I read the report about IHOPKC yesterday and wanted to comment. I don't really have anyone to talk with about it in the sense of other people, though I realize in a true sense it is not a matter of concern in this venue :) Also, Rick had said that he was not reading the things that had been written and there is wisdom and loyalty in that. Because of that and also not wanting to promote what still seems to be speaking against, I am not helping to identify the report. Almost nothing, if not nothing, has been written that seems without fault in all that I've seen, maybe for but I'm mainly meaning against. As I read, I noted some things as follows. Before starting, I mention the following note to the community here that was put online somewhat in the context of my reading the report--probably after I mentioned I was expecting the report yesterday though still before it was made available. "Let’s resolve this year to see Him more in everything and every way. Fixing our eyes on Jesus brings peace, joy, and hope in every circumstance." —Rick Joyner Peace, joy, and hope were what I needed and I benefitted from the word about the way we get those things--from the Lord. Also I heard in preaching during a transit time in my reading (as I drove to my apartment) that it wasn't what I was going to do; it was what he was going to do. That "he" is the Lord. My notes in response to the report--with comments about the brief notes. not identifying accusers--the report still uses that process for those with accusations who do not grant the right to publicize their names, so they get to make charges but are not identified and no one from IHOP in a public way is responding. silent victims is counted as a strength to the case--the report treats those who do not report as evidence of the case they report. That is like, "all the money I do not have has made me rich". countless others who may exist--these countless others are not identified or apparently known; they may or may not exist and are referred to as strengthening the case. quick theorizing rather than letting the evidence speak for itself--the report does not seem to be written in a very accomplished way and the author or authors hasten to theorize early and without having built the case in evidence. As the report goes on, some evidence is provided, however, it is not exactly what is needed to support their claim. blaming for grooming without really making the case--saying "this and that was grooming" (leading victims to greater vulnerability) such a concept (grooming) could be applied pejoratively even to literal grooming--when my family combed my hair as a child sometimes they were expressing affection toward me (I actually remember pain from a hair brush, not affection--I don't remember any occasions of gentleness there, though there probably were some) interpretation stated as fact--they do not distinguish between "having made a case" and "getting to state their opinions" possibly using animal models for interpretations--some of their references to grooming seems to suggest a mentality based on animals grooming one another, like monkeys grooming one another do you not know that you who judge do the same things?--Romans 2:1 says, "Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, each one who is judging. For in that which you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, for you, the one judging, do the same things." It seemed to me that the Lord (as the Lord "doing it" instead of me trying to "do it") brought this to mind. How else could someone say, when a person does this somewhat unexplained activity it means or they are seeking to accomplish this somewhat unexpected (in innocence) goal prophecy is a recipe for abuse and cover-up--they say that showing that they are not friends of prophecy as I expected during the earlier communications of uninvolved folks doing the investigation baked into Brother Bickle's narrative--they perhaps disrespectfully say "baked" and refer to those they fault by their last names, not by "brother" the religious right--they refer to the religious right and quote a book apparently faulting the religious right showing that they are not compassionate toward their subject or truly amenable :) statements without support expressing "remorse and then placed blame"--they say one at fault did that, expressed remorse and then blamed someone else, an action that in this world is not unheard of, but I did not see evidence that that happened in the present case--it does seem to some extent that there would be general fault, everyone on the scene was at fault though perhaps some wording is needed to defend anyone who was led astray. Yet, even if we are led astray, if we are astray we are astray; we're at fault in being astray. yelling on the front row--as a visitor at the IHOP church, one Sunday as I often had, I was seated on the front row and a man came and sat beside me, when there were other places to sit and more space on the row itself, so that seemed unusual. I began to feel a strong drawing against my will, against my own "want to" (I didn't want to) and I perceived it was wrong; I imagined other young people with less preparation and willingness to resist the temptation, and I imagined saying (perhaps shooting trash at the goal, as I mentioned before--not in this note) "get off my planet" (which is wrong in more than one way) and then I yelled a sound, adding intentional loudness to the yell. Later after church as I drove back to Texas, I was thankful that no one had corrected me for yelling like that. communities of over 1000 young people some from bad backgrounds--with simply that many young people there, without trying to identify differences among them or levels of maturity, it seems likely that there could be conflicts between folks. perhaps it should be "such should not be named among you" yet the likeliness of wrong behavior seems evident instead of "being so surprised" and finding extreme fault; I do not remember the exact context of my note, though I expect it does not closely follow whatever the claim in the report was, they were not talking about the "1000 young people" gaslighting: we're open-minded, waiting to hear the evidence, following the presumption of innocence, not prejudiced--as has been done before, the accusation of gaslighting is made, but I wonder if the reporters are themselves gaslighting. They say "Look, we're open-minded" but they're not. They say, "let's present the evidence" but they don't present a consistent, complete, convincing, and conclusive case. They say they're not presuming anything, but they evidently are; they rush to blaming statements before showing evidence of such blame. No wonder that there's kind of a "what's going on" response. I did not note this, but thought of it later. Maybe the Lord brought it to mind. There is an accusation, maybe more than one phrase accusing of rape and yet no evidence or evidential statement about rape or even sex. What kind of railroad is this? I'm not at all meaning to say, nothing wrong was done, but it's not exactly what the accusers have presented or said. They have not presented a case supporting what they accuse. They shouldn't be majoring on improving their accusation. We should not be slow to repent when we have done wrong, but if the Lord took hold of the frame and sort of did the 180 degree turn of the scene what would we see then? The Lord loves you.

Posted by John Fullerton at 2025-02-04 16:48:26 UTC