We have in the past highlighted the great work Holly McLean (Mommy Answer Lady) has been doing debunking the “Shiny Happy People” documentary slander. Since she started over a year ago she has knocked out a stunning 62 YouTube videos (@ShinySLANDER YouTube channel) in this series with no indication of letting up. She is hoping to combine all of that and much more in a full length documentary series of her own in the not too distant future.
Her most recent productions focuses squarely on the 2015 lawsuit brought by 17 plaintiffs against Bill and IBLP that were seeking close to $10 million in outright damages for “sexual harassment” and “sexual abuse”. As we documented here the suit failed spectacularly as the plaintiffs quietly left in several groups, those remaining walking away in February 2018. This resulted in court dismissal of all charges – there was no settlement. Being let go “without prejudice” they had a year to refile, but chose not to.
Holly’s last video (#3 in the subseries on “Repressed Memories”) is meaty and gives the precise series of events that lead to that final dismissal. The most colorful find involves a special “top secret” Facebook chat group set up by Recovering Grace personnel where the women spent years in endless and meticulous collaboration and cross-pollination. It was called “R2D2”, the name was chosen as they were sure this would confuse hapless “Gothardites”.
The women mistakenly thought that their 24 hours a day discourse was protected from lawsuit discovery. That group appears to have been the means of their undoing – they had the choice to present their chats to the lawyers or drop out. The video firmly addresses the persistent falsehood claimed by the plaintiffs that the suit was dismissed because of Statutes of Limitations.
Let us know what you think. Click to Watch
Holly is doing great, honest, investigative work in getting at the truth.
I’m hoping that more people will be interested in the facts pertinent to the case.
How do we know that Holly is doing great? Because Gothard’s enemies smear her with the same ad hominem they direct against Gothard. They question her motives without questioning their own. That’s a symptom of success.
But what has Holly proved conclusively? nothing really, except to prove that Gothard’s enemies have proved nothing.
“By their fruits ye shall know them.” What fruits are on display in the lives of Gothard’s enemies?
I have to say that I believe you may not have watched all the videos that have been posted on the Shiny Slander YouTube channel to say that all that has been proven is that Gothard’s enemies have proved nothing.
Certainly, the fact that they have proven nothing of any substance against Gothard and IBLP is true and this is covered in the video series.
There is proof that the women who made these claims had a completely different story in the past. There is proof showing that the claim that ATI was using unsubstantiated scientific information in their curriculum is false. There is proof that Gothard and his family did not live extravagantly off IBLP money, and much more.
What you are suggesting is that it is worthless to point this out. We should allow the public to assume guilt of a man and the organization because a negative cannot be proven. Therefore to point out the numerous and overwhelming number of lies that have been used to frame a false narrative is worthless. IN other words, prove the negative or you shouldn’t say anything at all. That is a ridiculous argument.
I am not assuming you meant to disparage the work that has been done to show the enemies of Gothard to be liars, but I wonder if you realize that is how your comment is coming off.
Each new Shiny Slander video has been good, and a fair rebuttal to Gothard’s enemies.
Ok, Shiney Happy People 2 trailer is out, and it has nothing to do with Bill Gothard, IBLP and the Duggars. It is about Teen Mania and Ron Luce which closed down in 2015, ten years ago, which begs the question why focus on something that has been gone for 10 years. There have been other documentaries and articles about the abuse and manipulation withing Teen Mania. I am personally not familiar with it but did look up the MSNBC documentary on it, done in 2013 while it was still going strong. There are a number of parallels between Teen Mania and IBLP. Both targeted young Christians (IBLP use to be IBYC). Both offered abusive para-military training. Both took advantage of sincere desires to serve God and go all out for Jesus. Both had the young people that work there, do long unhealthy hours and pressured the people working for them to do so. Both are para-church ministries with no oversite or control by any Church or Church group. Both had Churches unquestionably encourage their young people to go to their events and seminars. Teen Mania is not closed, IBLP is dying on the vine. Again, I am not sure why Amazon is focusing on something that shut down 10 years ago but hopefully will make people think on what they are sending their young people to and hopefully better investigations into para-church groups will be done.
Nothing in IBLP is “para-military” 🙂 If there is anything you can trust David Knecht to know, it is that. Because he was front and center in it. I know a ton of young men that went through ALERT. Nope.
When I took command of ALERT Basic Training, one of my first acts was to draft a statement about our military style. We had adopted uniforms and military organization. Some of our officers had military experience. But unlike a military force, we were peacemakers. We forswore force and embraced service. We were “strong to serve.”
Like the Salvation Army, our purpose was to serve God and man, so that God’s kingdom would come and his will be done. Over the years, ALERT has done a pretty good job serving God and man.
Did Alert offer military training similar to a boot camp? Yes. Teen Mania did the same.
That is paramilitary.
Paramilitary is in support of the military, or offering a similar function. When the sun sets, NOTHING about ALERT involves that. Search and rescue is not military. The function is not to protect buildings let alone individuals, like, say, bodyguards.
re-read the definition of para-military and Alert as well as Teen Mania fits the official definitions of para-military. Maybe Alert actually does more clean up or rescue type of things in their teams but the training and uniforms etc is totally military like and thus para-military. Plus, Alert is set up by military people like David. I have know idea what Teen Mania did in their training but traumatized its participants.
Alert was established by a carpet installer, Ron Fuhrman(? Unclear on name). If David is a military person, I was not aware. I am not aware of any military type people in the organization. And “having served in the military”, especially folks coming out the Vietnam draft era doesn’t qualify. You might as well include Boy Scout training as well. There has never been any weapons or combat training, even self defense, to my knowledge. 100% “Air Land Emergency Resource Team”.
I think it’s fair to say that ALERT _is_ paramilitary.
See:
https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=paramilitary
“Of, relating to, or being a group of civilians organized in a military fashion…”
https://alertacademy.com/about/
“ALERT utilizes a military-style structure,…”
Scroll down on the same page to see the ALERT team and their titles, such as:
COL. JESSE BOULDEN
Commanding Officer
SMAJ. JADEN LABARCA
Sergeant Major
and so on.
I guess the “Salvation Army” is “paramilitary” by that definition. 🙂 We both know that is not what “paramilitary” aimed at ALERT is designed to mean. Folks are trying to raise scary images of an army with guns enforcing Bill Gothard’s purposes.
Is the Salvation Army also paramilitary? What about the Cub Scouts? Think of all those scary little uniforms and badges. Tiny tyranny is just around the corner! But “unto the pure all things are pure.” The rest of the verse speaks for itself.
Indeed the ALERT founder had no military experience, although Several of us early ALERT volunteers did have military experience. Three of us volunteer staff had been officers in the army, another was a marine, and another was a navy medic. Our backgrounds were handy for making men “strong to serve.”
Did Teen Mania traumatize its participants we read on 7/19 above? all of them? or just some of them? what evidence supports that generalization?
Or is the outside accuser traumatized?
Cub scouts? This is the gift that keeps on giving. In many places, Alert has been sarcastically called the boy scouts of Bill Gothard. Very big difference between uniforms worn by boy-cub-brownies-girl Scouts and the military. Alert’s uniforms were certainly military.
Is ALERT any more paramilitary than Congress and the Rotary Club? Each of these has a “sergeant-at-arms.” Scary title, isn’t it? Admittedly, Congress ought to do more pushups than legislation.
On 7/14 above, we raise the topic of child abuse. Supposedly, rigorous physical conditioning and hard work is abuse, even for those who freely chose it. But this is absurd. Obviously, the opposite is true. Physical conditioning and hard work are virtues, not vices. We need more, not less. What could be more abusive than sending soldiers into battle if they are weak and untrained? or young Christians into adulthood if they are weak and untrained?
The SHP producers took the path of least resistance. They targeted low-hanging fruit which might be slandered with impunity. But when their slander against IBLP exposed their own malice, they shifted their aim to others.
So is para-church ministry bad, because it is unburdened by Roman rule? Do negligent parents send their kids to rigorous Christian programs? No, that is what good parents do!
Good parents should investigate any program they send their children to. They shouldn’t just go by enforcements like Pat Robertson did for Teen Mania and they also shouldn’t see if the founding members have used a program for their own children and if the founding members have not, then maybe the program should not be used. That says it all right there.
Do Gothard’s enemies say that ALERT makes Gothard’s Boy Scouts? In the ways that matter most, they are more correct than they know.
For generations, the Boy Scouts have earned a reputation for cultivating the scout oath. This includes virtues like helping other people at all times, staying physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight. Does this sound like a description of Gothard’s enemies? Look at them. Are they physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight? or the opposite? Do they hate Gothard and ALERT because of envy? or bitterness? or both?
