as his attitude has been, I think that he could at least be convinced to entertain the possibility of the “allegations” being true. I doubt that you, the moderator, would be convinced if literal video evidence of Gothard fondling Charlotte surfaced. We both know that will never happen, but I’d love to see your reaction if it did.

          Furthermore, I was speaking generally of the many, many girls who have spoken out on RG and how their stories line up with one another, and with the accounts of people from the centers at the same time. You should have known that and responded in kind.

          I won’t go to too much trouble to repeat here what’s been said over and over on RG, but you all but demanded witnesses, so here you go. The very nature of the behavior Bill is accused of requires that he keep it secret–thus it will be hard to find someone who can say he/she saw some of the more intimate things happening. But here’s the important part: people can confirm that the circumstances, and sometimes details described, were correct. People like Marcus can relate how they spoke to one of Gothard’s alleged favorites and were slandered and sent home. Even if the dirty details cannot be proven true or false, many other things can. But you’ve been on RG long enough that you should know what they are, even if you refuse to believe them. I will not waste my time or yours by compiling the accounts and confirmations that convinced me this was true.

          Finally, a “witness” doesn’t have to be a literal person. Let’s say I walk into a public bathroom on my college campus. (I know, a young adult female going to a Christian college–gasp!) If I see the walls splattered with blood and I recognize a bloody kitchen knife on the floor as belonging to my roommate, and the bloody corpse as a freshman that she hated with a passion, I think it’s probable cause to tell the campus police my roommate might have done something terrible! Definite proof? By no means. Legally it’s considered circumstantial evidence. But the Lord saw Abel’s blood as a witness against Cain. Isn’t it possible that the “circumstantial evidence” of these other people can serve as a witness, if not of the actual behavior, certainly indications that something was wrong? And if there were enough indications, as I fully believe there were, that maybe it’s time to actually listen to some of these girls?

          That’s all I have to say. I’ve presented my understanding and reiterated what others have said on RG, and unfortunately made the mistake of revealing my age so now I’m just a rebellious teenage girl. I’m done arguing. It just wastes my time and yours. In closing: actually consider that there are corroborations for the stories on RG. You just refuse to believe that they exist.

          • Moderator Moderator
            September 16, 2016    

            I doubt that you, the moderator, would be convinced if literal video evidence of Gothard fondling Charlotte surfaced

            You are quite wrong on that. So far I have not had a chance to demonstrate it. After all the volumes of accusations against Bill, it continues to never cease to amaze me . . . how it all . . . goes away when someone finally shines a light on it.

            But I similarly wonder if there is any degree of proof that folks such as yourself would accept to prove that some of the plaintiffs might not be telling the truth. Wait, we DO have an example of that. We said David Gibbs was a deceitful man early on, and, of course, we were laughed off the stage. And, then, we said that the facts that Gary Smalley so strongly testified to in a series of emails . . . never happened. And now we have his attestation from several different sources and times . . . that we were completely correct. There are still folks on RG that refuse to even believe the statement he signed in the presense of a witness to that extent. So . . . how are you doing on that score?

            I was speaking generally of the many, many girls who have spoken out on RG and how their stories line up with one another

            Do yourself a favor and read up on “sex abuse hysteria” and “repressed memories” . . . maybe even check out the sorry tale of the McMartin Preschool scandal, which happened quite close to where I was working at the time. You will discover that, yes, it is quite possible for an entire army of “witnesses” to come foward to testify about similar things . . . that, in fact, are morphed and generated by the collective consciousness and strong psychological needs of a moment in history. RG is a hive of need . . . and it has amazingly collected precisely what is needed to accomplish the goal that was prepared from the very beginning. I find it amazing at how the details that were previously unknown magically appear as needed. For example, nobody ever once mentioned Bill and “footsies” until it appeared on Recovering Grace a few years ago . . . and now it is the cause of causes. Strange, inasmuch as Bill and IBLP were already the subjects of a lawsuit on moral grounds . . . never came up. It just grew to meet the need. Not a single woman mentioned Bill fondling her breasts . . . not on RG, not in three versions of the lawsuit . . . and NOW several women have recovered memories of that in the current version! You tell me how that happens.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        September 17, 2016    

        Hello Peg. I’m not a lawyer. I’m just trying to be fair. No need to dismiss yourself as a rebellious teenaged girl. I’m just one of your father’s rebellious middle-aged peers. Let us reason together, saith the Dad.

        I read your example of circumstantial evidence. The bloody knife admits the case to a neutral court where evidence can be examined. Gothard’s accusers belong in a neutral court. Either a church court or caesar’s court.

        But we disagree on terms. A witness and circumstantial evidence are different. That’s a good thing. If you were accused, wouldn’t you want the right to face your accuser and cross-examine him? You can cross-examine a man, but not a bloody knife.

        You’re right. I am open to the possibility that any given man (including Bill Gothard) might molest a woman. Unfortunately I myself might stoop that low. Under different conditions, someone might build a “recovering from Knecht” website. Accuse me all you want, but I want you cross-examined in public, under oath, before you convict me.

        Of course sexual offenses will be committed in secret. But do we want to take the absurd position that lack of evidence equals evidence, because the evidence is secret?

        We need to see claims hold up under oath, with perjury punishment at stake. Wouldn’t you want that if you were the accused?

        Your father’s brother,
        David K

  28. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    September 18, 2016    

    Dear fierce soccer-mom Rob,

    What fun it is to banter with you! I think you and Mrs. K are cut from the same cloth. She’s a feisty little Sicilian woman from New Jersey. As a girl, she didn’t hesitate to beat up male classmates who gave her grief. That’s the kind of woman an alpha male needs to keep him from getting overbearing.

    I think you’re partly right about ATI girls. Some are submissive, both by temperament and training. But others like you and Mrs. K, not so much.

    BTW, Mrs. K is also a soccer mom. Our kids play soccer at that local megachurch I told you about offline. Yesterday was the first game of the 2016 season.

    Like soccer spectators, you and I will be watching the Gothard drama unfold from our vantage point on the sidelines. But we have Alfred reporting from near the field of strife.

    May the best team win,
    David K

    • rob war rob war
      September 19, 2016    

      A Sicilian soccer mom! it doesn’t get any tougher than that! You are in my prayers :). Any ways, good luck to your kid’s soccer season
      and long live soccer moms! Sarah Palin said the difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom was lipstick. I think soccer moms are like hockey moms, however, I don’t wear lip stick!
      lip stickless soccer mom Rob

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        September 20, 2016    

        Thanks, but if I keep bantering with the opposite sex online, my Sicilian soccer mom might make me an offer I can’t refuse!

        Gotta go,
        Don Vito Knecht

  29. Will Hunsucker Will Hunsucker
    September 25, 2016    

    This site is a disgrace to Christianity.

    Hoorah for Bill Gothard.

    All naysayers are perverts, rock music & sex addicts, ‘troubled youth’ and rebels.

    I was from a conservative Christian family. I was a model Christian young man.
    I gave 5 yrs of my life to Bill Gothard. I am still recovering. At 40yo.

    If there is a just God, Bill Gothard’s ‘ministry’ will die in infamy like so many before him who claimed God’s name to justify their own ideals, dreams & desires to dictate other’s lives.

    “May The Lord examine all involved, take charge, and allow mercy and truth to triumph.”

    Amen and Amen.

    • Moderator Moderator
      September 25, 2016    

      Will: Would your experience follow the pattern of a strong charasmatic leader promising great blessings in the name of the Lord in exchange for obedience, you following him and discovering that, instead of great blessings for your model behavior, you ended up in the middle of a desert, lost, broken, hungry and thirsty, with everyone that trusted you mad at you? Obviously I am thinking of Moses and the experience of the children of Israel. If we can debug that situation, maybe we can better understand what happened with Bill and ATI and IBLP. Of course, a few folk got called rebels then as well.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        October 13, 2016    

        Now that’s an interesting illustration. I take it that if some are unjustly called rebels, others may actually deserve the label?

        That was my experience when I volunteered to lead ALERT basic training more than two decades ago. Some of the rebels who entered our program really deserved the label and were so incorrigible we had to expel them. Happily some “rebels” were just misguided and immature. Against all odds, one in particular turned out to be a fine leader.

        Leader with a small following,
        David K

        • Moderator Moderator
          October 13, 2016    

          Yes, sometimes it is justly applied. Sometimes it is justly applied but it really is our fault, or at least partially. I am reminded of Saul who lit into his son Jonathan, calling him the “son of a perverse rebellious woman” (1 Samuel 20:30), presumably his Mom. Given Saul’s unbridled anger and self-centeredness, at least at that phase of his life, one cannot wonder that his wife was rebelling.

          As an ATI Dad that is a concern. We are not to exasperate our children. They still stand before God and all of the consequences of rebellion come to bear if they choose that route, but there is no level of satisfaction for the parents.

          But . . . it must still be said that the rebellion of the children of Israel in the desert was not due to the misfires of Moses and certainly not the Lord. It was a deliberate stress that they had to get through, learn to find the Lord in, to keep their faith, that would purify their hearts of secondary motives other than to please Him, even if He killed them. And we all get to go through that. I fear that many ATI young people followed the example of those in the desert, bailing under what they found to be impossible circumstances that implied that the promises they were following were bogus. More on this in our article “A Salvation Trinity

          • rob war rob war
            October 15, 2016    

            I am not sure what Saul’s bashing of his wife (Jonathan’s mother) has to do with anything. Just because King Saul said that, doesn’t mean it was true considered the state of King Saul’s soul at the time. Likewise, the wandering 40 years in the desert has more to do with the fact that when they arrived to the Promised land, the adults rebelled in going in to take it based on the negative reporting of the 8 spies. So the “wandering” had more to do with the time it took for that generation to die off, and it was their children under Joshua that went in. Joshua and Caleb where the only survivors of that particular generation to go in, even Moses was not allowed. Again, I am not sure what you are trying to say in your comparison. Even as an ATI dad, I don’t think the seemingly high rate of ATI students that are dropping out of this program has anything to do with rebellion but might have more to do with the observation that ATI looks to be a deficient educational program. Since 1984, are there any hard core facts of how many ATI students have turned around and now raising their own children in ATI? That would be an interesting figure to see. Even big name families like the Duggars have left ATI. I saw the Instagram comments by Erin Bates, that stated she was not a part of the program (kinda curious since Bill did the opening prayer at her wedding to her ATI husband). You don’t have to answer this but think about it, would your own children raise their children in ATI when they start their families? Or would they do another homeschool program?

          • Moderator Moderator
            October 15, 2016    

            the adults rebelled in going in to take it based on the negative reporting of the 8 spies

            That was far from the first rebellion for this group. They complained when they were thirsty, they complained when hungry . . . they went to an idol and got naked when they had to wait too long. No . . . this was far from a first failure.

            Since 1984, are there any hard core facts of how many ATI students have turned around and now raising their own children in ATI? That would be an interesting figure to see.

            Don’t know. ATI has shrunk a lot these days for a lot of obvious reasons, not the least of which is the full frontal attacks from every quarter. Frankly, I don’t much care. Success for Paul was complete abandonment at the end of his life from almost every corner of the globe. But he was right, and he won.

            Even big name families like the Duggars have left ATI.

            Duggars have not left.

            I saw the Instagram comments by Erin Bates, that stated she was not a part of the program (kinda curious since Bill did the opening prayer at her wedding to her ATI husband).

            I have no idea what you heard. Their child is a baby. Both sides of the family are in leadership in ATI.

            You don’t have to answer this but think about it, would your own children raise their children in ATI when they start their families? Or would they do another homeschool program?

