Dangerous Church Doctrines, Open Q&A

This is Andrew Rappaport with Striving for Eternity Ministries. Are you cooped up at home?

Are you just desiring to use your time wisely? Well, Justin Peters and I got together and realized that our calendars were cleared because of COVID -19.

So we decided we would get together and do our Snatch Them from the Flames seminar, home edition.

That's right. A free seminar, May 30th from 10 a .m. to 6 p .m.

Eastern Time. We're going to give you a free seminar that you can take at home. We're going to cover the topics of the sufficiency of scripture, interpreting scripture, discerning false teachers, identifying false teachers, and then a

Q &A. Get all the details at strivingforeternity .org, and there you can go to the online events to register before May 30th, and we'll see you there online in your home.

This is Apologetics Live. To answer your questions, your host from Striving for Eternity Ministries, Andrew Rappaport.

And we are live, Apologetics Live, here every Thursday night to answer your apologetics questions.

And we will be taking questions tonight. So if you want to join us, go to apologeticslive .com.

That is the place to go to get the link to participate. It is open to anyone.

We will take any questions as usual. We usually start up with some discussion, which we will do tonight until folks come in with some questions.

But I'm running the show tonight, so it will be two hours. Now, Ethan had put a thing out on YouTube saying four hours last week.

Is it going to be five hours this week? You know, I guess that he was just saying three, four, five, no,

Ethan, two hours. Anthony's in the backstage. I don't know if we'll let him in at all, and that way we can get through a show.

We'll have to tell everyone about Anthony being a box hog at some point. But that aside, he gets on a preaching box and just doesn't get off and doesn't let anyone else get up.

That's all it means. But we're here. We want to continue having some of the discussion that we've had previously.

I'm going to bring Anthony in. And I do want to mention, though, before we start,

Anthony, is that we do have almost 1 ,000 people. Last I checked, there was like 900 -some people registered for our

Statue from the Flames Home Edition this Saturday. So that's pretty good.

So folks, if you haven't registered, like we said in the intro, just go to strivingforattorney .org

slash online -events, or just go to strivingforattorney .org, and there's a tab button for the link.

So you could just go there. We wanted to do, Anthony, was, and we should announce next weekend, we're going to have a debate.

Ken Cook will be debating Lutheran on the subject of baptism. So that'll be next week.

And you and I have, we're planning to bring another person in and have some discussion in a couple of weeks.

And he may become someone that we'll see more often here is Pastor Justin Pierce.

He's a, if folks don't know him, he is a pastor who, he's been on here, I think, once or twice.

A lot of wisdom. You'll get to see. We may end up playing just clips of some false teachers.

I played the clip of, that I'm planning to play for the conference this weekend of Bill Johnson preaching out of Matthew 7, 21, 22.

I should have waited to play that live for Justin because the look on his face. We'll have to do that anyway for the audience.

So what we want to do for this show, we're going to start off, we usually start off with a monologue to folks come in and ask questions.

And so just do that at apologeticslive .com. You can come in. We'll, we'll monitor questions as always on that you put either on Facebook or Twitter or YouTube, wherever it may be.

But we want, I want to address something, Anthony, is the fact that I, we, we, we talked quite a bit on the show with dealing with issues of Grace Fellowship Church.

Why did I suddenly get bigger? Wow. You playing? Are you playing with it? Playing with it. Yeah. Yeah. This is why you should use the regular link there, sir.

For the chat box and I don't see the chat on the screen. So it should be on your right side.

Yeah. Comments. Oh, there it is. Yeah. I see it now. Cause if this is just like really big,

I'm glad at least you don't match your shirt this week. Three different colors, three weeks in a row.

Yeah. Yeah. So yeah, the red matches, there's a little bit of red there.

I got a, and what I wanted to do first is, so we, you've been dealing with issues with, you know,

Mike Reed and Grace Fellowship Church and some of the doctrines that they're teaching.

Now I've kind of been out of this. I've just, I've listened to the shows, you know, I've, I've made it clear that, you know,

I really didn't have the time to get, to get into some of this. And so I think there's a lot of folks who, who have, have said to us over at least that I know to me that they didn't know anything about this church or Mike Reed until Tony Miano got there and they became aware of it.

And people were concerned and, and, you know, wondering how

Tony could be involved in that. I wonder the same thing. I did get a message from Mike Reed.

Now Apologetics Live, the purpose, the reason we started this show and do this show is to teach you guys apologetics.

Okay. Sometimes it's when someone comes in, we get challenges and you get to see, you know, a, you know, apologetics in practice.

Sometimes it is. And even when we do that, we try to afterwards explain what is, what it is we're doing, why we're doing it, things like that.

Okay. Let's give Anthony a big head. Here's a comment that I just saw. Anthony saw you in American Gospel today.

You know, it's amazing to me that I'm a nobody and it's funny how, I mean, at Shepard's Conferences happens.

A guy named Evan, like pulls me aside, never met in my life. And he recognized me from watching the movie.

You know, there's two reasons why I wasn't in the movie, one, because I was avoiding the camera, two, because you saw a box and you and Ricky were like, box,

I must preach until like there's no one left to preach. So anyway, so what

I want to do is go through an exchange, boy, this is a longer exchange than I thought.

I want to go through an exchange of messages that I got from Mike Reed. Now I don't,

I think I met Mike Reed once. And so he's not someone

I've really had a conversation with other than saying hello. I think

I might have seen you talking to him at G3 this year and just didn't even know who it was.

But he reached out to me and I think that going through this is going to be helpful. You know,

Anthony doesn't realize he's responding to people in Twitter, okay.