What if they spent half as much energy earning Boy Scout badges as slandering Gothard? Wouldn’t that be an improvement? and they might even eschew those scary uniforms!
to the moderator,
I am currently reading an interesting (and depressing) book by sociologist Christian Smith, “Why Religion Went Obsolete: The Demise of Traditional Faith in America”. The current chapter on scandals and their effect had a rather very long list of cases and their synopsis. Bill Gothard made this bad boy list. He wasn’t along, so did Josh Duggar, they are both up there with people like Jimmy Swaggert etc. I really don’t think you can put the genie back in this bottle. His reputation is gone. Bill Gothard is right up there with a bunch of others, and it doesn’t look like it will ever come back.
I do confess I have lost the context here, one of the downsides of the moderator interface. But . . . Do take a moment to watch Holly’s last video aimed squarely at the women that defamed him: “Victims of Victimhood”
Whether his “reputation” in the world at large ever “comes back” has no bearing on reality. That really is God’s business, the final judgement will tell all and will be the only thing that matters.
1 Corinthians 4:12-13
” . . . and we toil, working with our own hands; when we are reviled, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure; when we are slandered, we try to conciliate; we have become as the scum of the world, the dregs of all things, even until now.”
It is simple and the context is this. Bill Gothard is no longer at IBLP. He is gone due to his behaviors with young women. You can claim as you have tried that all of that is baloney, you can have someone do videos on the same but none of these women have recanted their stories and IBLP has not brought him back. If someone does a list which Christian Smith did in his book of scandals with religious leaders and people, Bill Gothard makes that list.
Salvation Army does not force its workers into military boot camp which is what Alert is about as well as Teen Mania. Salvation Army may use miliary like terms and have uniforms, but they are about serving the poor and needy, not about military fighting or preparing for that. The only thing the Salvation Army has declared war on is poverty and one doesn’t need a gun to do that.
The women have not also responded to the damning evidence against them, nor explained how, with all of the backup and public encouragement they had, they ALL just . . . Walked away. We know why they did. They lied – or were deceived with the “recovered memories” perpetuated by their therapists. Of course they have not recanted, because they never got far enough in the legal process to be put in the hot seat – with consequences. And their fame and public identity – actually in some case cases income streams – are tied to this. They have not taken any further legal action, which they were able to do for a year after walking away . . . Because that would force them to finally belly up to their claims, point by point, and tell the truth or face the consequences.
AS to comparisons to Salvation Army – ALERT is also all about serving the poor and needy and definitely not about military fighting or preparing for that. So point made well. I see no difference.
Why did Bill Gothard resign from IBLP? because he abused young women? says who? his enemies? Nice try. Gothard’s enemies invented that improbable narrative and worked hard to prop it up. But they could not generate enough supporting evidence to satisfy the most mediocre freshman rhetoric teacher.
Does ALERT force boot camp upon unwilling victims? or upon motivated volunteers? Does every championship athletic team impose rigor upon its members? Indeed they do, because it is the best way to win.
Are the Girl Scouts are tyrannical because they sell cookies? Of course not. It’s what they do. Everyone participates who joins the organization. Some join for that very purpose.
The Salvation Army fights with mighty weapons which are not carnal. So does ALERT.
A sociologist thinks Bill Gothard’s reputation is gone? gone where? his reputation with whom? with sociologists? with the Church of Rome? with Christianity Today? Did Bill Gothard either seek or have any reputation among them? How was John Bunyan’s reputation in Vanity Fair?
So what was Smith’s thesis? Why did religion go obsolete? or did it? St. John hinted that religion was perpetually obsolete; hence his apostolic commandments which were simultaneously “old” and “new.” As Mark Twain might have said, reports of obsolete religion are “greatly exaggerated.”
As Joseph Sobran said, Jesus is the man they still hate: http://sobran.com/columns/1999-2001/991202.shtml
Query: believing that you have exonerated Gothard, why is it that IBLP never accepted him back with apologies?
I believe Gothard misrepresented Grace and Truth. I believe it hurt me. I believe that based on centuries of Reformed theology struggling mightily with Grace and Law. I believe this based on my own experiences, the effects I’ve seen in many IBLP lives and Gothard’s own confessed focus on outward appearance (especially that of young women).
Can’t see why you guys can’t even grieve over the sins Gothard admitted or see the damage those admitted sins caused.
Please do not stake your salvation or Christian confession on the character or extra-biblical teachings of one man. If you are wrong about Gothard, can you still trust in Jesus? Or would that destroy your faith? If it would, you are not a believer in Jesus but in Bill.
IBLP made what they believed was a strategic decision to “move on”. I have personally heard current leadership acknowledge that they are now (for some time) convinced that Bill never did any of the awful things he was accused of. Leadership had issues with directions he wanted to go, including the way monies were being spent in a tight environment. It came down to Bill’s vision and calling vs. what the Board was comfortable with. Maybe even “faith” vs. “reality”, as they saw it. And, for the record, last year’s IBLP mailing around this time of year included a warm blessing for Bill on his birthday and an encouragement for IBLP folk to reach out to him. You probably missed that. No, that is not bringing Bill back. There is little left of the original, particularly where Bill lives, to bring him back to. Bill is 91, as of Sunday. But near as I can tell the animosity is gone. “Leadership” comes over to visit him fairly regularly. That is a fact.
Bill Gothard’s ministry was counsel, not coercion. At worst, a counselor may dispense only bad advice, not positive harm. A man who heeds bad advice is a fool who needs wisdom, not a victim who deserves restitution for harm.
Indeed, the Protestant reformers contended with Rome about grace and law. Since the Reformation, we Protestants still debate how those categories correlate. “Extra-biblical” teaching need not scare us. Most good teaching is also extra-biblical. By definition, all teaching is extra-biblical which is not strict academic Bible exegesis. This includes most sermons and “The Chosen” on TV. Yet they do us good.
So let’s not waste any concern about taking Bill Gothard too seriously. How dangerous are his seven basic principles? What about a phony Christian confession? Jesus warned against that. The shallow-soil seed was choked by worldliness, not by a Gothard dress code. Which is most dangerous?
Does brother Smith need to recalibrate his definition of obsolete?
Since the mid-20th Century, about 3 million people have spent more than 30 hours under Bill Gothard’s instruction. How does that compare to Mr. Smith’s readership?
If sociologists aren’t known for scandals, is it because everybody is ignoring them? Is Mr. Smith just jealous for attention? As Theodore Roosevelt said, it is not the critic who counts.
I’m going to address several points here based on Proverbs 26:4-5. It is really grasping at straws to even compare the Salvation Army to Alert Academy and Alert Academy is not in poor communities trying to help and relieve poverty. Disaster help or clean up is not being and living in poor communities helping the poor with the many things Salvation Army does and has been doing for 160 years. Disaster help and clean does not need to have a military style boot camp that is just as hard as the Marines to offer such help which is one of the many complaints I’ve read by those that went to Alert. I don’t think American Red Cross, Cajun Navy, National Guard etc. Need help from Alert for dealing with disasters.
It is also very foolish to give responses in trying to defend Alert and compare groups like the Rotary club, Congress, boy scouts etc. to an obviously para-military group like Alert. There is no comparison whatsoever.
Finally David, you really like to speak out on things or give opinions, usually in a condescending manor about things you clearly don’t know anything about. Christian Smith listed Bill Gothard in a very long 3 full pages of many different religious leaders that had to leave or were forced to leave their positions due to scandals, most of them in the moral department. He covered Catholic, Protestant, Jewish and other faiths. I am very sure Bill Gothard will show up on anyone else’s list of having to leave due to bad behaviors. Mark Drisco also is listed even though his leaving did not involve immorality. Whatever is left of IBLP, I am sure who is running it, isn’t about to bring Bill Gothard back. The only thing Christian Smith missed was the earlier sex scandal at IBLP involving Steve Gothard. So IBLP has 2 scandals involving it’s leadership. If you think this is all baloney, then maybe you ought to read the blog, Wartburg’s watch which exclusively covers Protestant scandals and abuse and Bill Gothard is very much there too. Maybe reading Proverbs 18:13, 13:16, 29:20 and 26:12 and memorizing them might be a good start.
Back to the scandal for one more minute: IT NEVER HAPPENED 🙂 Court of law examined, with lots of money on the line. Could not have been more ideal conditions for the plaintiffs. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
ALERT does go into poor areas to help, wherever they are asked. With no guns, just lots of grunt work. And if ANYONE would know, it would be David Knecht.