            No idea. Some would, some would not, I would expect. But, again, I don’t care. ATI was always gutsy, and risky, and not for everyone. Kind of like being a soldier . . . or a Navy Seal. There are a number of deep convictions we hold we have purposed to not demand of our children. They have to get it for themselves before the Lord. But we, and so many others of our generation are crystal clear on why we went there . . . and for us, at least, there is no regret. Better to have shot for the moon and got off the ground than shoot for a lightbulb and get nowhere.

  30. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    October 13, 2016    

    I thought of this lawsuit when I was re-reading Gulliver’s Travels, the famous eighteenth-century satire.

    In one place, Gulliver narrated his experience in Lilliput, a country with a novel form of law. If in Lilliput a man was found innocent at trial, his accuser was immediately put to death, and the acquitted man was compensated from the estate of his accuser. Fraud was also punished by death.

    I don’t know whether Gothard is innocent or guilty, but one wonders what effect Lilliputian justice would have on his case, as well as many other cases in our land. I wonder also what punishment would be meted out to lying politicians. What a thought in 2016!

    Pleased to be neither accuser nor accused,
    David K

  31. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    October 16, 2016    

    Dear Rob,

    This is one answer to your question about whether ATI graduates use the program for their own children. I might speculate that there are few who do. Had ATI been designed to secure multi-generation devotion to Bill Gothard, it probably failed.

    But I don’t think ATI was designed to create brand loyalty to Gothard. I think the design was similar to that of the Basic Seminar. Back when our generation first attended the Basic (1981 for me) we were charged a one-time lifetime fee which equals about $120 in 2016 dollars. That bought access to unlimited annual refreshers until we “got it.”

    After three four-year trips through the material, my kids “got” ATI. Then we moved on.

    Two of my daughters married ATI graduates, and they are homeschooling their kids as conservative evangelicals using different materials, having already extracted the “meat” from ATI. No need to buy it twice. The idea is to follow Jesus, not Bill Gothard. At least I hope so.

    Either I got it or it got me,
    David K

    • rob war rob war
      October 17, 2016    

      Brother Dave,
      I think you are confirming my concerns about ATI program, that it had less to do with being an adequate home education program and more to do with a remix of basic and advance seminars. If ATI was an adequate home educational program, then those that were raised in it would use it for their own children because it was just so good. But I am not seeing that really anywhere. HA has all the wisdom booklets PDF on line and in a simple review of some it, I am not following how this was an adequate or complete home education program that prepares the children enrolled in it to move on to meaningful jobs and careers that they can support themselves and their own families. Arranging basic education topically instead of systematically which is the generally method of education only really works for just a few children. Take the subject like math. Math builds over time as one works through it’s basic building blocks to pre-algebra, then algebra then calculus. Science is the same way. History builds on itself the same, usually starting out as social studies. To take a Bible verse out of the Sermon on the Mount and then try to extrapolate it to cover all these areas of education, math, science, english, history etc. and twisting the verse to try and fit all these things and more is not healthy. The fact that you yourself has moved on from ATI and using other programs like Saxon math and phonics etc is very telling. Whether Bill was trying to be “cutting edge” or innovative, he seemingly took unproven education ideas to put this program together. I know what it is like to have education innovation shoved down my throat. In the late 60’s, the Initial Teaching Alphabet or ITA was the big new rage. In case you never heard of it (and never want to), ITA is an extrapolated 44-45 phonics alphabet that was started in England to work with special ed children. The idiots in the public school district where I grew up bought into an unproven program and the first grade teacher I had was a drill sergeant which results in me spending a chunk of my life relearning how to spell with our real alphabet and 26 letters. There is real phonics and then there is this nonsense that people bought into and the results were not good. I have a lot of sympathy for those that feel cheated in their formative education years. The promises of the home schooling movement by a number of it’s early promoters doesn’t exactly seem to have panned out since it’s explosion in the 1980s. Maybe there are reasons why subject matters are taught they way they generally are, and that could be because it works a majority of the time. Now, it seems like you have found a balance in what you are doing and your older children are following suit. My other question for Alfred is this, would the ATI program prepared him to obtain the math degrees that he has?

      • Moderator Moderator
        October 17, 2016    

        If ATI was an adequate home educational program

        Adequate for what? Most things “Christian” have traditionally been “inadequate” for the world at large. Because Christian stuff is based on a whole different set of objectives and premises. That would hold true for social activities, business dealings . . . family planning . . . child rearing . . . politics . . . how to wage war. Let alone things like origins in science . . . or other such things. If your goal is to see your children follow Jesus with all their heart and make a mighty impact in the Kingdom of God, even if poor and persecuted, you are not looking for educational triumph. Time will certainly tell. I think some ATI students find themselves in the “middle ground” of the trip from Egypt to Canaan . . . and long to correct some of the unpleasantness of the desert. Too soon they will discover a great many of the reasons their parents “jumped” (frog in pan of water being heated) out of “normal” and even “adequate” to strike out for something that mattered for eternity. When they do, I suspect their parents will start looking a whole lot smarter than they may now. The place to really look for ATI or whatever takes its place may well be in the realm of the third generation. Biblically, the fourth generation echoes large . . . it takes a while for the fruit to come to maturity.

        “And when ye shall come into the land, and shall have planted all manner of trees for food, then ye shall count the fruit thereof as uncircumcised: three years shall it be as uncircumcised unto you: it shall not be eaten of.

        But in the fourth year all the fruit thereof shall be holy to praise the Lord withal.

        And in the fifth year shall ye eat of the fruit thereof, that it may yield unto you the increase thereof: I am the Lord your God.” (Lev. 19:23-25)

        • rob war rob war
          October 18, 2016    

          Alfred,
          Christian parents have been passing along the faith to their children for the past 2000 years and this has been going on long before Bill Gothard and the current home schooling movement came along. Maybe this is your hope that you are going to see some super duper Christian young people come out of ATI, but the looks of it and the number of ex-ATI students out there doesn’t prove your point. Trying to compare ATI and those leaving it to the 40 years of wandering in the desert is grasping at straws. Maybe you believe that following ATI was going to turn one’s children into super duper sold out for Jesus types but there are plenty of ex-ATI students that state otherwise and many of them seem to be atheists, not the super duper sold out of Jesus types. Now you can try and write off all these ex-ATI students as “rebellious” but that is not looking at the real fault which is that ATI seems to have been a defective, substandard education program, untested and ineffective. Even if you look at the Duggar children who have turned themselves into reality TV stars with gossip columnists that follow them are hardly and should not be positive examples of super duper sold out for Jesus types. They look like they are dependent on the money and attention and can do nothing else. While the Bates family is less noticed, the same road for them. I would stack any of these examples of ATI grads to a 14 year old boy, Jose Sanchez del Rio, who died fighting for his faith in Mexico in the Christeros wars. He was captured after giving his horse to the general whose horse was just shot out under him. This caused his to be captured and tortured. They ripped the skin off the bottoms of his feet, forced him then to walk barefoot, beat him up and all he did was cry out “Viva Cristo Rey” or ‘Long live Christ the King” and never recanted his faith. Now that is an example of super duper sold out for Jesus kinda faith and kid and he didn’t get that way due to Bill Gothard. Jose is featured in the movie “For Greater Glory”. ATI has been since 1984 and that should be plenty of time to have all these super dupers sold out for Jesus to come out. Instead ATI grad got together and started RG and HA and HA has a lot of atheists there. I hope that your children are fairing much better than these people. The promise results of super duper sold out for Jesus due to being enrolled in ATI don’t seem to be there.

          • Moderator Moderator
            October 18, 2016    

            the looks of it and the number of ex-ATI students out there doesn’t prove your point.

            I would have to emphatically disagree with you. Of the tens of thousands of children and young people that went through the program the vast majority turned out just fine . . . in most cases much better than fine. ATI grads continue to be movers and shakers in their worlds. I see many entire families where all are going on well . . . certainly a majority. A few unhappy people that are really loud can seem like an army – it is anything but that. You mentioned RG and HA . . . a stunningly small number of very loud individuals. Look at the lawsuit, all the fanfare . . . count the number of people complaining and look at the relative strength of their stories, seemingly constantly being enhanced and propped up. Look at the number of stories on RG. Based on what you believe there should have been hundreds, thousands surfacing with bitter stories. A tiny fraction, Rob, of all that went through ATI, let alone the Basic Seminars. Eternity will tell. Perhaps time will tell as well.

            Duggar children who have turned themselves into reality TV stars

            I have nothing but respect for both families you mentioned. They are anything but “reality TV stars”, speaking to that stereotype. They are real, we know them, both families.

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            October 19, 2016    

            Thanks for the tip, Rob. I just watched the For Greater Glory movie trailer on Amazon. It was inspiring. But I don’t know whether I have the guts to weep through an intense drama like that.

            Everyone who follows Jesus ought to be like the Jose you describe. Either within or without ATI, too few of us are.

            If too many atheists began in ATI, you have to admit that plenty began in either my Methodist Church or your Roman Church. More’s the pity.

            He that endureth to the end shall be saved,
            David K

          • rob war rob war
            October 19, 2016    

            “in their world”, Being movers and shakers and their world seems to be IBLP correct? However, isn’t the IBLP world kinda not doing so well, with a consolidation in Texas? So unless one has turned themselves into “reality” TV stars which the older Duggar children have done to either support themselves since they can’t do anything else and get attention, I’m not seeing it. Unless they make their living selling used cars for Dad, I have know idea what these kids really do to support themselves. If IBLP is made up of ATI grads, what happens to the ATI grads that don’t work for IBLP? I hardly think they are movers and shakers anywhere else. Do you think HA publishing all the 49 wisdom booklets used in ATI is to promote ATI or expose ATI? I hope Alfred that your children will end up and do well. There are enough studies and observations out on the internet that home schooled children that have college education parents have done better than homeschooled children that do not have college educated parents. This comparison is between homeschooled children. The parent education level was the key. So I would guess Alfred with a couple of math degrees and working partly at home, your kids would have some benefit which will probably help them inspite of ATI.

          • Moderator Moderator
            October 19, 2016    

            isn’t the IBLP world kinda not doing so well, with a consolidation in Texas?

            The success of God’s things is never defined by popularity, numbers. In case you haven’t noticed, a lot of other things that were riding high 30 years ago are not “doing so well” either. That has much to do with the times we live in, as the world continues to squeeze the life out of the church.

            I have know idea what these kids really do to support themselves.

            I am curious how many ATI or ex-ATI folks you know in order to gauge this by. Ignoring the blogs, which collect the naysayers and do not speak for the rank and file. For my part . . . from my world I see a lot who have made a decent living for themselves, some self employed, construction, shop owners, a number of lawyers (that was an emphasis, as you may recall), I know one who went to West Point (this after completing his bachelors degree before 20, spoke Chinese fluently as a second language), pastors . . . some living and working in Taiwan. I currently do not know anyone who is unemployed or “in trouble”, as you imply.

            There are enough studies and observations out on the internet that home schooled children that have college education parents have done better than homeschooled children that do not have college educated parents.

            I will bite. Where? I see a great deal of other data myself, for the record. Check this out: Profoundly Disconnected — This is from Mike Rowe of “Dirty Jobs” fame. He makes a powerful case against college being the only let alone best course for the average individual, regardless of their aptitude. He started this initiative based on a poster that he saw in his high school guidance counselor’s office: “Work Smarter, Not Harder”. He says it (lots of education = success) was the worst advice he was ever given.

            Oh, and this slapped me in the face a few weeks ago:

            College Can Crush

          • rob war rob war
            October 19, 2016    

            My correction, I said 49, it is 54 wisdom booklets. I think the 49 corresponds to Bill’s teaching or 49 commands of Christ/ 49 character traits (according to Bill)

          • Moderator Moderator
            October 19, 2016    

            You really have my attention here. I have a super hard time understanding how the posting of an entire curriculum represents “fair use”. Of course, I am not a lawyer, but am checking that out.

            And, yes, you are right on your numbers.