One of the most satisfying services which ALERT rendered was in the poorest neighborhood of Knoxville, Tennessee. Bill Gothard had offered ALERT to the mayor for whatever community services he needed most.
Our project was to restore an old cemetery which had been reclaimed by nature after decades of neglect. Using only hand tools, ALERT restored the cemetery, including a monument to casualties of the First World War. Other civic groups had attempted this restoration, only to give up in despair.
Undoubtedly, the Salvation Army relieves the poor. But they can’t do everything. Some needs are only met by about forty strong and virtuous young men.
One does not need a military style boot camp similar to the marines to go and clean up Cemetaries, Municiple parks, someone’s yard etc. Cleaning up this cemetery served the mayor not the poor neighborhood where it was located. This is just a photo opt for Bill, IBLP and Alert.
We correctly note on 8/28 above that no military training is necessary to perform such civic good works as restoring parks and cemeteries. Yet these good works are left undone until good men do them. What else do good men do?
They buffet their bodies into strength so that the life of Christ resides within a house of “lively stones.” If God want to call weak men, he has plenty available. But for a few who are “strong to serve,” he knows where to look.
Was the ALERT clean-up project a shallow, cynical bid for publicity? If so, it probably failed. Reporters eschewed the dirty neighborhood we served. But many poor people were well served, at least for a season.
Which of us has lived in squalor for decades? Not I. But if I did, I would appreciate any relief I could get. Wouldn’t we all?
I just reread the links provided by Recovering Grace on the court cases and their transcripts. Bill did not win. None of the women in sworn testimony recanted their stories about Bill Gothard. Likewise, there are many more women that were not a part of that court case that have come forward about Bill Gothard and have done so publicly. Bill likewise is not back at IBLP to run it and IBLP is not taking Bill back. And finally, if someone make a list of disgraced religious leaders that are no longer in their positions, Bill Gothard makes that cut.
None of the ones that condemned Jesus and put Him do death have recanted either, same for Paul. Both “disgraced”. That reality may be ours in this life. But . . . 17 plaintiffs with $8.5 million on the line before punitive damages in play, anonymity for any that wanted it . . . Could not get a single count of the 180 filed as far as depositions, let alone jury. In any other world, THAT would be quite significant to you 🙂 Plus, that story has not reached its final conclusion.
Judas clearly regretted what he did, so much so that his despair lead him to suicide. The Centurian at the cross, overseeing the crucifixion realized that Jesus was the Son of God and said so. But what you have just done here, which is compare Bill to Jesus borders on blasphemy. Your comparison does not work. You have offered nothing whatsoever to show that any of these people have lied.
If I have spoken evil, bear witness to the evil. The only reason a comparison to the unjust treatment of the Savior and Paul . . . Is if it is self-evident to you that what has happened to Bill is not unjust. Begging the question. Also one or two standing with the disgraced one – Paul had a handful – is not an exoneration. A lot more than that stand with Bill. My point was simply to point out that a crush of accusers and a general rejection of a man of God does not mean he is guilty. So that is a lousy argument to make.
We don’t know that none of the people who condemned Jesus or Paul ever recanted. We just know that if they did, it didn’t make it into Scripture. And Judas, who betrayed Jesus, did express remorse and regret. And of all the people involved in condemning Jesus, Judas was the one who knew Him the best. The Jesus/Gothard comparison continues to be an extremely weak one.
Judas “recanting” was known to a handful of people. Which is why it is only recorded by one writer. And, for the record, a member of IBLP leadership, presumably speaking for the whole, said to me early on – 2015 timeframe – “If it turned out that Bill had molested girls, I would not be surprised”. Which was shocking, given that it was their job to ascertain that, and they clearly had not. Years later I was formally told that the Board was now certain that Bill had NOT molested girls or women . . . And the one who had made that statement denied ever having said it.
You may find it interesting that in a recent mailing IBLP had a celebration of Bill’s birthday, an open acknowledgement of his status as “founder”, and encouragement to folks to reach out to him. No, that is not “bringing him back”, but it is a clear statement that the notion of Bill’s guilt as an evildoer is no longer held by “those that know him the best”.
Those that want to hate will continue to do so. God knows all. There are consequences for reviling a disgraced leader of God’s people, EVEN when that leader is guilty . . . Which I can confidently assure you Bill is not. Ask Shimei about how that worked out for him (2 Samuel 16) You will note that EVERY WORD that he spoke was true, even the “son of Belial” slur, describing David as he committed adultery and murder.
all four Gospels record different things. Only 2 mention his birth or the circumstances around it and even then, they are rather different. You cannot say that just a few knew what happen to Judas and that is why only one gospel went into the details around what happen to him doesn’t mean just few knew about it. The first business after Jesus’ ascension into heaven was to replace Judas with Matthias as recorded in Acts. The trials of Jesus and Paul have nothing to do with Bill Gothard. Poor comparison that borders on blasphemy.
Saying it twice doesn’t make it so. Strongly disagree. But you knew that.
In response to the moderator comment on August 25:
The board’s job was to notify law enforcement to do a proper investigation, not to try to do an investigation themselves when they didn’t know how to do one.
And sure, Bill Gothard was “an acknowledged leader”. But acknowledged by who? Scores of middle-class families who wanted to buy what he was selling—reassurance that they would have happy families and successful lives if they did what Gothard said, reassurance that supposedly was really coming from God because it was supposedly what the Bible said, even though Gothard had to cherry-pick verses out of context to get there.
And Gothard wasn’t anointed with oil by a prophet of God in the way that David was. He may have been anointed in a more metaphorical way, but how do you know?
Yes, Gothard himself was under the authority of a local church—which is meaningless anyway in an “independent church” context where people can just pick whatever they want–but his organization wasn’t. That was his own thing.
You said it’s just my opinion that he teaches moralism and his own personal opinion with a light sprinkling of Bible, but even David Knecht doesn’t try to say that Bill Gothard doesn’t teach moralism. He just defends that because “morals are good”. And even you haven’t tried to tell me that Gothard expounds Scripture in any meaningful way. You just say that it’s okay because he’s a “counselor” and not a typical Bible teacher. [That’s from a comment you made April 1, 2024 ,on the Shiny Happy Slander page.] So no, it’s not just my opinion. Even people like you at least tacitly agree with that.
“When they don’t know how to do one” 🙂 That is funny. They did hire a law firm to do that . . . But what is it about the police that makes them uniquely qualified to do an investigation? The Board satisfied themselves that no crimes were committed – leaving it to the aggrieved to demand more if they wished. Which they did – one filed a police report (we have that – the young lady denied there in front of the policeman what she later put in the lawsuit, perhaps why she dropped out quite early), and 17 filed a civil lawsuit for “neglect”. Which would have been a slam dunk if laws had been broken. Your perspective falls short – it doesn’t add up.
“Acknowledged by who” – AGAIN, 2.7 million alumni, and thousands of ATI families. That is kind of how it works.
“Anointed by oil” – in the NT that has to do with sick people, right? In modern times the “anointing” is by the Holy Spirit and is signified by people on a real or metaphorical “laying on of hands”. He was definitely under his local church and definitely anointed by the Holy Spirit.
“People just pick whatever they want” – What does that mean? He was in an established church where his family went, later moving to another local church in a mainline denomination. I met with his pastor, and was there as his pastor conducted an investigation and reconciliation attempt between Bill and the Board, several members of which were also in that church. And as to “his organization”, no, it was not part of a denomination. Few “ministries” are. That is rather . . . Silly.
Bill expounds Scripture in very meaningful ways. Have a look at his postings on Facebook and X. I do not say anything that sounds like “it’s OK because he’s a counselor”. He is a Bible teacher who counsels. His focus is practical vs. doctrine, maybe that is what I was trying to say. I will check out the comment and report back.
Edit:
OK, now I understand. Unlike J. Vernon McGee (from my youth – “Thru the Bible”, 5 year repeating tour of the entire Bible), the exposition of Scripture is not his primary focus. No more than Dr. James Dobson was. You like exposition. I do too. Sometimes you need practical application of Scripture to daily life. But he does expound Scripture along the way, does an excellent job!
In response to the moderator comment on August 27:
“What is it about police that makes them uniquely qualified to do an investigation?” That’s part of their job. That’s like asking what it is about pilots them make them uniquely qualified to know if it’s safe to fly a plane.
As for who acknowledged Bill Gothard, you keep appealing to large numbers. But so what? Large numbers of people listened to Jesus and large numbers of people listened to Hitler. Large numbers alone mean nothing. And if they do, there are a whole lot more Christians who would reject much of what Bill Gothard teaches than there are those who accept it, especially now.
What makes you so sure that Bill Gothard was “definitely anointed by the Holy Spirit”?
Bill Gothard wasn’t unique in that he picked what church he wanted. That’s one of the defining features of Protestantism. But what that means is that nobody has any real accountability. They don’t have to submit to the larger body of Christ. They just find a local church that they already agree with–and that already agrees with them–and they’re unlikely to be challenged. And if they are, they can just leave. So—no genuine accountability. It’s still pertinent, even though it’s not unique to Bill Gothard.
It’s fine to do practical application as well as straight-up Bible exposition. But it can’t be at the expense of what the Bible text actually says, and what it means in context. And Gothard consistently does a terrible job of expositing. I look up anything he says anywhere, and he rips it out of context to make his point. I’ve given examples in some of the comments on the other page about creeds.
To give another example here, in his first Basic Seminar video, he took a verse in Job where Job says “the thing I feared has come upon me” to espouse the idea our words determine our outcomes. Never mind that the very first chapter of Job tells us exactly why all those things were happening. Gothard ignored that and blasphemously took something which Scripture clearly attributed to God and instead attributed it to Job’s lack of positive thinking.
As for James Dobson, I take issue with him, too. His whole shtick was talking about the family, but the Bible doesn’t go into enough detail about the family to have an entire ministry that’s genuinely just about what the Bible says, so he added a ton of personal opinion to it. It’s fine to give suggestions about possible ways to apply something in Scripture, but it’s not okay to take your personal opinion about what you think it means and make it sound like that has the same authority as the Biblical text.
“That’s part of their job. That’s like asking what it is about pilots them make them uniquely qualified to know if it’s safe to fly a plane.
Scripture disagrees: 1 Corinthians 6:1-3 “Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?”
“. . . There are a whole lot more Christians who would reject much of what Bill Gothard teaches than there are those who accept it, especially now.”
A whole lot more Christians have no idea what Bill teaches. “Especially now” after a heavily organized cancel campaign? The best things come under the greatest attack.
“What makes you so sure that Bill Gothard was “definitely anointed by the Holy Spirit”?”
Because I – and 2.7 million alumni – listened to him and discerned the Holy Spirit in what he said. That is the only way to know “anointing”.
“And Gothard consistently does a terrible job of expositing. I look up anything he says anywhere, and he rips it out of context to make his point.”
And we have answered each example. If Bill takes a law of Moses and applies that to the church, would that be an example? Because, of course, Paul did that. Multiple times.
“To give another example here, in his first Basic Seminar video, he took a verse in Job where Job says “the thing I feared has come upon me” to espouse the idea our words determine our outcomes.”
We are commanded to not fear, not the devil, not what people can do to us. So Job definitely had a problem. “Moab is my washpot” (Psalms 60:8) tells us that God uses His enemies to clean up His saints. God was clearly working on Job even as He was using him for a massive object lesson.
“As for James Dobson . . . . it’s not okay to take your personal opinion about what you think it means and make it sound like that has the same authority as the Biblical text.”
Nobody I know ever ascribed that kind of authority to Dobson. And I heard his first radio broadcasts way back when he had a woman announcer, before Gil Moegerle (the original theme song is running through my head).
This is a response to the September 8 moderator comment. Since it’s been so long, I’m going to copy/paste the entire thing you said, and put my comments underneath the whole thing. The parts in quotes are the parts where you quoted me and then responded.
“That’s part of their job. That’s like asking what it is about pilots them make them uniquely qualified to know if it’s safe to fly a plane.
Scripture disagrees: 1 Corinthians 6:1-3 “Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?”
“. . . There are a whole lot more Christians who would reject much of what Bill Gothard teaches than there are those who accept it, especially now.”
A whole lot more Christians have no idea what Bill teaches. “Especially now” after a heavily organized cancel campaign? The best things come under the greatest attack.
“What makes you so sure that Bill Gothard was “definitely anointed by the Holy Spirit”?”
Because I – and 2.7 million alumni – listened to him and discerned the Holy Spirit in what he said. That is the only way to know “anointing”.
“And Gothard consistently does a terrible job of expositing. I look up anything he says anywhere, and he rips it out of context to make his point.”
And we have answered each example. If Bill takes a law of Moses and applies that to the church, would that be an example? Because, of course, Paul did that. Multiple times.
“To give another example here, in his first Basic Seminar video, he took a verse in Job where Job says “the thing I feared has come upon me” to espouse the idea our words determine our outcomes.”
We are commanded to not fear, not the devil, not what people can do to us. So Job definitely had a problem. “Moab is my washpot” (Psalms 60:8) tells us that God uses His enemies to clean up His saints. God was clearly working on Job even as He was using him for a massive object lesson.
“As for James Dobson . . . . it’s not okay to take your personal opinion about what you think it means and make it sound like that has the same authority as the Biblical text.”
Nobody I know ever ascribed that kind of authority to Dobson. And I heard his first radio broadcasts way back when he had a woman announcer, before Gil Moegerle (the original theme song is running through my head).
[End of your September 8 comment]
I Corinthians 6 was talking about things like believers suing each other over being cheated. It doesn’t mean that if a woman accuses a man in leadership of committing a crime, God will zap other believers with a special ability to know if the woman is telling the truth.
You can’t play the numbers game both ways. You can’t say that the number of people who followed Gothard indicate that he was anointed by the Holy Spirit, and then also dismiss the larger number of Christians who would challenge his teaching by saying “the best things come under the greatest attack”. If you want to go by numbers alone, American evangelicalism as a whole isn’t representative of historical Christianity or even historical Protestantism, let alone Bill Gothard’s sub-set of fundamentalism. If you don’t want to go by numbers, then you can’t appeal to 2.7 million alumni.
Yes, Paul took things from Moses and applied it to the church. That doesn’t automatically give Bill Gothard—or anyone else—carte blanche approval to apply Scripture however they want. If we could do that, then we could make the Bible mean contradictory things.
As far as Job, yes, we’re told not to fear. And yes, Job had a problem. And yes, God used Job’s enemies to teach Job some lessons. None of that means that it’s okay to take the statement “the thing I feared has come upon me” to mean that the bad things happened to Job—even in part–because of his negative thinking. That’s inserting an idea into the text that simply isn’t there.
As far as James Dobson, he advertised himself as a Christian author, not just an author who happened to be a Christian. In other words, his claim was that he said what he did because he was a Christian. To advertise yourself that way in the evangelical world automatically means that what you’re saying about the topic is what the Bible says, and therefore has biblical authority. He didn’t have to say it outright. That’s what it means, and that’s exactly how people took it.
“It doesn’t mean that if a woman accuses a man in leadership of committing a crime, God will zap other believers with a special ability to know if the woman is telling the truth.”
Why not? That is exactly what it is saying. I mean, how else are we going to be qualified to “judge angels”?
“the larger number of Christians who would challenge his teaching”
The voices challenging Bill’s teachings – restricting ourselves to those that actually were under his teachings – is emphatically not “larger”. Louder, yes, but not larger. There were people who rejected Paul as not anointed or appointed. Apparently more or less everyone in Asia, according to 2 Tim. 1:15. They were wrong.
“carte blanche approval to apply Scripture however they want”
Nobody is suggesting that. Only those that are spiritual, full of the Holy Spirit, anointed by God with the insight that only God can give, can correctly interpret and apply Scripture.
“That’s inserting an idea into the text that simply isn’t there.”
What gives you the authority to declare it is not there? I think it is there. The command of Jesus to us to not be afraid is a most significant command. Fear is unbelief. Job was acting in unbelief. Isaiah 8:13 “Sanctify the LORD of hosts himself; and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread.”
Dobson: I am not recalling the arc we are following. Dr. Dobson, for the record, presented himself as a Christian psychologist. Like Clyde Narramore, the original “Christian psychologist”, at least well known, and that directly and personally inspired Dobson to pursue that line of medicine. I am not sure where he switched to being a Bible teacher. Or what the point was we were pursuing.
Of course Gothard’s enemies will not recant their accusations. They seem advantageous, as sin often does. Otherwise, why would we sin?
Those who “come forward” to accuse Bill Gothard are careful to avoid any forum which does not reward gossip. But Gothard’s enemies will not bind themselves with oaths or face dangerous cross examination. They eschewed “sworn testimony.”
This does not prove that they enemies are liars. But shouldn’t this arouse our suspicions?
Finally, what about lists? Indeed, Bill Gothard has enough enemies to make a list. A much more important list is in the Book of Life. Who appears on the list? and why? Bill Gothard? or his enemies?