          • rob war rob war
            October 20, 2016    

            Alfred,
            the Consumers Report article is about college debt and underneath the big print and on the cover is how much debt that person has. What “ruined” their life was the massive debt, not the basic fact that they attended college at all. No one is suggesting that someone should go into massive debt to attend college. That isn’t the issue being discussed here. You attended college with a single parent and did not occur debt. We saved up for our children. But the people that save or use college savings plans, the people that work through school paying for it, the people that get scholarships don’t make the news or covers but people that get worthless degrees that have no jobs to them and obtain big debt in the process do. I think what we are trying to talk about here is whether ATI homeschooling program as an adequate educational program to prepare children to become adults that in turn work at meaningful or supportive jobs which is turn enable them to have families and live. To have Bill who does have more than one college degree tell Christian parents and young people that college is not God’s way or plan, that they really don’t need it at all and that all they need is to follow some home school program that is only based on Sermon on the Mount, is chaotically arranged by topics and that they are going to get the big jobs by just smiling and looking nice. There isn’t even a High school diploma at the end of it.

          • Moderator Moderator
            October 20, 2016    

            What “ruined” their life was the massive debt, not the basic fact that they attended college at all.

            That goes without saying. But it brings into question whether college is somehow a universally good or even mandated thing, especially for Christians. If God is in a thing, the finances will say so. What is one of the biggest reasons why families do not welcome more children? Why, it is because “we can’t afford it”. Why would this be? Because of the cost statistics so often presented. I recall seeing one years ago that had the figure in the millions, PER CHILD. A quick check on the Internet says it takes $250,000 per child to raise. Let’s see, I have 11 – that means by the time we are done we will have spent almost $3 million dollars. That appears to me to be another example of “Profoundly Disconnected”. What is the biggest component of this fee? College, of course. So . . . does this strike you as a God ordained mandate for His families?

            And as to your disdain, I again heartily disagree. The Duggars and Bates are exhibit A of what “Wisdom Books” are all about, a life full of creativity and discipline and enthusiasm. They are a launching point, based on the fear of the Lord, a reverence for His word, into learning about all facets of life from His perspective. If you have studied different educational techniques you will be familiar with a “Unit Studies” approach, as opposed to the traditional focus on “disciplines” – https://www.thehomeschoolmom.com/homeschooling-styles/unit-studies/ and http://cathyduffyreviews.com/homeschool-reviews-core-curricula/unit-studies-all-in-one-programs contain home school oriented information. Unit Studies focus the attention on a single topic or problem, then bring in all of the disciplines in support. You learn a little math, a little science, a little language, a little social studies, arts and crafts, do some field trips, some physical exercise, some medical information. Keep doing that and you learn a lot about a lot of things, and, unlike the traditional approach, you have a framework to organize and retain that knowledge. It really works, particularly in the “one room schoolhouse”. Try it before you slam it. In this case the “Units” are verses, or sections of Scripture – all the study is attached to that. Frankly I have never lost my enthusiasm for this approach – I am a trained educator, for whatever it is worth, credentialed in two disciplines, taught high school.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        October 18, 2016    

        Dear Rob,

        I can see how my defense of ATI might confirm your concerns. Some of your concerns seem sound, but others seem mistaken.

        I partly agree with you, but I would use some terms differently. We might say that ATI is a parent-directed extension of Bill’s seminars. ATI itself is not college-prep material any more than the seminars are. ATI parents who seek college prep simply supplement ATI with college-prep materials. That works well. Some years ago an ATI family in my church had an ATI son appointed to the Air Force Academy. He did fine. He is now an active duty instructor pilot.

        When you dismiss Gothard’s Wisdom Booklet format as unhealthy, I think you’re mistaken. If Gothard’s format is unhealthy, so are more than twenty centuries of sermons in churches.

        Most sermons attempt to relate a Bible passage to something outside the Bible itself. You know the sermon topics; from self-help to interpersonal relations to politics, etc. If sermons like those represent legitimate Bible application, then so do Gothard’s Wisdom Booklets. Anyway, that’s my defense of Gothard’s format.

        Of course ATI began with unproven education ideas. All things begin as unproven until they are proven.

        Research shows that even Harvard’s undergraduate program is incomplete. Eighteen months after graduation, graduates retain only 10% of the course material they passed on the classroom exams. I don’t know how ATI retention compares.

        I agree that our generation was victimized by education novelties. When I was twelve I was enrolled in a novel school which let me get away with a majority of mischief and a minority of learning. So you are right to be suspicious of gimmicks. So am I.

        But I also agree with Alfred’s answer above.

        Your former-ATI brother,
        David K

  32. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    October 19, 2016    

    Dear Rob,

    Correlation cannot prove causation. Perhaps there is some correlation between college-educated homeschooling parents and good outcomes for their kids. It simply does not follow that either parents or kids should attend college. A study which claims to prove causation from correlation is phony. There is a strong correlation between crowing roosters and sunrise. But where is the causation?

    Your crowing brother,
    David K

    • rob war rob war
      October 20, 2016    

      Brother Dave,
      If a cock crows as the sunrise, don’t you kinda think that maybe the sunrise has an influence on the cock when it crows and the sunrise just might be the reason why? I’m not following the thinking here. Bill’s teaching was loaded with cause and effects, many of which really don’t have any true relationship. If homeschooling is based on the parents and is run by the parents and the parents have a higher education of some sort, you don’t think that the parent’s own education level is going to have an impact indirectly? The ATI program did not result in any kind of high school diploma so for any one to go on beyond it, there usually is needed a HS diploma or a GED equivalent. Now for someone to get to West Point, I have no doubt in my mind that this person went on the get a GED, take the SAT /ACT which is required if one looks that on line. Since ATI doesn’t seem to give grades and West Point requires greater than 3.7 and above. So, it is curious how this person obtained a high GPA and high SAT as the first hurdle for West Point. But, if this person from ATI went on the real high school to obtain those grades and SAT/ACT, then just maybe he got into West Point but it wasn’t due to ATI program, it is inspite of ATI.

      Usually, one of the first steps out of poverty is education. Now maybe, one wants to follow the Anabaptist model and idea that they want to live in their own little enclave away from everyone else and work at simple remedial types of living and careers. Then maybe ATI seems to be for them. But what happens with that is this sort of community becomes isolated like the Amish and the rest of use just walk by, saying “that’s nice” and keep on moving by. I don’t see how that fulfills the great commission or change the world for Christ.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        October 20, 2016    

        Dear Rob,

        You got the point of my cutesy rooster illustration. The causation flows one way, not the other.

        Where there is correlation, causation can flow in either direction, or in no direction at all. Even if tall black men play basketball, I shouldn’t expect that playing basketball will make me either tall or black.

        Does West Point really require 3.7 GPA for admission? I was admitted nearly four decades ago, so my grades must have been okay. I graduated in the top 10% of a bottom 10% high school. Apparently that was good enough.

        And home schooling has become so mainstream for high achievers that I would’t be surprised if the academies fund a way to recruit home schooled students.

        As for education being the first step out of poverty, the Mark Twain proverb comes to mind, “I never let my schooling interfere with my education!”

        Your educated brother,
        David K

      • October 21, 2016    

        I am new to commenting on this site, I am enjoying the well thought out comments of those who contribute. Our family used Wisdom booklets through the Advanced Training Institute for 10 years. We found that testing our children on a regular basis helped us supplement academic weaknesses in the program. Our oldest daughter, who is now a university professor, was found to be weak in math and science. Thus we loaded her up with these subjects for her last 2 years of high school. She did well in college and grad school.

        The program was certainly not perfect, but we made several trips through the wisdom booklets as a family and I believe we greatly profited from them.

        Our adult offspring serve in various professions, a son in Marine Corp Intel. a daughter who is finishing her Masters in Nursing and will soon be a Nurse Practitioner, a daughter who works as a stock broker etc. (OK. I’m a proud dad).

        For our family ATI was the right fit for the time. The excitement came from experiencing a new way of doing life. Each morning began with wisdom searches that would last from 10 minutes to well over an hour. Family discussions of the Scriptures ranged from non-existent to intense depending on the day.

        I have met a good number of well adjusted adults who went through the program. A friend of mine has 4 children who went through the program, all of which graduated from law school. One son passed the Cal. bar exam at age 19. Likewise I met several young people who claim the program was less than helpful. With ATI one size really didn’t fit all, however it worked for us.

        • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
          October 23, 2016    

          Congratulations, brother Goldfish. Rob may suspect that successful ATI families are statistical outliers. The commenters who populate RG may agree. Nevertheless it is good to hear success stories.

          To success,
          David K

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        October 21, 2016    

        Dear Rob,

        Your 10/20 comment about being insular was thought-provoking. I see what you mean with the Amish example. I wonder if Bill didn’t make a mistake when he modified the dating teaching in the old Basic Seminar. The courtship model which succeeded his dating teaching had a lot of strengths, with its emphasis on parental involvement. But when you insist upon a specialized romance model with a specialized vocabulary, it can have that narrowing effect you warn against. I still think his old dating teaching was pretty good, and probably represents the Fundamentalist moral standard of the mid-sixties. We could do a lot worse than that in 2016, don’t you think? Wouldn’t you want boys to treat your soccer-expert daughter as Bill taught in the old days? Pretty gallant.

        No school like the old school,
        David K

      • Moderator Moderator
        October 23, 2016    

        I do know that they did a full court press on gaining that coveted slot. What exactly was involved I am not sure, but I recall it involving scuba training among a host of other things. As to GED, this may represent a tad of ignorance on how things work in the homeschooling world. A homeschool diploma – and transcripts – carry the same weight as those presented by a government or private school. In this case the parents prepare the transcripts – or umbrella school, for those that use that. My friend was an overachiever, of that there can be no doubt. I mentioned his fluency in Chinese, a discipline engaged in as he spent some significant time “over there” (not sure if it was Taiwan or mainland) during the high school years. Bottom line, the appointment was well deserved, and his subsequent success there proved it.

        As to your maxim, “The first step out of poverty is education”, is there any way you can prove that? The American colonies and then states boasted an astonishingly high literacy rate in the early years, all with the average formal education being 11 weeks, if I recall the number correctly. It is my opinion that higher education is a result of a higher standard of living, not a cause. Mike Rowe might consider some of your perspectives typically “disconnected”.

        • rob war rob war
          October 24, 2016    

          I am slowing reading through the ATI wisdom booklets on HA. Likewise, I am looking at the requirements for West Point which include 4 years of college prep English, 4 years of college prep math including algebra, geometry, trig as a minimum, 2 years of college prep, science such as chemistry and physics and even precalculus and calculus as a bonus. One also has to have a very high GPA and score very high on ACT or SAT. There is nothing that I have seen in ATI that matches any of these subjects at all and certainly isn’t college prep material. Scuba diving is not a requirement but being physically fit is which I assume this kid did on his own in spite the no sports teaching of Bill. In other words, if this is a real person that really went to West Point, he did so no due to ATI at all but do to what you said was a very ambitious parents or dad and would be an extreme example not the typical of ATI graduates. From all the testimonies, ATI does not result in a high school diploma and if IBLP provided one for this kid to get in West Point then again they made an exception. He doesn’t prove that ATI is an adequate education program at all, he achieved in spite of it. He is a rare and one time exception. ATI looks to be a catechism of Bill Gothard’s fundamentalism, or as brother Dave said, a remix of the Basic and Advance seminars or sermons. A catechism program is not the same a basic education programs whether it be home, private or public. I am honestly shocked at what I am reading in these wisdom booklets.

          There was a Facebook meme going around about Simone Biles, Olympic gold medalists who ended up being homeschooled due to the demands of Olympic training at that high level. The meme in case you haven’t seen it says “But how will homeschooled kids ever compete in the real world? Pretty well, I guess”. Olympic training at a high level like that is not the “real world”. She also had to be homeschooled which she initially didn’t want due to the demands of that type of training. I don’t think they prove superiority of homeschooling as having one ATI kid make it to West Point proves anything about ATI program.

          • Moderator Moderator
            October 24, 2016    

            You are to some extent a victim of your prejudices, Rob. Homeschooling is so much bigger and so much more effective than your perspective.

            o No, ATI provides no diploma – that is for the parents to give, and they do. That diploma carries the same force as anything provided by a public school, accepted under the laws of the state. The teacher assigning the work, evaluating it, grading it is the parent. That is the only difference. Transcripts generated are, by law, equivalent.

            o I noted the use of “college prep” for English and Math and such. Can you tell the difference between “college prep” and non-college prep in these disciplines? I was a math teacher – no, I can’t either. The subject is by definition “college prep”.

            o ATI has a supplemental course in “Language Arts”, just for the record.

            o The Wisdom Books listed are the old course – the entire curriculum was redone (and I did alert IBLP to this – to me – blantant copyright violation perpetuated by HA. The one junior manager was shocked, so we shall see what upper management thinks.)

            o ALL ATI families work in other course supplements, especially the later years. This is completely within the scope of the curriculum. Whatever it is, it is the parents – not ATI – that set that direction and provide the transcripts and grades for all of that activity. The young man may have taken some external courses in his high school years – his father is chairman of a department at a local junior college. I know many who do that – my own son did that for a semester before joining IBLP. Whatever it was, all, again, within the ATI framework. You don’t think ATI should get the credit – I think it should. Oh well, it is what it is :-)

          • rob war rob war
            October 24, 2016    

            Alfred,
            The term “college prep” is used by lots of schools and places. West Point’s own web site on what they require used the term “college Prep”. Most private and parochial schools advertise themselves as “college prep” which and again this should be another no brainer for you, that the course material is in such a way and taught in such a way that will prepare the student taking them for college level material. The ATI material is not college prep or even advertised as such. Remember, Bill taught and I can remember him stating this clearly that “college is not God’s way”. Now whatever that means in Bill’s head, it is obvious that ATI was not college prep or pre-college material. Take your subject math. Now there is a difference between a high school math course that may be “business math” and pre-Calculus and calculus which if the student was that advanced in math would most likely be in calculus and that would be considered college prep. A simple high school math course or business math is more basic and not considered as much as “college prep”. Likewise, honor courses that many high schools offer now are considered “college prep”. There are also Charter high schools now geared to advanced subjects in science and math with the purpose of “college prep”. Not sure how long ago you taught in high school and when and where put there is much more differentiation in what is begin offered at the high school level.

          • Moderator Moderator
            October 24, 2016    

            taught in such a way that will prepare the student taking them for college level material.

            OK, you are talking to an educator . . . and, sorry, Summa Cum Laude. If “College Prep” means more difficult material, that part I get. But that is WAY more likely to happen under the watchful eye of a motivated parent than of a teacher in a large school The results speak for themselves. My friend’s father was not into the sciences or math, for the record . . . sociology, truth be told. Yet . . . somehow . . . as a dedicated ATI family . . . they got it done. And Westpoint was conquered as well. Again, ATI, by definition, encourages the family to get the supplemental help they feel they need when the time comes to move in that way.

            I can remember him stating this clearly that “college is not God’s way”.

            So, I frankly cannot recall such a statement. I do recall a lot of cautions, but nothing that would make me feel guilty about making use of University. His point is that higher education is a discipleship program . . . making disciples . . . with discipline. If the people making disciples are bad, they will use that discipline for evil. Like everything else in the world “out there” it can be overcome. But he made many of the points I make here, that higher education is way, WAY overrated . . . way too expensive. Find another way to do it, was always his point. So he invented Oakbrook School of Law and they churned out a whole troop of lawyers . . . who, yes, passed the bar. He is much into online, distance learning . . . way cheaper, same material. In this Internet age you can learn about anything you want online. So . . . cut the umbilical cord to the overpriced world of universities – with a little creativity it can often be done.

        • rob war rob war
          October 24, 2016    

          My “proof” for my observation for education being a first step out of poverty is often the effort to provide education to those that are in poverty or low economic status. That ranges in a number of things through out history. Teaching ex-slaves to read and write after the civil war was for the purpose to give ex-slaves the ability to move beyond being poor share croppers and continued dependence on their ex-masters. The current push with Charter schools, most of which are often in big inner cities is an effort to help those trapped in poverty get a quality education and get out of poverty. Like I mentioned to our friend David K. in reading the book “Voices of the Saints”, a huge chunk listed in that book were people that started schools to help the poor and needy and give education in order to help those trapped in poverty that didn’t have access to education. St. Jean-Baptiste de La Salle dedicated his life to the education of poor boys in France and started a number of education reforms still used today. Likewise, St. John Bosco, a priest dedicated his life to the education of poor street boys for the same reasons. His emphasis was to educate based on love and not harsh discipline. I could go on and on. Even looking back to the middle ages, some of the big name kings such as Charlemagne, King Alfred of England, lead reforms to have the populous to learn to read which likewise included women. I’m not sure what “proof” it will take for you. This is kinda a no brainer. But I’ll close with a quote about De La Salle which sums up and supports what I’m trying to say to you. “Jean Baptiste de la Salle believed that education gave hope and opportunity for people to lead better lives of dignity and freedom. Moved by the plight of the poor who seemed so “far from salvation” either in this world or the next, he determined to put his own talents and advanced education at the service of children “often left to themselves and badly brought up””.

          • Moderator Moderator
            October 24, 2016    

            Basic education can definitely help . . . enough to read (the Bible!) and write and do basic math. Like I said, 11 weeks of sit down education in the 1700s made American one of the most literate nations on earth and produced the brilliant minds that produced our nation. Far cry from compulsory education of children for many, many years in little seats where all of their dreams and creativity gets stuffed in little boxes. On that note . . . have you read, “Better Late than Early”, an early book by the Moores, 1975? http://www.homeschool.com/articles/bookexcerpt/ . . . It makes a well supported point that if you teach your children NOTHING for the first 3 grades, in particular, and perhaps much longer, delaying formal education, they will go farther, faster for a number of reasons proven out by the research. This is also brought out in the study of “Readiness” which my wife and I got to ponder at the university – hit them before they are ready and you will stunt the learning process and render it inferior to the results of . . . waiting.

            So . . . a few vitamins introduced to an impoverished diet can yield extraordinary results. But the effects are limited, and it does not follow that twice as much focus on vitamins will then result in twice as much results. We are way, WAY over educated . . . and we have lost creativity, entrepreneurship, initiative . . . brilliance . . . in the process.

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            October 26, 2016    

            Wow, Rob. You are quite a smarty-pants. I mean, how often do we see modern people citing Charlemagne or King Alfred in a 2016 blog about a 20th Century American religious figure?

            But I might take your point even farther. You and Alfred are saying the same thing two different ways. You cited La Salle and Bosco who devoted themselves to raising the poor through education. Alfred cites motivated parents seeking good outcomes for their children.

            In both cases you have people full of love, taking initiative. Maybe their love and initiative carry more weight than the quality of their tools. Suppose for the sake of argument that ATI is not the sharpest tool in the education shed. (We ATI parents use plenty of other tools for music training, etc.).

            If ATI kids have quality parents, they have at least as good prospects for “the good life” as their non-ATI peers. Love and initiative make the difference, whether the instructor is LaSalle, Bosco, or an ATI mom working with her kids around the kitchen table.

            So I hereby canonize ATI moms for special recognition on All Saints Day next Tuesday.

            The more saints the merrier,
            David K

  33. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    October 20, 2016    

    Say Alfred,

    if you’re looking for a good cause for that $3 million to intend to spend on your kids, send some my way. As George Bailey once said, I’ll settle for half that amount in cash!

    Not too proud to panhandle,
    David K

    • Moderator Moderator
      October 23, 2016    

      Haha! I, too, would like half. Since it is apparently a requirement I can’t meet . . . it is not unreasonable to expect the government – rich people – to handle it, right? :-)

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        October 23, 2016    

        Perhaps Caesar should render unto us or a change?

        Your parsimonious panhandler,
        David K

  34. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    October 24, 2016    

    Dear Rob,

    FYI: Here in Florida, a common credentialing work-around for homeschooling families is the homeschool affidavit. It is a notarized form which carries the weight of a diploma. Though I have never used it myself, I hear that it is widely accepted in lieu of a school diploma or GED. Here is the link: http://iamhomeschooling.com/florida-specific-printables/1829-affidavit-of-home-school-completion

    And California law simply holds that parents may simply declare themselves private schools by signing a form. That gives them full authority to issue diplomas on their own terms. Or that’s the way it was when I left California in 1992. I was principal of a school with five students begotten by me. Impressive, no?

    That may help answer your credentialing concern. The diploma problem is like, so 1986.

    In 2016, homeshooling has long since leaped that old credential hurdle. ATI parents leap it the same way. It is like the scarecrow in the Wizard of Oz. He had the Pythagorean theorem down cold. He just needed a credential to document it. So he got one.

    For the sake of comparison, how many graduates has your Catholic school has sent to West Point? Please don’t answer that. I’m just kidding.

    Duty, Honor, Country,
    David K

    p.s. “catechism of fundamentalism” is a pretty cute term. But maybe it fits. Did you invent that term yourself?

    • rob war rob war
      October 24, 2016    

      Catechism of fundamentalism is my own term and I think it fits because in reality that is what ATI program is after reading some of the wisdom booklets posted on line. Haven’t gotten through them all. Bill spent a lot of time covering the lives of different Protestant reformers or leaders, pastors, etc. So not only do you have how to read the Bible and Bill’s “one interpretation” but you have a boat load of Protestant “saints” to look up to and follow. So yes, this is a complete “catechesis” via Bill.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        October 25, 2016    

        Okay, that’s a fair description of the ATI history resources. Catholic saints need not apply. However, I remember one trans-denominational missionary. Adiniram Judson began as a Congregationalist and converted to Baptist by the time he got to Burma.

        Maybe they should have consulted you while developing the ATI curriculum. On this forum you have mentioned saints whom I might never have heard of otherwise.

        Happy All Saints Day,
        David K

        • rob war rob war
          October 26, 2016    

          Lol, I would NOT have been a very good one to consult at all. I think the one very positive thing I took from the seminars was Bill’s encouragement to study past Christian leaders and their lives. I’ve taken that basic idea and just went to a very different group than probably what Bill had in mind :). A couple of things though have struck me in reading through these wisdom booklets concerning this subject of past Christian leaders and that is there are very few women at all. Now maybe there are more, I haven’t gone through them all just about 10 books. But what I have read, the emphasis is on men and women are only mentioned if they were wives of different men. They are not mentioned on their own or their own accomplishments at all. There are no positive female roll models for girls that are in ATI. Just the boys. The message is kinda obvious that men count, women only count if they are married. Like I said, I am trying to read the rest of the wisdom booklets so maybe Bill does use a female on her own, not connected to a man so I will withhold final judgement. That would be in contrast to the plethora of Catholic saints, male and female where both sexes stand on their own. Another observation is that their lives are talked about but not what all these different people actually taught and what many of these different men taught are kinda in conflict with each other. Case in point would be George Whitfield and John Wesley. Both men played a role in the the Great Awakening, especially George Whitfield. However George was an ardent Calvinist and John Wesley was not and falls in the Arminian camp. Both men didn’t really get along. Now one doesn’t get that from the Wisdom booklets and I would suspect that Bill’s purpose would be to highlight their lives and struggles for inspiration and not what they taught. Again, someone being raised on all of this isn’t going to walk away with a true understanding of all these conflicts between conflicting ideas in Protestantism. All these characters become one big pot as if they taught all the same things. Just an initial observation and I have many more as I read through these booklets.