In response to the moderator comment on August 25:
It should never have been the IBLP board investigating whether Bill Gothard did what he was accused of in the first place. One, they weren’t qualified, being a religious institution and not law enforcement. And two, there was an obvious conflict of interest.
But my point is not to debate whether Bill Gothard did everything he was accused of. We’ve already beaten that topic to death multiple times. I’m debating the idea that he was an upstanding Christian leader, and that only the dishonest, immoral, or misinformed could think otherwise.
He was a self-proclaimed leader with questionable qualifications who set himself up as an authority based on almost nothing. He wasn’t anointed by God like David. He wasn’t even operating under the authority of a local church. He just hit on something that middle-class families in the 70’s and 80’s wanted to hear, which was a family-centered prosperity gospel, and taught a mixture of common sense moralism, a light sprinkling of Bible, and a generous dose of his own personal opinion. That’s not a crime that you can be charged with, but it does call into question the idea that he was some sort of great Christian leader.
It was most definitely the Board’s job – in fact that, keeping the corporation responsible under state law, was their main job. And making sure the ministry was discharging its responsibilities to the Body of Christ. Which they discharged. Sort of. They never went all the way to ground to the point that ANYONE asking them would come away satisfied that the matters in question were fully vetted. They preferred to take the exit ramp instead. Heaven will tell.
“Self-proclaimed leader with questionable qualifications” He was an acknowledged leader recognized around the world as such. His qualifications were a stunning degree of success in counseling such that educational institutions were early clambering for him to teach his secrets. 3 million alumni testifying to the same.
“He wasn’t anointed”. Yes, he was.
“He wasn’t operating under the authority of a local church”. Yes, he was. There was never a time when he was not under the authority of a local church. To this day.
The rest represents your opinions which are not shared by the majority of people he has touched.
IBLP judged Bill and found him wanting. Why does that not give you pause?
If I am mistaken, why have they never taken him back, restoring what was destroyed by (according to you) lies? Is IBLP guilty of slander or false witness?
IBLP is not God. And IBLP was also mistaken, on a number of counts. To this day the original investigation, commissioned by Bill himself as part of the then Board, has never been given to him. From multiple sources there was nothing in there worthy of forcing him out. And, the $8.5 million lawsuit against him with 17 plaintiffs judged him and lost. Presumably having access to everything pertinent. In this current “woke” environment in the liberal state of Illinois, boy, that has to be worth something.
On 8/12 above we are told that the Salvation Army performs good works which are different from the good works of ALERT. Of course. The apostolic analogy is obvious. Different parts of our bodies perform different works. Their common purpose is much more important than their different methods. When some good works are rigorous, how should we train for them? with leisure and bon bons? But of course we train for rigor using rigorous methods. The ALERT motto is not “pampered to serve,” but rather “strong to serve.”
We are also assured that Bill Gothard is mired in permanent scandal because of lewd conduct. From whence comes this certainty? from the accuser’s personal first hand experience? If so, declare the evidence under penalty of perjury. But no accuser has dared to do this. Is gossip more satisfying and less risky?
Above, we debate recanting. But shouldn’t we consider something more than recanting?
Jesus commanded us to repent and believe. But like Judas, sometimes we substitute remorse for repentance. Satan gloats, because we mire ourselves in regret and remorse, death and despair.
If only we would repent and believe. That’s repentance unto life!
On 8/25 above, we revisit the question of whether Bill Gothard qualifies as a “great Christian leader.” That depends. If we measure greatness by scale, then Bill Gothard obviously qualifies. Bill Gothard offered Christian teaching for which millions paid more than $150 in 2025 dollars. If that is not great scale, then what is?
Obviously, Gothard is “great” enough to be an internet gossip topic in 2025. He “just” hit on something which millions of people wanted to hear? indeed, and Sam Walton also “just” supplied retail customers with billions of dollars in merchandise value. Both are widely admired and envied for what they “just” did.
Supposedly, Bill Gothard was self-proclaimed. But how? His name was barely mentioned in his materials, which are comprised of “common sense moralism.” But the Ten Commandments are also common sense moralism. By these we are damned if we don’t repent and believe.
On 8/25 above, we are told that only “law enforcement” is qualified to investigate Bill Gothard. Investigate for what? for violating what statute? In all the Gothard gossip, we have yet to hear anyone accuse him of violating caesar’s statutes. But caesar’s sword has two edges. For gossip and rumors, should Gothard’s enemies taste its vengeance? Is that due process?
We also told that internal investigations have conflicts of interest. Indeed they do. Yet we are commanded to do them. “Let a man examine himself” before he partakes of Holy Communion. What interest could be more conflicted than that? Should sinners screen themselves for sin? Yet we must.
When Gothard’s enemies examine themselves, what shall they find? chastity? or carnality?
Again, going in a cleaning up some old forgotten cemetery is not the same as helping, feeding and servicing the poor that lived around it. Very big difference between that and the kinds of ministries that the Salvation Army, Capuchins and a host of other groups actually do to help the poor. Nothing being said here has proven otherwise. Alert is not the Salvation Army, and the comparison is a phony one. One that is trying to cover up Alert’s paramilitary bent.
Knowing what I know this perspective is completely mistaken. Like 100%. You do not know what you are criticizing. But I suspect nothing will change your mind on this. If there is no new information to present vs. opinions and speculations, best to leave it there.
something for you to think about:
“To live without faith, without a heritage to defend, without battling constantly for truth, is not to live but to ‘get along’. We must never just ‘get along’.
St. Pier Giorgio Frassati.
I agree, not sure of the added point, but thank you.
On 9/7 above, brother Frassati expressed noble sentiments, but he erred about something important. He warned us not to “just get along.” None of us have managed even to just get along. That’s the tragedy of the rich young ruler. He smugly assumed he had kept God’s law to just get along. But Jesus proved he was just as lawless as the rest of us.
For us sinners, “just get along” would be a major improvement. Our sin blinds and restrains us. We do not just get along. Instead, we sin against both God and neighbor. So Jesus and his apostles had to pound us with platitudes. Love. Forgive. Bear. Forbear. We do not “battle constantly for truth” because we do not even “just get along.”
In fact, Bill Gothard created the Basic Seminar to help us from our sin swamp to just get along with God and neighbor.
You clearly didn’t understand this quote, which is not surprising at all, but you had to say something anyway, even if it doesn’t make any sense. Maybe you ought to understand the quote in terms of Charlie Kirk, who went around challenging the ideas and beliefs of others. He wasn’t going around trying to “get along”. That is was this quote is about, not what you are trying to say here. In the early 1920’s in Italy, Fascism was starting to rise, and St. Giorgio was against it and expressed his concerns to his fellow friends. Unfortunately, he contacted Polio and passed away at 24. Maybe you ought to read up on things first before you comment on them.
On 9/3 above, we note that some good works differ from others. Of course they do. Jesus cured lepers from leprosy, blind men from blindness, and lame men from palsy. Doesn’t that make sense? If a man has cancer, he needs a cure. If he is hungry he needs a meal. The good Samaritan met the needs at hand, not the ones that weren’t.
Indeed, ALERT cleaned up “some old forgotten cemetery.” Should we rather neglect our dead? Maybe that is our problem. Should we forget our dead? Must a ghost warn us that a cemetery awaits us and our loved ones?
Like the Salvation Army, ALERT serves in uniforms with rank insignia. Anyone may decline their emergency services. But nobody has. Hopefully none of us needs an emergency resource team of Christians who are strong to serve. But if we do, won’t we be glad of their help?
Your comparisons are phony. Having some muscle boys go clean up an old cemetery is not the same as feeding, housing, educating, clothing and serving the actual poor people that lived around this old cemetery. That is the work of the Salvation Army as well as the Capuchins, Sisters of Mercy and a whole host of other Christian groups that actually do that sort of real work. All you have brought up as service work of Alert is clean-up crews. One doesn’t need military training like the Marines to do that if that is one of the goals of Alert. The comparison of Alert to the Salvation Army makes Alert look like a bad joke which with these repeated comparisons I think it is.
WHERE have you gotten the notion that the goal of Alert is military training “like the Marines”? You are making this up out of whole cloth. I personally am familiar with the stellar work ALERT does – they are not worthy of this kind of disrespect.
That is the testimony of those that have been through Alert and published online and all over the place. This program was set up using real military people, of which, David has attested to. One doesn’t need boot camp in order to go around and do clean-up which is the only specific thing that has been mentioned of the “good deeds” done by Alert. Your defense of “knowing” people that have been involved seemingly does not include your own and David’s sons. This is curious. If this program is so good, why isn’t it been used by both of you and his own sons? Boot camp like the Marines was described in more than one place by more than one person that has actually been through this program. But like a lot of other IBLP programs, it is expensive and really leads nowhere because the training being offered would have to be repeated again if one joins the military, fire departments, police academies, EMS etc.