          • Moderator Moderator
            October 26, 2016    

            I can attest to having studied a number of great women through ATI. Gladys Aylward, Fanny Crosby, Florence Nightingale, Susanna Wesley come quickly to mind . . . Of course modern heros like Elizabeth Elliot, Joni Erikson-Tada . . .

          • rob war rob war
            October 26, 2016    

            Like I said, this is an initial gut reaction and read. The missionary Amy Carmichael should be mentioned. From what I read of her, she became a missionary to India, never married and quite devoted. I would hope Corrie Ten Boom would be mentioned and she and her whole family is quite admirable. “The Hiding Place” is just incredible. Likewise there are a number of leading women in the abolitionist movement which lead to Susan B. Anthony and even Julia Ward Howe (the author of the Battle Hymn of the Republic). The early women’s right to vote supporters spent just as much time opposing abortion and speaking out that abortion was just as much a crime against women as the baby. They were motivated by deeply held Christian beliefs. Sojourner Truth was an early Black abolitionist. I would imagine some of the later ones I am mentioning might be deemed as not fitting the submissive wife mode since they spoke out against slavery and supported women’s right to vote.

          • Moderator Moderator
            October 28, 2016    

            Amy Carmichael I have a memory of, and definitely Corrie. A married woman not a “submissive wife” would be out of line with the clear teaching of the New Testament, right? And given that Bill was front and center in advocating for a strengthening of God-ordained lines of authority it would be no surprise that such would not be presented as role models. Much hay has been made out of his rejection of Abigail as a good role model for the same reason. “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.” (Proverbs 14:12) We run over God’s design and God’s commands because of our deeply held perspectives, then wonder why we have debilitating, crushing problems, and the Lord appears to ignore our pleas for help.

            Point remains that there were a great many women presented for consideration.

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            October 27, 2016    

            Dear Rob,

            Yet again, I agree both with you and with Alfred. I can’t speak for Gothard, but his pattern of male emphasis might suggest that Gothard is a Complementarian. BTW, Wikipedia says Complementarianism is also the doctrine of the Catholic Church: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementarianism

            But Alfred is right about the great Christian women whom Gothard spotlighted. Yes, they were evangelicals and not Catholics.

            Anyway, I had the impression that the Wesley-Whitefield parting was more theological and less personal. At least I hope it was. And Wikipedia seems to agree. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Whitefield

            I don’t remember what the Wisdom Booklet said about their relations.

            With my “complements,”
            David K

          • rob war rob war
            October 30, 2016    

            Yes, I’ve read the Wikipedia article on complimentarianism, more than once. It is obvious that men and women are built differently and their bodies can do different things. God designed it that way and I would guess that we would all agree on that between you and me and Alfred. However, what the Catholic Church teaches about men and women, purposes and roles is very much different from the John Piper style, TGC, Promise Keepers, Bill Gothard and patriarchy and the Catholic Church’s complimentarianism is not a heavy handed men over women, authoritarianism/submission. While many quote St. Paul from Ephesians etc., St. Paul also wrote that men and women are joint heirs in Christ and exhorted “submission” to one another and that men should “love their wives like Christ loved the Church and gave up His life” Jesus also stated that true authority and leadership was not to “lord it over” others but to serve and He exampled that by washing feet. I don’t see any of these balances with the current John Piper style complimentarian movement (as well as Bill Gothard). Both over emphasized “authority” and submission. Real authority does not “demand” submission and those is authority are suppose to be washing feet and being a servants. I think a very balanced article from the Catholic prospective would be by Dr. Monica Miller at http://www.catholic.com/magazine/article/the-authority-of-women. So yes, I would be a complimentarian in the Catholic understanding but not in the John Piper/Bill Gothard teaching. So if both you and Alfred are the “heads” of your families, then my challenge to the both of you is, how are you washing your wives feet and laying down your lives for your families? Men and women do compliment each other but that compliment doesn’t mean a top heavy, chain of command but equals working together and fitting together as God designed it.
            different but equal

          • Moderator Moderator
            October 31, 2016    

            I was trying to find something to knock down here but am having a hard time. Husbands are to “lay down” their lives (literally “souls”) for their wife, and honor, respect her. And yes, there is a fundamental mutual submission, I.e. Husbands are to see themselves as their wife’s slave, just as they are to see themselves as the slave of their husband. The key point of note is that in those official capacities, and specifically in “the final decision”, a wife must trust the Lord to work through the man in charge. Clarity is gained by comparison with Christian bosses and Christian employees. While they too are to mutually submit to one another, nobody has any problem seeing how their roles remain fundamentally different as well. There is no 50-50 decision making, for example. That said, a smart boss will trust a wise and committed servant to make decisions, maybe in about everything, much like Joseph in Potipher’s house, and so smart husbands will trust their wise and committed wife to run the whole show. But the “reverence” aspect – and a few key areas of control that he chooses – will always highlight “who wears the pants”. Bill is not out of line in this teaching. That (we) petty husbands have taking the areas that he has emphasized trying to get back to a godly balance and used them for personal advantages to NOT have to be our wive’s slave, love her in dramatic ways she is not required – by the Lord – in return, that cannot be defended. And that gives “love” a bad name.

  35. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    October 24, 2016    

    Just to be yet more mischievous:

    The World Series begins tomorrow. Anybody out there want to root for either the Cubs or Indians as a diversion from the Gothard lawsuit?

    I’ll take the Cubs. Feel free to retaliate with un-Christian comments. I’m under orders to forgive you!

    Go Cubs,
    David K

    • Moderator Moderator
      October 24, 2016    

      The right answer is the Cubs. :-) Yes, we live in the Chicago area.

      • Sandy Sandy
        October 25, 2016    

        I’m a Braves girl myself, but beyond that, usually stick with National League. So GO Cubs!

        • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
          October 26, 2016    

          Attagirl Sandy. I like Nation League rules best (no DH), but favor the Yankees by marriage. That’s what happens when you marry a New Jersey woman.

          Love covers,
          David K

    • rob war rob war
      October 24, 2016    

      Yes, it’s the Cubs. But in my house, we have the usual holy war ( with a smile) between Mr. W and #2 son who never likes the teams the boss man likes. So we have Cubs supporters and Cleveland all under one roof. #2 son also likes Ohio State, the Yankees and any other team not from Michigan. So we have lots of fun with free thinking and sports teams. All in good fun!

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        October 25, 2016    

        Good for you, Rob. Such sporting wars remain holy so long as they are fought in fun. Myself, I am a little conflicted. I want the Cubs to win, but I admire Terry Francona.

        I hope any wars in your house over 2016 politics are just as charitable.

        Give peace a chance,
        David K

        • rob war rob war
          October 26, 2016    

          No holy wars right now with politics. That occurred more during the primary but not now. To have a son be an ardent Ohio State supporter in the land of U of M and Mi State is pretty heretical in these parts. But I give refuge to sports heretics even though Mr. W tells Big Z “oh how I hate Ohio State”. All in fun.

          peace and love even with heretics.

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            October 27, 2016    

            Hello again, Rob. I read your post the day after the Cubs evened up the series with their Game 2 victory. So it’s on to Wrigley Field for Game 3.

            Your house sounds like a pretty charitable place to be. At least when the bones of contention are merely sports and politics. I hope the War family is just as charitable about that third rail of social conflict, namely religion. You seem pretty decent about it here on DG.

            I realize War is just your pen name, but it reminds me of that hilarious line from Dr. Stragelove, “You can’t fight here, this is a war room!”

            Peace and love,
            David K

  36. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    October 28, 2016    

    Dear Rob,

    I am with you on the merits of Amy Carmichael. Jim and Elisabeth Elliot were admirers of her. A Chance to Die, Elisabeth Elliot’s 1993 biography of Amy Carmichael is a good read.

    I admire Bill Gothard, Bill Gothard admired Elisabeth Elliot, Elliot admired Amy Carmichael. I hope that says something good about our tastes.

    Your fellow Carmichael fan,
    David K

    p.s. I am of Paul, Cephas, Apollos, and Christ

    • rob war rob war
      November 1, 2016    

      Well, I’m not too familiar with her. In trying to read about Keswick theology which was brought up by Ron Hertzel, her name came up more than once as an example of someone in that camp. What I’ve read about her, seemed very impressive and she was very self sacrificial in her life in going to India and serving over there even when suffering physical illnesses later in life. I wanted to understand and get my brain around what Keswick theology is or isn’t instead of following the cut and paste blast from Ron. It looks like Dwight Moody was also from that camp. I can easily see how Amy’s life example would inspire others such as Elizabeth Elliot who I did so see speak long time ago as a college student. The critical books and articles on Keswick theology seem to have come from the Calvinist camp. I’m not so sure how big Keswick theology or “let go and let God” is any more. The blogger Frank Vioila would be the only current example “Deeper Life”. It seems Keswick theology is the basis of the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement where the baptism of the Holy Spirit would be an example of the deeper journey. Ron tried to tie Bill Gothard to Keswick theology via Watchman Nee, who only attended one Keswick convention back in the day. But again this is shallow cut and paste cheap shot apologetics and not true and honest research. I do think Bill Gothard does have some of the “deeper life” emphasis where one isn’t just a Christian but makes and effort to be a more serious or dedicated Christian. But is that “real ” Keswick theology based or is it more influenced by the pietist movement which is more Wesleyan and gave more of a birth to the pietist movement, Keswick movement and even the early Pentecostal movement. I believe Bill was heavily influenced by the pietist/Wesleyan movement.
      Didn’t mean to get off of Amy Carmichael, but her name and example kept coming up in trying to look into all of this and from the little I’ve read about her, she seemed to have lived out her faith in being totally sold out for Christ. I read a quote from her where someone asked about what it was like to be a missionary and her response was death or what I think she meant was death to self which in reality is a challenge for all Christians everywhere.

  37. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    October 31, 2016    

    Dear Rob,

    I read your 10/30 post about Complementarianism, and Alfred’s 10/31 response. Alfred is right about you. there are few nits to pick in your post. So I won’t pick any. Yet again, you are both right. And your feisty spirit shines through.

    If I fall short on spousal foot washing, will you give me credit for foot massage? That’s my assignment from Mrs. K while we listen to the World Series on Mrs. K’s mlb.com app. Pardon me for being superstitious, but maybe my spousal foot massage helped the Cubs win Game 5. My massage hand is standing by for Game 6 duty.

    Unfortunately I got a page-not-found error when I tried to open your link. If intuition counts for anything, I will guess that the article you linked takes a more moderate position than the patriarchy movement would take.

    I am reminded of that Christopher West book about Christian couples “imaging” the Trinity in their lovemaking. On the topic of submission in marriage, don’t you think West would opine that the central submission for Christian couples is their mutual submission to God in both flesh and spirit.

    Submitting to foot massage duty,
    David K

    • Sandy Sandy
      November 1, 2016    

      Backtracking on my National League preference this time … GOT to pull with “Nana” for the Indians – she’s precious and I’m pulling for whoever SHE’s pulling for. So GO Indians, make Nana happy!

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        November 2, 2016    

        Dear Sandy,

        You get a free pass for your baseball treachery. Never was there a more noble reason to switch loyalties. We can’t do without a happy Nana.

        May the best team win Game 7,
        David K

        • Moderator Moderator
          November 3, 2016    

          We shall note with utmost importance . . . that the Cubs won their first World Series in 108 years . . . on Bill Gothard’s 82nd birthday. There must be some significance . . . :-) Sorry.

          • rob war rob war
            November 3, 2016    

            There is also 108 stiches on a baseball as well

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            November 4, 2016    

            And I thought I was the superstitious one! I took credit for the Cubs Game 6 victory because I was charitable enough to give Mrs. K a foot massage.

            If I can stretch the imagination that much, I’ll go farther still for Game 7. When the tenth inning rain delay rolled around, the Cubs spent the delay getting fired up to give Bill the birthday gift of the century. The inspiration had to come from somewhere, right?

            I hope Sandy’s Nana gets her victory in 2017. That is, unless the Indians meet the Yankees in the ALCS as they did in 1997.

            Okay, we have addressed the important stuff. Now we can go back to such trivia as the Gothard lawsuit.

            Priorities, priorities.
            David K

          • Moderator Moderator
            November 5, 2016    

            Haha! Sometimes we need the Cubs for a few moments to be human again.

          • rob war rob war
            November 4, 2016    

            Did Bill get a chance or take a chance to watch or listen and enjoy the victory? He never seemed like a sports fan but wondered if he would have made an exception for his own home team?

          • Moderator Moderator
            November 5, 2016    

            Will have to ask him. He is a lot more aware than you might think.

    • rob war rob war
      November 2, 2016    

      Well, you sound like you have learned to service Mrs. K very well :). I’ll try the link again which is: http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/the-authority-of-women. If that doesn’t work again. just go to http://www.catholic.com and in the search box near the top right put in authority of women and the article should come up. The article is more about early teachings of the Catholic Church and in contrast to neoplatonic view which is men represent the good spiritual and women the bad which was quite prevalent way back then and looks to be rearing it’s ugly head in some of the ideas expresses in some of the complimentarian thinking that I’ve seen. She points out that Mary was considered the new Eve by many of the the early Church fathers and as the new Eve undos Eve’s choice to eat the fruit against God’s command. Dr. Miller’s aim was to counter some of the radical feminists ideas as well in that the Church is against women.

      I think what you are seeing in Christopher West’s book is the sacramental nature of marriage in that marriage is a Holy institution by God since both Catholic and Orthodox teach marriage as a sacrament and a special grace given by God for marriage and those called to it (which is most everyone). I think Bill Gothard almost came close to these ideas and views about marriage. Even some Protestants use the term “Holy matrimony”. Marriage which started by God in the Garden of Eden was for the mutual companionships between men and women and out of that mutual companionship, the begetting of children, thus the dual purpose of marriage.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        November 2, 2016    

        Dear Rob,

        Okay, I’m blushing. No “servicing” for Mrs. K this evening. We are listening to Game 7 while she works on a quilting project. That quilting needle is dangerous.

        Yes, I found the Monica Miller article online and enjoyed it. Did you receive the offline email I sent you on 10/31? I discussed it a bit there, so I won’t repeat it here.

        You may be right about Bill Gothard’s views moving toward Holy Matrimony orthodoxy. He embraced liturgical prayer and weekly communion during my later years in ATI.

        Three cheers for “mere” Christianity,
        David K

        • rob war rob war
          November 4, 2016    

          Well, I didn’t mean it like THAT! If Bill was moving to the ideas of weekly communion and even liturgical prayer, that is quite out of step with the views of his IFB Churches he attended all his life since those Baptist groups don’t practice either. That is very curious.
          Is Mrs. K a quilter? I don’t do quilting but I love counted cross switch and needle point. I think the other positive I took from Bill besides the study of past Christian heroes (Catholic for me) was his idea of the home being a craft center. I guess that would fit with Hobby Lobby whose founder is a supporter of Bill, Steve Green. Having a craft and hobby has so many wonderful benefits. One it leave a nice momento for one’s children. So I would hope or imagine that Mrs. K is making quilts for the grandkids which they can remember her by for years to come.
          your crafty sister

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            November 5, 2016    

            Aye, there’s the rub. You’re a victim of male word association. For my sex, “service” is often either military or that other attention-consuming activity.

            Mr. K took up quilting in 1990 at our final military post. I’m proud of her for taking up that womanly art. There’s a big quilt rack in my living room right now. The project is a restoration of an heirloom quilt for the wife of our former pastor. I liked that “craft center” idea when I joined ATI in 1987. But Mrs. K wasn’t very crafty and I wasn’t very handy. That took some time to develop.

            I don’t think we were consciously following Bill, but Mrs. K took up sewing at our military post within a couple of years, then quilting within a couple more years.

            You may surprised where old church practices spring up among evangelicals. I was referring to an announcement at my final ATI conference in 2004 that a Southern Baptist megachurch in Texas instituted weekly communion after Bill Gothard recommended it. I expect it was teetotaler-style communion with unfermented grape juice instead of wine, but it was every Sunday.

            I’m with you on the heroes of the past. Some have suggested learning history through biography. Personality-centric history is more interesting than date-centric history. I wonder how history will remember Bill Gothard? As Nixon once said, “It depends upon who writes the history.”

            Your bro,
            David K

          • rob war rob war
            November 7, 2016    

            Brother Dave,

            I’ll split up my responses into three sections. Bill in his pastor seminars promoted an “order of service” which he had the service starting out with preaching and then end up with more praise and worship. The independent Church I was attending at the time actually followed it for a month before switching back to the previous order which was praise and worship followed by a sermon (this was a 2 hour service). Now, you mentioned what you heard at the last seminar you attended where Bill announces some “un-named” mega Baptist Church (SBC you indicated) that is just going to switch to communion every Sunday just by Bill’s suggestion according to Bill. I find this whole announcement suspicious because I really don’t believe that any Baptist Church which views communion as just a memorial and no teaching or concept of the presence of Jesus of some sort. I really doubt this story since a majority of Protestant services and ideas is once a month communion which includes Methodist. Any SBC church, especially a mega church is hardly going to do this out of the blue and based on just Bill suggesting it without an uproar because communion every Sunday would make them “too Catholic” or too Lutheran or Anglican. Now maybe Bill revised some of his “order of worship” to include some kind of ideas of communion every Sunday. I don’t know. His previous ideas in this area seemed to have flown over like a lead balloon. The Churches which do have communion every Sunday besides Catholic and Orthodox usually have some kind of “Jesus being present” in the bread and wine teaching to go along with the importance of receiving communion every Sunday. Baptists, Fundamentalist Baptists, Anabaptist groups do not teach such things and communion is just a memorial. Liturgical Church services have a much different emphasis than singing some nice songs and listening to the sermon. Having an official set of Bible readings, a short homily/sermon on the readings to follow into Eucharist celebration has been the order of worship for Christians from the start. A great book on this would be “The Mass of the Early Christians” by Mike Aquilina which documents and quotes all early and the earliest sources about early Christian worship and service. I’m not sure where Bill was going with his ideas or where he got them from or what was drawing him to some of his ideas in this area. Maybe Alfred can enlighten us.

          • Moderator Moderator
            November 9, 2016    

            Bill has expressed a knowledge of and some appreciation of some of the teachings of the Plymouth Brethren on NT churches, which some of us are very familiar with. This is far short of an endorsement . . . but I recall attending a random staff meeting where he had all of the chairs in a large circle. Indicated that was the way the early NT believers met, all together, all equal. In any case, frequent communion is a characteristic of PB gatherings, as is sitting in a circle.

            I can tell you that Bill emphatically rejects the notion that the physical body – cells, blood – of the Savior comes out of the bread and wine. Have heard him make several pointed arguments against that in recent months. Communion to him is very much focused on the process of “examining ourselves”, getting right with the Lord and each other prior to participating . . . and so should be practiced often.

          • rob war rob war
            November 7, 2016    

            One should learn history both ways, by biography and by time period. Just focusing on biography can lead to a disjointed understanding of the flow of history from one time period to another. Bill seemed to have just a snap shot focus in ATI material which looked to be rather limited understanding to me.

            I am not sure how history is going to remember Bill which if probably not too kindly.

          • Moderator Moderator
            November 10, 2016    

            In a year where both the Cubs won and Trump won, against history and all odds, I am even more inclined to believe exactly what Bill says so often: “God writes last chapters”. It ain’t over until it is over. History’s recollection of Bill has not yet been written . . . and it may yet be far different than that envisioned by so many who have declared him dead, gone, and have written his obituary . . . and left the arena.

  38. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    November 4, 2016    

    Here’s some comment bait for my fellow visitors to DG.

    H.L. Mencken on Complementarianism: “Man, without a saving touch of woman in him, is too doltish, too naive and romantic, too easily deluded and lulled to sleep by his imagination to be anything above a cavalryman, a theologian, or a bank director.”

    There’s more where that came from,
    David K

  39. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    November 5, 2016    

    re: Bill Gothard and TV-watching. Those are difficult to reconcile in my ATI mind. I know Bill put himself under oath never to go into a movie theater. I don’t remember him taking an anti-television oath, but I remember an old Basic Seminar handout which itemized seventeen reasons not to have television in your home.

    If Bill has a television-free residence, somehow I cannot imagine him patronizing the local sports bar to watch the World Series! Maybe Joe Maddon had to manage his victory without Bill Gothard in front of the boob tube.

    Television is so, like 20th Century. In my house we listened to the Cubs audio broadcast from an iPad.

    On the cutting edge of technology,
    David K

    • Moderator Moderator
      November 6, 2016    

      Yes, Bill’s home is “TV Free”. He makes active use of the radio, however.

      • rob war rob war
        November 7, 2016    

        Would Bill then listen to something like the World Series on the radio?

        • Moderator Moderator
          November 9, 2016    

          That is an excellent question. Somehow I doubt it, as I have never heard him make any reference that indicated a knowledge of professional sports. But you never know :-)

  40. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    November 6, 2016    

    Dear Rob,

    Are you really that bright? When you’re not dropping names of obscure historical figures, you are posting the number of stitches on a baseball. You deserve a game show championship in fewer than 108 years. Maybe 108 days?

    Fascinated,
    David K

    • rob war rob war
      November 10, 2016    

      lol, I heard on the radio that morning someone making the point that there are 108 stitches on a baseball and compared it to 108 years for the Cubs. I just passed on the info in our conversation. And I LOVE Christian history and history in general.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        November 10, 2016    

        Okay, sis. You are officially acquitted from suspicion of having the entire internet between your ears. Even mere mortals can accumulate trivia along the way!

        Still impressed,
        David K

  41. rob war rob war
    November 10, 2016    

    Quick question Alfred in reference to our conversation on communion. What are PB teaching in this area since you are indicating Bill leaned towards those views, at least now?

    • Moderator Moderator
      November 10, 2016    

      For “Plymouth Brethren”, at least the ones we know:

      Communion is a command, by Jesus, to believers – “This do” – so attendance is fairly mandatory

      Communion is focused on showing the death, burial, resurrection of the Savior to the world, even to angels, so they can learn.

      Communion is linked to “love feasts” and the gathering of believers in Acts “on the first day of the week”, so is practiced weekly.

      Communion is a symbol or type of receiving Jesus – “eating and drinking” Him – into our hearts, spirits. Molecules of bread and wine are not changed into molecules of flesh and blood.

      Communion is a time to examine ourselves, get our hearts right with the Savior, maybe get relationships right with other Christians, before participating.

      Communion is a holy sign of the unity of the body of believers – which is why most use a single loaf of bread – broken – and a single “cup” of wine, both passed hand to hand so no one person is presented as more important than another (For the record, Bill is strongly opposed to using fermented wine for communion) For this reason also many gathering sit in a circle for this meeting. Headcoverings for women are widely practiced, long hair, uncovered heads/short hair for men, silence among women, all men having equal authority to speak, pray.

      There are some things where different PB groups differ:

      Many insist on a sanctified location – a “table” – where the Lord has placed His name and to which believers come to meet.

      Many make the elders responsible for allowing or baring access – in some groups it is restricted to only those believers that are under those elder’s authority, i.e. “in fellowship” in that meeting. All others, including believers from other groups, sit in the “seat of the unlearned” for observation. Access for believers traveling may be granted at the discretion of the elders, usually by means of a “letter of commendation” from the elders in one meeting to those of another. Pattern for this is Romans 16:1-2, where Phoebe is “commended” by Paul to the gathering in Rome.