Respect to you, Rob, but you do not know what you are talking about. The man who started it? Was installing carpets for a living – in fact he was working the Northwoods facility when Bill noticed his work ethic, connected. He had a burden for training young men to be disciplined, much along the lines of the original purpose of the YMCA, heavy focus on scripture . . . And manly disciplines. We have gone back and forth several times and it may be best to move on on this point.
Let’s concede an important similarity between ALERT men and U.S. Marines. Both bring their bodies “into subjection” to be strong or their mission. Is that surprising?
Satan hates and fears strong Christian men. They are dangerous to him.
But Satan is not the only one. Some women hate strong men for similar reasons. Some women covet girly boys whom they can easily manage, even while despising them. They may find them in the world or in the church. But they won’t find them in ALERT.
Indeed, ALERT is “Like the Marines.” and Christopher Reeve was “like Superman.” But we are all “like” the queen of England somehow. Is ALERT being compared? or only criticized? and have the critics earned a hearing? how?
Which men have been both ALERT responders and Marines? probably few. I knew only one. Only he had personal first-hand knowledge. Only he was “in the arena.”
As the saying goes, “better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.”
On 9/8 above, we dispute the utility of muscle boys. Muscle boys have no utility at chess tournaments. That’s where you want brain boys. But has muscle no utility anywhere?
What is the alternative to muscle? absolutely all services rendered only by girly boys? When you need Superman, you don’t need Sissyboy. Aren’t some forms of chaos remedied only by muscle? Don’t you sometimes need Mr. Incredible instead of Elastigirl? Lexington and Concord were defended by MINUTEMEN. Jesus is the Lion of Judah, not the kitten.
ALERT conducts absolutely no military raining. They train to serve, not to slay. Nor do they train to make bad jokes. Disasters are not funny. So ALERT trains with a straight face to relieve serious suffering.
why don’t you define for us girly boys and sissy boys? Your defense here only exposes what many other see as toxic views on what it means to be a man (and woman) found in patriarchal systems like Bill Gothard and his teachings.
Jesus is the lamb of God and that is used more than Lion of Judah in scripture. Jesus also said, “come follow me because I am meek and lowly of heart”. That isn’t macho man stuff David and your one-sided use of examples here isn’t working for you. Lion is used to denote royalty than fierceness and Satan himself was compared to a “roaring Lion” by St. Peter.
Which comparison is a bad joke? that Salvation Army and ALERT both do good works? that both wear uniforms? Both are true. Which one is funny?
But only one of them collects donations while dressed as Santa Claus. Is that the funny part?
On 9/5 above, we read objections which deserve an answer. Supposedly Bill Gothard is immune from “real accountability” because of his membership in a church from which he may secede. This raises questions about real accountability. What do we mean? Any Christian may secede from any church. Sometimes he must. Every church reserves the right to chasten, excommunicate, and expel. Sometimes they must.
So what is the “real accountability” which should be imposed upon Bill Gothard? immolation for heresy? Even for Rome, isn’t that too old-fashioned? or is it or the good old days? But perhaps the realest accountability is intense public scrutiny by enemies? By this definition, who is more accountable than Bill Gothard?
Let’s answer The next objection. May a Christian minister help to resolve basic youth conflicts? of course! May a Christian psychologist focus on the family? May a Christian engineer design good bridges? indeed!
For one, real accountability is at least respecting whatever authority you purport to submit to. In the case of neither Gothard “suspension” did he submit to the IBLP Board. His own Wheaton professor explained thoroughly in his Board resignation letter many years before the final scandal. There is no reason to believe that brother was a slanderer. There is every reason to believe Bill avoided accountability throughout his “ministry”.
I will leave this here for David to respond, again missing the context. There is NO reason to believe Bill avoided accountability to any authority he was working with. To this day he is under church leadership. In fact his pastor opened an effort to reconcile the two sides around 7 years ago. Same pastor – who was clearly not a “Gothardite” – debriefed me personally. Round 1 had Bill ask forgiveness for some personal attacks against Board members. Round 2 . . . Board quit. One thing was very telling – In the meeting the Pastor had with the Board he was adamant that not once did they refer to anything sexual or improper when responding to what their primary concerns with Bill were, blocking his return. Not a single thing was mentioned. They primarily focused on his abrasive behavior toward others in leadership. So, you see, it was personal. I do not discount that, BTW. Saying harsh things about others, breaking promises, those things matter to the Lord. But it ought to be crystal clear that what is (was, really) being shouted from the rooftops against Bill as the sexual pervert . . . Never was. And for THAT a lot of people have yet to stand before God and give account.
Shouldn’t we accommodate the range of Christian opinion about accountability? Rome demands episcopal accountability. Presbyterians demand elder accountability. Some church polity calls for congregational accountability. Perhaps the most rigorous is market accountability. If the sheep ignore the shepherd, or the team ignores the coach, how good can he be?
Enemies of the Good Shepherd slew him, because he would not submit to them. He was insufficiently accountable! He ignored their traditions and scorned their demands. How dare he?
When we demand accountability from our neighbor, are we merely admitting that we are jealous of him? Are Gothard’s enemies jealous of him? Nobody accuses them because nobody notices them? At least Gothard gets noticed enough to be hated.
You keep making cracks about Rome. The is what the current Pope said about leadership, “Peter must shepherd the flock without ever yielding to the temptation to be an autocrat, lording it over those entrusted to him”. He also wrote previously this:
“There is no room in Augustine’s concept of authority for one who is self-seeking and in search of power over other, the exercise of authority in any Christian community requires the setting aside of all self-interest and total dedication to the good of the community”.
That doesn’t sound like “Rome demanding accountability” and is in total opposite of what Bill Gothard taught about authority. What really is curious about Bill is that he really wasn’t under any authority, even though that is the keystone of his teachings.
Proverbs 18:13 “He who answers a matter before he hears it, it is a folly and shame to him”.
In respond to David’s initial September 9 comment,
In the first centuries of the church, before it split into Roman Catholicism, and loooong before Protestantism, matters were settled in council. When men like Arius started teaching that Jesus wasn’t God, or that he was somehow less God, his teaching were condemned in council as heresy by a group of Christian leaders. That’s where accountability came from. Now that we’ve removed ourselves from that, accountability is effectively meaningless. As I said in my September 5 comment, that’s not unique to Bill Gothard, but it’s still relevant.
And yes, of course Christians can help to resolve basic youth conflicts, focus on the family, or engineer bridges. But if they pretend that they’re doing any of those things in a uniquely Christian way when it’s really just their own opinion, I think we can and should call that out.
On 10/2 above, we are told that Brother Frasati died young. That’s a shame. If he had survived, he might have exhorted Bill Gothard’s enemies to repent and believe. Then they might at least “just get along.” Wouldn’t that be an upgrade on slander and gossip? RG and DG exist because Gothard’s enemies will not just get along.
In the Beatitudes, Jesus exhorted his followers to just get along. After his resurrection he commanded us to make disciples. That is risky, difficult, and political.
Few of us are good at step one. Where is the evidence that Bill Gothard’s enemies have repented and believed? Do we see works of the flesh or fruits of the Spirit?
You clearly don’t understand the quote. I highly doubt St. G. Frassati would extol anything about Bill Gothard. An avid mountaineer that has pictures of his with a pipe in his mouth would have nothing to do with Bill Gothard’s ideas. Speaking of fruit of the Spirit, I haven’t seen any of it in your many words on recent posts. You keep accusing “enemies of Bill” of gossip and slander. You are offering no proof of this accusation. You also keep calling for repentance by what you call Bill’s enemies. They are false accusations of others. There is nothing in the beatitudes that states we just need to “get along”. But speaking of Beatitudes, St. Frassati is called a living Beatitude because of his help to the poor around him.
Who has accused whom? Gothard’s enemies accuse much, but cannot prove their accusations, nor will they answer questions. Questions aren’t accusations, even if they are rhetorical. So what are the answers? Can Gothard’s enemies answer without confessing sin? As Bill Gothard taught, it is easy to accuse, but difficult to repent.
The Beatitudes are platitudes. Yet we do not do them. If we did, we would just get along. As St. Peter said, “who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good?”
May brother Frasati rest in peace. He had no option of Gothard, nor Gothard of him. Proof of slander? Shiny Slander on YouTube has plenty, which none has rebutted.
What fruits of the Sprit were evident in the words of John the Baptist? or of ancient Hebrew prophets?