      • rob war rob war
        November 14, 2016    

        I appreciate your explanation here. Head coverings or mantillas use to be the standard in the Catholic Mass before Vatican II and the rise of the vernacular Mass and still is the dress code at a Latin Mass. I think you bring up an interesting issue here in that what you are describing is a closed system and that communion is only for those members and in good standing. Actually, the very earliest Christians met twice on Sunday, the first was the reading of scripture and a homily/teaching/sermon which was open to all. Then later, there was a second which was closed where communion took place. The closed meeting lead to some of the early accusations against Christians that they had secret meetings because they were cannibals. The two meeting system quickly changed to one. But only those that are members and in good standing are suppose to receive communion. Communion isn’t just a me and Jesus but also represents the community and that we are in communion with each other. Someone outside of that communion or unity is always welcome to attend but shouldn’t present themselves for communion because they are not apart or in agreement. I think that is what you are saying what the PB group (that you belong to) teach and practice and it is not too dissimilar to Catholic interestingly enough. That is probably not something you would want to hear but it’s how I am understanding you and PB community.

        • Moderator Moderator
          November 14, 2016    

          The similarities have to do with some clear Scripture that some have ignored. It is for believers only, and there is governance to ensure it is that way, as much as is humanly possible.

  42. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    November 10, 2016    

    re: Cubs and Trump. Isn’t that something? My record is 2-0 in 2016. I was rooting for the Cubs and also for Trump. Both won!

    Full disclosure: I didn’t vote for Trump because voting is against my religious, political, and practical convictions. But that did not hinder me from being pleased with the Trump victory.

    Perhaps by the end of this month we will see a resolution (either victory or defeat) in the Gothard lawsuit.

    2-0 and holding,
    David K

    • rob war rob war
      November 11, 2016    

      Happy Vet day to you. I am completely at a loss why voting would be against your convictions, especially for someone that has served his country in the military. I can’t think of any Christian group that would promote such thinking. Even Bill Gothard teaches that Christians should be involved which would mean voting and considering a number of those from ILBP that ran for office and served in some capacity in public service, I again am at a loss by this and actually disappointed that these are your beliefs. Considering how close it was for Trump in Fl, he could use your vote, even when he won the Fl. Mi was very much closer, not even called for a couple of days. I’ve alway voted in every election which includes primaries since 1980. Our boys vote and we made sure they registered to do so. I’m sure Alfred, his wife and oldest voting age children the same. I am at a loss at this.

      • Moderator Moderator
        November 12, 2016    

        I have it on good authority that Alfred refrained from voting much of his life because it is still frowned upon by many in the group where he is in fellowship. The thinking is that, as “citizens of heaven”, Christians would not be voting in the affairs of a foreign country on earth. While he is sympathetic to this perspective he also notes that Christians have a dual citizenship in that sense, and even Paul availed himself of the rights and privileges of that earthly citizenship. But we must never lose sight of the fact that God alone assumes final responsibility for placing people in power.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        November 12, 2016    

        Hi sis, thanks for the kind sentiments for Veterans Day.

        But first a word about terms. I am a veteran only in the inflated, modern sense. All my military battles were training simulations. In the 1920s, Dwight Eisenhower lamented that he missed out on being a veteran. “The Great War” had come and gone, while Ike was training troops in Ft. Meade, Maryland. Because he did not deploy to a combat zone, he was not considered a “veteran.” But now with perpetual, illegal wars going on, everyone who dons caesar’s uniform is a veteran.

        My attitude about voting runs like this: A vote expresses my will that a politician should have power to coerce my neighbor. But Jesus commands me to love my neighbor, not coerce him. Jesus explicitly rebuked James and John for aspiring to a political office. I doubt He has changed his mind about politics.

        I admire Bill Gothard for much, but not for statism.

        My opinion may be rare among Christians. But the opinions of Desmond Doss were rare among Christians and soldiers. Check out this review by a Catholic writer about the new Mel Gibson flick about Desmond Doss. Doss’s story is also told in a terrific 2005 documentary, The Conscientious Objector. Here is the review: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/11/ellen-finnigan/military-hero-never-killed/

        Do you think the Seventh Day Adventists or Jehovah’s Witness have room for me if the Methodists get tired of me? Or maybe I can be a peace Catholic like Ellen Finnigan?

        BTW, all this is just our little secret, okay? If caesar finds out that I’ve lost that loving’ feeling, he may break up with me. Then how will I pay my bills without my VA disability compensation?

        Your panhandling veteran,
        David K

        • rob war rob war
          November 14, 2016    

          I hardly think you will be in trouble wth caesar since you have lost your loving feeling. While I probably won’t see the movie on Doss, I think it sounds well done and brings up some very interesting issues about pacifism, just wars and all of that. Doss from what I’ve read about his situation is very interesting. A strict type of pacifism is found in some Catholic circles and orders. St. Francis of Assisi would be an example. He did participate in the fifth crusade peaceably, going to minister to Christians and Muslims and met with Sultan Malik al-Kamil to appeal to him and nearly converted the Sultan. He supported dialog with Muslims and the Franciscan order is the only Catholic order allowed to minister in a number of Muslim countries. Just war and the idea that countries have the responsibility to defend themselves against aggression is predominant. thinking. St. Thomas Aquinas had a big hand in formulating this. On the other end, there are a number of soldier saints such as St. Maurice and St. Joan of Arc. There is a both/and here. You would probably find a nice home in the third order secular Franciscans who are committed to a simple life and I think even pacifism of some sort in line with St. Francis of Assisi. The reason I probably won’t see the Doss movie is that I can’t take watching violence but I think the story does bring up great discussion about war and peace, fighting and pacifism.
          Pax Christie

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            November 16, 2016    

            Okay, that’s a relief. It sounds like you won’t rat me out to Caesar. I knew I could count on my loyal sister not to be a tattletale.

            Feel free to skip the Mel Gibson movie. It was okay, but you get the intensity you would expect from a Mel Gibson flick. But treat yourself and watch The Conscientious Objector documentary. You can stream it on Amazon for $2.99. It features the real Desmond Doss as an old man, as well as the men he served with.

            Your account of Francis nearly converting the sultan sounds like that “almost persuaded” account we have of Paul before Agrippa. Terrific!

            I am okay with the both/and position you take. Wiser and better heads than our have wrestled (in good faith) with these war and peace questions for centuries. Who are we to think we can improve upon them in a few minutes of pecking at keyboards?

            Peace and love,
            David K

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            November 16, 2016    

            On our topic of Desmond Doss, war, and peace; one more quotation from Gulliver’s Travels, this one more self-deprecating:

            “A soldier is a yahoo hired to kill in cold blood as many of his own species, who have never offended him, as he possibly can.” Poor Gulliver had a lot of trouble trying to explain that one to the wise and peaceful houyhnhms.

            Wisdom and peace,
            David K

  43. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    November 10, 2016    

    Dear Rob,

    Point well taken re: Bill and weekly communion. As you know, Protestants tend to favor the Zwinglian theory about Communion, which insists that Communion is a memorial meal and nothing more.

    Although we Protestants usually think that Aquinas went too far with the Transubstantiation theory, we often acknowledge that something more significant is happening than a mere psychological experience for those who participate. Some groups believe in a “real presence” of Jesus, although they deny Transubstantiation.

    I don’t know whether that big Baptist Church of 2004 stuck with weekly Communion or not. But I wish we would do it at my UMC church.

    Hungering and Thirsting,
    David K

    • rob war rob war
      November 11, 2016    

      Transubstantiation is not a Thomas Aquinas invention, it’s been taught from the start and I could send quotes from the earliest Christian writers to substantiate it. Lutherans, Anglican and Methodist believe in a “real” presence of some sort called consubstantiation and that would be different from the view that a majority of evangelicals have which is just a memorial, nothing more. I think the term is ordinance which is we do this because Jesus told us to but that’s it. Yes, that is more Zwinglian and even what Wycliff tried to teach and got himself in trouble for as heresy.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        November 12, 2016    

        You’re right, Rob. For the reason you say, nobody could be said to invent a theology which goes all the way back to the Apostles. But I had the impression that Aquinas took the lead in showing how some of the ideas of Aristotle (substance vs. accidents) can also apply to the Eucharist. We have both heard claims and counter-claims. I don’t believe claims that Saul of Tarsus invented Christianity. Nor do I believe any claims that Aquinas invented Transubstantiation. I don’t know whether Transubstantiation is true or not. It seems plausible to me, but I probably don’t understand it well enough.

        Thanks for setting me straight,
        David K

  44. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    November 11, 2016    

    Quote of the day from Gulliver’s Travels, when Gulliver saw history for what it is:

    “I found how the world had been misled by prostitute writers, to ascribe the greatest exploits in war to cowards, the wisest counsel to fools, sincerity to flatterers, virtue to betrayers of their country, piety to atheists, chastity to sodomites. How many innocent and excellent persons had been condemned by corrupt politicians and judges. How low an opinion I had of human wisdom and integrity.”

    History awaits the outcome of the Gothard lawsuit,
    David K

  45. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    November 13, 2016    

    A recent news article feature an inverse of one of Bill Gothard’s teachings. Bill taught that a man ought to heed the counsel of his wife. This piece opines that Hillary Clinton lost because she did not heed the political input of her husband. Here is the link: http://www.unz.com/isteve/wife-fails-to-listen-to-her-husband-loses-presidency/

    David K

    • Moderator Moderator
      November 14, 2016    

      Interesting :-) Who knows. I have a hard time finding any useful application of Biblical perspectives to that particular couple. It may be a personal problem.

    • rob war rob war
      November 14, 2016    

      Hillary lost the election because she is a old sick woman that no one likes, corrupt to the hilt, morally bankrupt and acted like she was entitled to the job and it was due to her. She under estimated her opponent, she called Trump’s base “deplorable” and the American electorate did the job that the woose at the FBI should have done and sent her packing. Without the arm twisting during the primary and her super delegates, I’m not so sure if she would have even won her own party’s nomination. She lost to Bernie in MI and WI in the primary over trade issues and she lost both States in the general election due to the same issues which she and her campaign ignored. Kinda shows the state of the democrats in that all they had to cough up was crazy socialist Bernie and Hillary. It has nothing to do with
      not listening” to Bill. She had nothing to offer but the same old same old in policy and never ending corruption. They can point fingers at each other till the fingers fall off but the fact remains, Hillary is a sick old nasty bat that was in it for herself and no campaign team or makeup can cover it up.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        November 14, 2016    

        I agree with your analysis, Rob. But back in September I got a strong dose of shame when I read a blog entry by a devout Catholic political blogger. He shamed me into praying for Hillary. Here is the link: https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/pray-hillary/

        David K

  46. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    November 14, 2016    

    Dear Rob,

    Here is another reason not to vote. See if you agree with H.L. Mencken’s description of a politician: “Merely a wholesaler of notions so infantile they must needs disgust a sentient suckling. A spouting geyser of fallacies and sentimentalities, a cataract of unsupported assumptions and hollow moralizing, a tedious phrase-merchant and platitudinarian, a fellow whose noblest flights of thought were flattered when they were called comprehensible.” Does that sound like 2016 politics, or what?