Their messages were sometimes harsh spirit-breathed warnings, and sometimes also sweet spirit-breathed assurances.
Don’t we need both? What other fruits should we expect?
On 10/1 we read three more objections about ALERT.
First, we note that it is expensive. So is gold, and for a similar reason. Both are valuable. Do we really expect to obtain something valuable at the low cost of something cheap?
Next, we read that ALERT “leads nowhere.” Must all things be merely a means to an end? Must all things be exploited for personal advantage? Must we be only cynical? or may we be altruistic?
Finally, we object to redundant training. So what if other organizations also impose rigorous and redundant training? So does Jesus. “If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons.”
On 10/1 above, we also raise the question of whether we may affirm ALERT without having a personal stake in it, such as our own sons. This deserves consideration. Unless we have personal firsthand knowledge, the best we can offer is hearsay. As St. James said, there is a big difference between a doer of the law and a judge. For the doer it is personal, but for the judge it is only academic.
But have we noticed that this principle cuts both ways? If we may not praise ALERT unless our own sons are enrolled, neither can we criticize it unless we meet the same conditions. No criticizing ALERT unless our own sons are enrolled. Wouldn’t that shut a mouth or two?
If we insist on personal firsthand witness, why not interview people whom ALERT has helped? or would that interfere with the accuser’s agenda?
https://ministrywatch.com/tx-supreme-court-rules-against-bill-gothard-and-the-institute-for-basic-life-principles/
speaking of lawsuits, in June 2025, Bill and IBLP lost their case to block a lawsuit against them brought about by two sisters. Alert Academy is also mentioned in it.
There are two lawsuits, as I understand it. The epitome of “frivolous”, claiming that Bill is the head of a vast sex cult who taught their fathers and brothers to molest them. The “proof” they have is – literally – the pack of lies called “Shiny, Happy People”. All Bill “lost” was the first attempt for a summary dismissal. Last I heard that objective may be secured soon on appeal. SHP is worthy of a massive lawsuit, which they would lose. They made some delicious $ – it will burn them as they soon meet the God of all the earth face to face. Tick, tock.
James 5:2-3
“Your riches have rotted and your garments have become moth-eaten. Your gold and your silver have rusted; and their rust will be a witness against you and will consume your flesh like fire. It is in the last days that you have stored up your treasure!”
You mean Bill Gothard is not an evangelical Hugh Hefner? Both were from Illinois, so that proves it! Satan’s ammunition is running low when he must resort to that one.
Are guilty souls getting desperate? Will no absurdity be left untried? Must Bill Gothard be punished because he told them the truth? What’s next? Bill Gothard on the Epstein list?
SHP probably made money smearing Bill Gothard. But is lucre the mildest motive among Gothard’s enemies? Isn’t guilt stronger than greed?
I know they made a ton of money. It was the most popular Amazon docu-series to date. Holly’s excellent series debunking it is well worth watching:
https://www.youtube.com/@ShinySLANDER
Holly’s most recent series exposes yet more fraudulent accusations about unchastity. This serial accuser is a former ATI girl who is cashing in on accusations and exploiting the good will of gullible sympathizers. Jesus, St. Paul, and Bill Gothard warned us that our guilt makes us hypocrites. When we sin, we have two choices; either we repent or we accuse.
Jesus told us about an impenitent debtor whose guilt drove him to accuse and abuse. St. Paul put it this way: “Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.” Bill Gothard illustrated this with our imaginary scale which balanced our guilt and blame.
When do chaste people accuse their neighbors of unchastity? hardly ever. Virtue is a full-time job. It does not squander precious time on false accusations.
DSK seems to be saying that accusers are always guilty and should repent. If so, those accusing the accusers have some work in front of them. Me, I’m only confused and confounded by the reasoning you all use. (Must be gut brains.) There is always an excuse, push back, gas lighting, or justification. There is never a point accepted, even merely to ponder. Never an inch given. Always defend, defend, defend. Why? To what end? What does it do to your world if Gothard was wrong about anything important he that he taught or claims?
Boy, if we can get past “Bill is the devil” there is certainly room for reflection. Have been thinking a lot about Charlie Kirk. Kirk was not perfect, right? But in the context of “he is a Nazi and is full of hate”, well, I will never do anything other than defend him. Same with Bill.
Bill and IBLP lost before the Texan Supreme Court. Anyone can read the court documents. There were a couple of dissenting Judges, but the sisters can go ahead with their lawsuit which does blame Bill, IBLP and Alert for the abuse they suffered in their home at the hands of their father and brother.
I may be a bit more tuned in than you are. We shall see. Our information is a week or two old. YES, of course they blame Bill and IBLP – ALERT? I was unaware of that. Which is funny. *I* think they pulled all the information they could off of the documentary and proceeded with “suing hapless conservative groups for fun and profit”. Most of the time it is cheaper to settle than fight, and they probably were banking on that. They, of course, do not know Bill or IBLP.
They were raised in IBLP and ATI. Read the actual court documents. Maybe you should actually read the actual court documents, and it had nothing to do with “pulling information” off of the Amazon series. And their abuse is not funny. They were given the green light to go ahead with their lawsuit.
Read what we read and see if we got it wrong. This was from the original filing. Has it been changed? No, it is pretty clear that they are pulling their info from SHP.
Yes, you have it wrong. There is only one reference to SHP and that one sentence is stating that SHP demonstrates the problems of Bill’s and IBLP teachings. It did not state that the plaintiffs only took information from SHP, but that SHP support the fact that these teachings are abusive in the public domain. Bill and IBLP lost before the Texas Supreme court, so their lawsuit can go forward. Your other point that these women are suing and looking for deep pockets is baloney. You also stated that Amazon made a lot of money off of SHP. If someone was just looking for deep pockets, they would sue Amazon which has lots of money, not Bill and IBLP which doesn’t have deep pockets like it used to. When I talk about reading court documents, I am referring to what the Texas Supreme Court as put out, not one line in the opening court documents.
No, I don’t have it wrong. You and I both know that IBLP is not a sex cult – the allegation that it is comes from only one source.
But we move along. Also, Bill and IBLP have emphatically NOT lost. The only thing that happened is that the Texas Supreme Court initially declined to order the trial judge to dismiss the suit on constitutional grounds. And that matter is being reheard. It is the fastest way to shake a frivolous lawsuit, and that option remains on the table.
What about proximate cause? and what abut the tortfeasor? He is the man who caused the harm. As Ezekiel said, “the soul that sinneth, it shall die.” We heed this ancient principle of justice, and today we call it proximate cause. This is the cause which is nearest to the harm.
Harm often originates from a long chain of sin all the way back to Adam and Eve. How convenient. We scour this chain for excuses to justify our sin. But God is unimpressed with our blame game. Shall we blame Bill Gothard for everything from cavities to cancer? Is nothing too absurd?
If a tortfeasor inflicted harm, he obviously should make restitution. What about a third party who may have merely influenced the tortfeasor? He should not be liable because too remote from the harm. Was the tortfeasor not worth suing? for lack of evidence? or for lack of wealth?
First of all, I never said or even implied that I think IBLP is a sex cult. Do I think that IBLP and Bill teachings coupled with ATI as cult like? yes, I do think that. Abuse takes many forms, there is physical, emotional, spiritual and yes even sexual. Bill’s heavy emphasis on authority and obeying one’s authority which usually amounted to the father coupled with one needing to obey because that is their “umbrella of protection” can lead to and set up abusive situations that includes all of the abuses I just mentioned and this has been repeated over and over again on the internet by all sorts of people. I would also like to say that I never compared Bill Gothard to Hugh Hefner. Someone else (Captain K) just did that here as a joke, I think. It is a pretty sick comparison, not one I think or even mentioned. I would also like to point out that advise to sexual abuse victims found in Bill’s and IBLP teachings and literature very horrific and awful. Again, I did not call IBLP a sex cult, but I do think Bill’s teachings and ideas can lead to all sorts of abuses of all kinds and there is enough testimony by all sorts of people to back that up beyond SHP.
Thank you, Rob. Abuse takes many forms – not all that is called abusive by man is so, by Gods definition. The Bible has way heavier emphasis on authority than anything our modern culture thinks is reasonable. Agreed? Shockingly so.
As someone who has listened to Bill’s teachings, applied them, lived close to many who have applied them I simply have never seen them leading to “abusive situations”. I have heard of such things, but not seen it in my network. Meaning – such things are the exceptions, far from the rule.
To play along, what advice to sexual abuse victims do you consider very horrific and awful? The stories I have heard are anything but that. What I hear is life long lasting deliverance from the effects of sexual abuse, something almost unheard of in the world of therapy. What is that worth? I recall a random show on “Forensic Files” where a woman savagely abused with lifelong physical damage living happy and free years later . . . After applying principles that are at the core of what Bill teaches. I have no idea how she came to it, or even if she knows the Lord . . . But it gave me great joy. God’s ways are the opposite of ours, and they work.
So – zero in, if you want.
People who are in trouble love to blame everything and everybody. The biggest elephant in the room gets the most blame. Once Walmart became the biggest corporation on earth they amazingly became the “cause” of all kinds of troubles in so many lives, lots of lawsuits. Bill is big and has affected the lives of millions, telescoped many times over as his teachings travel through the generations. He didn’t do it. And he certainly didn’t cause whatever abuse these women are claiming he did.
Moderator,
You repeatedly fall back on your experience with Bill’s teaching and for you it was positive. Yet, anyone that has had negative experiences with Bill’s teachings, their time at ATI or IBLP get discounted, gets accused of lying, gets accused of slander, gets gaslighted and cast aside as suspect. If you want to bring up your experience yet claim anyone that has been harmed by Bill’s teachings and organization is biased on your part. Someone can turn around and say, “yea, you want to claim that Bill and his teachings and his organizations are good but really you are delusional and deceived”. You can’t have it both ways. You cannot claim RG is full of liars, SHP is full of lies and then state that your experience trumps everyone else’s. This isn’t working for you.
Final note, Charlie Kirk has been brought up. Charlie Kirk was about dialog, especially those that would disagree with him. I’ve seen enough videos now of him taking questions from those that are hostel to him. He never responded by belittling them, he never responded with name calling even if he was being sworn at and yelling at and being called Nazi and fascist. What he responded with respect towards his opponent and would calmly ask back, “what do you think a fascist is?” “Why do you think this?” etc. If his supporters booed or heckled the person, Charlie shut it down. You may want to claim the mantel of Charlie here and I do appreciate your respect and dialog but not everyone who is regular here has done the same. Instead, there is name calling, sweeping generalizations, false accusations etc.
My experience – all of us that support this effort – valid and not inferior to anyone else. As to dialog, that is precisely why we are here, correct? You mentioned RG – RG is gone, ancient history. We are still here. Others may name call or make false accusations – are you accusing me of that? I am so not into that.
Supposedly kin accused kin, yet they sued IBLP for damages? why? because IBLP has deeper pockets than kin? did they also sue their kin with shallow pockets? why not? no blood in a turnip?
The dog ate my homework, but I sue a third party for damages? why? because dogs have shallow pockets? If that is not corruption, what is? Who bribed whom? how?
What abuse did the plaintiffs allege? grumpy faces? confinement with Uncle Fester in the basement? or is the accusation vague and impossible to prove? with equally vague damages sought? or did the plaintiffs put a lucrative price tag on evil? Beware. God’s price for evil is Calvary’s cross. “How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation?”
Is IBLP a sex cult? If anything, IBLP is a chastity cult. IBLP was a pioneer in the courtship movement of the 1990s. ATI families eschewed dating because of the carnal risk. Can we resist the temptation to fornicate with our date? Do Bill Gothard’s enemies hate him because he taught young people to be chaste? Are Gothard’s enemies chaste? or unchaste?
Are the Texas plaintiffs chaste chaste damsels in distress? or carnal and conflicted? or bitter souls who hate their fathers for ATI homeschooling? do they love the world and hate the Lord? Which of these possibilities is most probable?
Our Bibles warn us against worldliness because it is unchaste and lustful. We are warned against “lust of flesh and lust of eyes and pride of life.” So IBLP insists upon chastity instead of worldliness. Why do Gothard’s enemies find this so outrageous?
We read an important truth on 10/4 above. Jesus is indeed The Lamb. Yet Jesus once accused his best disciple of channeling Satan. Remember that? It happened when Peter exhorted Jesus to be more like a lion and less like a lamb.
But like all analogies, this one breaks down. What other lamb has fiery eyes and a sword in his mouth? What other lamb has wool like cotton to his friends, but like barbed wire to his enemies?
Indeed, ALERT is “strong to serve.” Service often requires strength, and strength comes only from deliberate conditioning. Definitions? we already know too much about girly boys and sissies. They are the fools and sluggards who expect strength without effort. Plenty of Proverbs talk about them.
Above, we reference the lamb who is a lion. What happens to the lamb’s enemies? Our warning comes in Revelation 6. They hid themselves and said to the mountains and rocks, fall on us, and hide us from the wrath of the lamb.
Do they hate ALERT and Bill Gothard because of the lamb? hopefully not, because this doom awaits the lamb’s enemies.
Is Jesus a lamb? or a lion? He is both. We had better treat him so.
I am sorry you all devolved into an accuse/defend cycle re: Alert. I know a number of young men who went through the program. Not sure any ended up where you would have liked them to be. But that is a judgment on unhealthy expectations rather than the actual program.
I am an Eagle Scout and have 3 Eagle Scout sons. I endorse the teaching of responsibility and character that both Scouting (formerly) and ALERT promoted and some of the training practices. I was not enthusiastic about ALERT in part because of reports of irresponsibility in the destructive (reckless) use of vehicles in training and the natural errors that come from entrusting immature young men with the training of newbies. I was deeply disturbed at Knoxville when young men rappelled from the rafters over bleachers filled with regular folk. As a former safety professional, I considered that to be unwise, unsafe and demonstrating foolishness in leadership. Only immature men say: “let’s do this, it would be so cool”, or “watch this everybody!” You never see professionals demonstrate rappelling over unprotected civilians. The same year I believe was when the cross and American flag were superimposed on one another in a way that dishonored both in my studied opinion.
But those are small complaints, not a conclusive judgment on the program. Egos get in the way of many good works. Any family who thought ALERT would make their sons “godly” men, were unwise, just as the confusion of “character” and godliness in ATI were unhealthy. But those who thought the challenges would bring discipline and manly courage or at least persistence into their sons were probably justified in using ALERT to help train their sons.
And yet, I believe that none of the authoritarianism promoted by any Gothard related program was spiritually healthy. “Servant of all” breads healthy submission, but power corrupts…every creature, everywhere, every time.
Again, leave this up for discussion. What is so weird is that I, personally, hear completely different stories. Making me wonder what the disconnect is. I saw a young man a couple of weekends ago in a leadership position where, BTW, both parents are prominent in state and national politics, godly believers. I have heard him speak publicly, non-IBLP settings, over and over how ALERT changed his life. Typical of what I hear from others. Kind of like ATI, right? Some crater . . . Representing a very, VERY small percentage compared to the many others that bless the program and continue living and teaching what they learned.
Brother Don, why not expect good results from ALERT? We sometimes expect rigor to improve a man. God does, too. “If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons, for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?” Of course our expectations can be unrealistic. Will rigor make bad men good? not necessarily. It is just as likely to make them worse. When I was an officer in ALERT, we were sometimes constrained to concede failure and expel a man from the program.
Although power corrupts, what power does ALERT wield? It wields no more power than the boy scouts. Neither ALERT responder nor boy scout is under constraint. All are volunteers.
Does every boy scout become an Eagle scout? Of course not. Neither does ALERT make young Christians all that they should be. But in good faith, we tried.
Bill Gothard taught an authority principle, but not a system. Men love systems, but God loves covenant. We see the difference in Jesus’ teaching. “Or what man is there of you, if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone?” Jesus shows us a father and son connected by natural authority because of their natural covenant. The son delights to ask. The father delights to give. Authority is never invoked, because the natural covenant works.
We know not how Bill Gothard related to his ecclesiastical, organizational and personal authorities. We may enjoy some gossip about this, but mainly it is their business, not ours.
In ALERT we did conditioning drills and marching drills. Our flesh needs drills, but our spirit needs covenant. ALERT men enter a volitional covenant. They obey the officers who drill and train them. Otherwise, how do we expect them to become strong to serve?
Does power always corrupt as we read on 9/30 above? This sounds like a safe generalization. Yet everyday real life proves the opposite. The mother of every infant has power either to nurture, to neglect, or to destroy. Her power is nearly absolute. How does she wield her power? for vice or virtue? The choice is hers. Would we survive infancy if our mothers were corrupted by their power?
Christ’s apostles hedged against corruption without being cynical about power. Paul exhorted Timothy to “prove” candidates before entrusting them with power in the church. Candidates might be either virtuous or vicious. Try to find out in advance.
Would it not help if we distinguish between rulers and leaders? Jesus did. He forbade his disciples to contend for power like worldly men. Worldly rulers coerce. Christian men lead.