    I rest my case,
    David K

    • rob war rob war
      November 14, 2016    

      Basically, I don’t agree with you at all or even with the quote. Whether politicians are corrupt or not is not are reason not to vote at all. If one doesn’t exercise their civic duty, it could be eventually loss. When one doesn’t vote, you are basically letting others choose your leaders for you. It is an abandonment of civic duty and your own self interest. I think about 53% of those eligible to vote did so in this election. What that means is that 53% of the voting age population picked the country’s leadership. Pretty pathetic. St. Paul in Romans said to pray for one’s political leadership. What’s interesting is that he had Nero. St. Paul didn’t say pray if we like them, if they are good etc. I don’t think Nero was really a nice guy and under him beheaded St. Paul. It’s the fringe groups that are saying “don’t vote” which is what you have seemed to bought into. I’m not following your justification at all. You vote because you have a civic responsibility to even if you think it’s all corrupt and a loss cause. There isn’t an excuse here, at least not for me and my family. Not voting only hurts you and not voting doesn’t change the system or the people that run it. And not voting is a slap in the face to those that fought and died for this country and the right to vote.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        November 17, 2016    

        Fair enough, Rob. You can dismiss Mencken’s harsh words about politicians. Once in a lifetime we get a good man in politics. In our lifetimes, that man was Ron Paul. I wish Trump would appoint him to an office. I can dream, can’t I?

        Of course you are right that the apostles commanded us to pray for rulers. It simply does not follow that any Christian should vote for them. Remember that scene in Fiddler on the Roof? “God bless and keep the Czar (as far away as possible!).”

        St. Peter specifies why we should pray for rulers. The wording refers to a “quiet and peaceable life” for us their subjects. In reading Paul and Peter on the topic, I get the impression that they expected Christians to be ruled by unelected monarchs. Peter even specifies a “supreme king.” If we draw any political conclusions from the Apostles’ doctrine, it probably supports the old “Divine Right of Kings” theory rather than “vote for politicians.”

        I prefer my quiet and peaceable life away from the polls. As John Lennon said, I hope someday you’ll join me.

        On the topic of Civic Duty: In some countries, voting is mandated by the state. So I will exercise my precious freedom from voting while I still have it!

        And I dispute that anyone ever died for my right to vote. Here is a snarky treatment of that common claim: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/03/jack-perry/men-died-right-vote/

        Let freedom ring,
        David K

  47. Moderator Moderator
    November 14, 2016    

    The lawsuit filed by David Gibbs III against Bill – before he was removed from the case for cause – featured a number of references to the fact that he was also litigating on behalf of a young woman – Lourdes Torres-Manteufel – that had accused the well known founder of The Vision Forum, Doug Phillips, of sexual misconduct while she was a nanny and was suing for damages. Mr. Phillips had acknowledged inappropriate contact with her which had a “physical component” but did not involve . . . sex. She and her then husband went on to make many additional claims.

    The case was recently – and quietly – resolved. Phillips put out the following statement on Facebook:

    https://www.facebook.com/visionforum/posts/10150718499249964

    Ms. Torres-Manteufel has not made a statement, and apparently declined to add to this information when contacted by some sympathetic to her cause. There is no indication whether money exchanged hands. It is clear that all matters against Doug are resolved in his favor, “with prejudice”, with her retracting public accusations against him.

    Although many attempts were made – notably by Gibbs – to link Phillips and Mr. Gothard, they had, in fact, not worked together or had contact for many years before this news broke. We list this information simply to note that, in yet another case, wild claims and speculation have resolved to something far short of a conviction. The woman had her day in court . . . and confessed that she lied about him, claims which she had to retract.

    “He that is first in his own cause seemeth just; but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him.” (Proverbs 18:17)

    • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
      November 14, 2016    

      That’s a relief. Doug Phillips and Bill Gothard have determined enemies, so there’s a tense wait while things get sorted out.

      The Doug Phillips confession was lawyerly and vaguely worded. It raised more questions than it answered. I couldn’t decide whether he was being sexually discreet or just feeding us baloney.

      I am glad to know that the worst claim against him has been retracted. I did not want to think ill of either him or Bill Gothard (charity thinketh no evil).

      Pleased with the news,
      David K

      • Moderator Moderator
        November 14, 2016    

        Yes, of course it was lawyerly. It was likely prepared by his lawyer. The information provided – and notably the absence of a rebuttal – would leave us, again, that things went in his favor as much as was possible.

    • rob war rob war
      November 14, 2016    

      I think this more proves the fact that kicking G 3 off the case did more favors for those suing Bill than you want to admit. From what Spiritual Sounding Board posted about this was that because the case was dismissed without prejudice, that the plaintiff cannot speak out any more about the case or what happen and had to withdraw public accusations. Just because she had to withdraw public statements and can no longer talk about the case doesn’t mean that didn’t happen. We will never know but G 3 seemed to do more for Phillips than his client in this situation and kicking him off the Bill case did the plaintiffs a big favor if these are the kinds of deal he cooks up for his clients. I would be careful what I wish for.

      • Moderator Moderator
        November 14, 2016    

        Come on, Rob, you are an intelligent person. Are you suggesting that Gibbs misled her, gave her bad advice, and THAT is why the case was dropped? Gibbs may be many things, but he is very much of a pragmatist . . . and he likes to get paid. He had a lot of money sunk into that trial, so every motivation to pursue it to whatever end most benefitted him, and his client. So . . . I see that the case was simply weak enough, with enough misinformation provided to him by the plaintiff that, once he, through discovery, understood what they were up against, he lobbied for anything that would salvage something.

        And one thing you and I both know is that removing the dignity of a sexual abuse victim is a great crime in and of itself. With all of the support that Lourdes enjoyed . . . from the likes of SSB and HA, let alone a sympathetic national media, let alone court system, can you imagine a scenario where she would allow herself to be muzzled . . . unless she had no choice? Think about this objectively.

        • rob war rob war
          November 14, 2016    

          Alfred, just based on G 3 being kicked off the Bill case alone makes him out to be a rather dubious lawyer. I’m not sure why you want to compare these two cases. Are you hoping that this is a sign that Bill and his old friends from IBLP board are going to be exonerated? They might have needed G 3 for that. But they had him kicked off the case. In all honesty, I don’t know what happen in the Phillips case. The settlement looks a little sinister with crooked G 3 involved. Lawyers can pressure clients to do things that maybe the clients in their heart don’t really want to do but “without” prejudice and the fact that her silence is now bought with a settlement. Crooked G 3 got that. Are you glad that crooked G 3 isn’t working against Bill? Maybe you should wish crooked G 3 could be back on the case cooking up more deals like this.

          • Moderator Moderator
            November 14, 2016    

            I don’t know what happen in the Phillips case

            What do you suspect is the most logical explanation for the evidence before you? :-) The easiest, simplest explanation is usually the best.

            Maybe you should wish crooked G 3 could be back on the case cooking up more deals like this.

            If DGIII had not been around, it is highly doubtful the case would ever have been filed in the first place. Contrary to your current perspectives, let alone the disdain heaped on him by HA and others, he is not a slouch lawyer. Because he got so personally involved in Bill’s matters his judgment was clouded. But I can assure you he tried for a big win with Lourdes, and had the experience and team to do so.

          • rob war rob war
            November 15, 2016    

            Alfred,
            a non-slouch lawyer wouldn’t not have gotten himself kicked off any case do to ethical violations, Bill or no Bill. He also wouldn’t have taken the case to begin with do to conflict of interests. You can’t have it both ways. He is a great guy because the Phillips case is settled out of court but well he just over did it with Bill. Either he is scum or he isn’t and like I said, it looks more like the scum than the honest.

          • Moderator Moderator
            November 18, 2016    

            We share our distaste for what the man did. We will leave it at that.

            All eyes turn to November 30th, where some significant actions are likely to take place. We are, as you can imagine, praying earnestly for the judge and all involved.

          • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
            November 18, 2016    

            Dear Rob,

            I would not take it for granted that non-slouch lawyers are immune from getting caught on the wrong side of a legal ethics violation. As Scott Adams of Dilbert fame wrote, “experts work for money, not truth.” If DG3 makes enough money in his law practice to avoid moonlighting at pizza delivery, who cares about Truth? Is a lawyer a slouch based upon his win-lose record, his income, or his discovery of Truth?

            I think it’s funny that you consider G3 a kind of jinx on his clients. It makes you wonder about his won-loss record for cases like these. Oh, well. Happily none of our business.

            Peace, Love, and Truth,
            David K

          • rob war rob war
            November 18, 2016    

            I don’t believe that a non-slouch lawyer would have taken on a case that he already in going to have a conflict of interest because of his relationship and friendships with the other side. Either he takes the case and cuts his ties and friendships with the other side or he is honest with the potential clients in that he can’t take the case due to potential conflicts of interest. These sorts of ethics come up all the time with lawyers and therapists. They are part of ethical standards for both professions. Mr. W every year has to take ethics as part of his state license which discuss conflicts of interests and potential conflicts of interests. G3 was also part of the Terri Schiavo case in Fl. They lost that one as well. So his record from my prospective isn’t looking too good and the article on HA about him and the cases he has involved himself with is pretty damming. Like I stated above, kicking G3 off the case probably did the plaintiffs a big favor.

  48. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    November 20, 2016    

    Okay, Rob, you win. I didn’t realize DG3 was part of the Schiavo case down here. That was a very sad one. Yet another reason I believe it is better to have trusted friends than a “living will.”

    Willing to live,
    David K

    • rob war rob war
      November 29, 2016    

      The Schiavo case had nothing to do with living wills. Terri was married to an abusive husband. He should have cut the ties with her, moved on with his life with the new girlfriend and their kids together and let her parents that wanted to care for her, take care of her. Only when the louse of a husband became involved with the Hemlock society and it’s lawyers, did it turn into a die by starvation case. Don R. from RG helped right the law or at least the brief defending the law before the Supreme Court. The husband claimed Terri made some sort of crack about severe handicaps and wanting to never be like that as a basis for starving her to death. The comment if she made it was only to him supposedly. I followed it very closely during that time. Her brother indicated that this jerk was an abusive control freak which Terri hid from her parents. The morning of her collapse, she was talking to a girlfriend about possibly leaving him and she went and got an unauthorized hair cut. Any man that wants his wife to starve to death is one big selfish pig. And any woman that then lives with such a creep, has a couple of children with him while his wife is starving to death at his wish ought to have her head examine for a brain and her chest for a heart. God help those children. The case was turned into a right to die case but at it’s heart, this was really a spousal abuse case and the ultimate abuse done by this big **** was to have his wife starve to death.

      • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
        December 1, 2016    

        I think we are both correct, sister. You address the Main Thing, which was Mr. Schiavo pushing for the starvation.

        And I was thinking of the risk management implications for the rest of us. Given the death lobby out there, wisdom lies in withholding firing squad ammunition which they would love to fire at you. A living will could end up as a mighty convenient bullet for an enemy who would dispatch you in a health crisis. God forbid!

        Maybe I lured us off-topic a bit, but maybe not. Our thread is about justice or injustice in caesar’s courts. Apparently in the Gothard case, that question will have to be settled on another day.

        Your pro-life brother,
        David K

  49. Moderator Moderator
    November 29, 2016    

    The hearing scheduled for tomorrow morning (11/30) has been postponed due to court scheduling conflicts. A new date has not yet been set.

    • David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
      November 30, 2016    

      Thanks for the update, brother. We’ll wait for caesar to get his act together.

      David K

  50. Moderator Moderator
    December 1, 2016    

    A small bird told us that they will reconvene the hearing “just after Christmas”. Officially, the court docket for the suit has no date listed . . . yet.

  51. David S. Knecht Sr. David S. Knecht Sr.
    December 6, 2016    

    Our topic here reminds me of some comment bait worth considering. Here is C.S. Lewis’ description of his first attempt at moral self-examination: “I found what appalled me; a zoo of lusts, a bedlam of ambitions, a nursery of fears, a harem of fondled hatreds. My name was Legion.”

    Few of us would be as eloquent as Lewis, but does that description of the inner man sound familiar to anyone but me?

    David K

  52. Moderator Moderator
    December 21, 2016    

    Based on the posted court docket, the next hearing is January 9th. We have no further information at this time. Merry Christmas to all, and a blessed New Year.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Categories