As well as, you know, just to anyone on Twitter, you see Anthony responding to someone that's on YouTube.

Okay. Because he doesn't know how to drop down. He doesn't know how to use this and he wants to be, he wants to run it, you know.

So there's a little box there, Anthony, that you could choose if you're, you know, where it says there's a little Striving Fraternity logo, how to use this live.

There's a little arrow there. Click that and you can choose between all destinations, just the

YouTube video or Twitter, you know. Twitter is the periscope. Periscope.

So, but I think, I think this exchange is helpful because I think that as we go through this, you get to see how

I was responding and I want you guys, when you're having discussions with people,

I want you to be able to recognize some tactics that people use. So I'll try to get through most of this, but some of this is a little bit longer, but Mike responded to me on Friday.

I didn't get to it till Tuesday. So he's going to respond to some, and I don't know if this was, let me be clear.

I don't know if this is more of, if this is actually

Mike using his Facebook or not, because he's going to, if it is, he is using himself in third person.

So he says, grace and peace, brother. I wanted to reach out for two reasons. One, to let you know that I'd like to talk to you about two issues, reconciliation between you and brother

Tony, and two, to make you, to make you aware that Anthony is giving a platform for slander, gossip, and ninth commandment violations.

And possibly unknowingly, you are actually doing the very same things.

I'm sure that Anthony has shared with you our emails, texts, and summaries of our

Zoom meetings. While our discussion with Anthony have been friendly, they have not helped our brother to see his continued cause of harm to the bride of Christ, and have not moved toward biblical reconciliation.

It's our desire to speak with you, to discuss these matters, to bring reconciliation between you and brother

Tony, and to bring an end to this series of podcasts, and help biblical reconciliation be possible with JFC, Mike Reed, and the others bringing charges.

That's the part where I wasn't sure he referred to himself third person, or maybe he had someone else type it up for him.

I'm not sure. But then he goes on. Would there be a time later today that you could do a

Zoom meeting with one of our elders and I, our third elder, is unavailable? Now, before I get to my thing, there's a key in here that I think we're going to see.

One thing to look for is when someone makes a statement and there's arguments and then those arguments get answered.

And the person just instead of going, oh, I didn't notice that. OK, let's put that to rest.

They continue with the argument. They just move the goalpost because you're going to see that. So this was my response.

Mike, thank you for reaching out to me. I will point out the what

I will point out. I guess I didn't type this very well. I should have said I will point out what reconciliation looks like.

But I put I will point out the reconciliation with Tony looks like this. One, Tony calling me.

Two, Tony acknowledging his sin. Three, Tony asking for forgiveness of that sin.

Four, me accepting his forgiveness. There is no need for a third party unless Tony is still unrepentant.

You assume that Anthony shared with me details of your conversation. He has he has not because that would be gossip.

And we do not engage in that. He only shared with me details of which you spoke about me.

I'll get to those things maybe later on. On the note of slander, I would ask you mention slander without any specifics.

I will not waste my time with games. If you cannot be specific with sin, then there's no real charge.

Slander is the lying for the purpose of damaging someone's reputation. You you provide no details of this claim.

And if there is no specifics, then the charge itself is slanderous.

And you you need you are need. I got to learn how to write. I should have said you need you are need to list very specific examples of gossip of slander, gossip and lying.

Good day. Other than my grammar, what I'm doing there is very simple.

Notice that he was speaking of biblical reconciliation, Anthony. But how did he define biblical reconciliation?

He wants him and an elder. Or him and his elders and Tony and just me, that's not biblical reconciliation.

Biblical reconciliation is exactly what we tried to do. I went to Tony specifically to Tony when it couldn't be resolved.

I tried to bring in others. In that case, it was you and Chuck that came in. I brought you. He brought

Chuck. Great. But in the end, there was no repentance because he didn't acknowledge his sin.

Even when three men noted it, he was he was judging my motives, as you had pointed out, you know.

So but notice that even with that, I'm also addressing the fact and this is something to note when somebody gives a claim, someone is slandering me.

OK, how? And folks, if someone says you're slandering them, that's the first question, how?

Now, let me give some definitions or what or what you said. Yeah. So I mentioned in the thing what slander is, right?

Slander is lying. So you have to you have to know you're doing it, OK? You have to know it's untrue.

Yeah. And you have to do it for the purpose of damaging one's reputation. What's gossip? Gossip is idle talk, but it's not just idle talk.

It's idle talk, again, with the purpose of damaging someone's reputation. OK, so so,

Anthony, you and I can have a chat about the president United States. We could we could talk whether it's really a wig he wears or if that's really his hair, that's idle talk.

Does it damages reputation? I don't think so. Right. Is that sin? No, it's not gossip.

But if we're starting to do idle talk just so that people could listen in that and it it then damages someone's reputation, that could be gossip.

Now, I don't. Oh, go ahead. Well, yeah. OK, so I guess this is really the bottom line with all this.

And Chuck put this into the comments section. This is the issue, and this is really trying to establish over the last two weeks that there are there's two different things that we have spoken about.

On one hand, there is what are the specific doctrines and teachings of Mike Reed and his other elders?

At GFC, that's one side of it. The other side of it is his practices that flow from there.

How how do how do those teachers, doctors manifest themselves out in practice? And so that's really the issue.

Now, I brought up the terms reconciliation, right? So maybe some of this is my fault, because in the end,

I want to see reconciliation, too. But there's a larger issue at hand. Because as you,

Andrew, you know, I don't have your placard here right in front of me, but you are one of the experts on reconciliation.

I mean, you have written placards that sell very well at conferences. And and a lot of people have complimented you over this, how to actually follow the

Matthew 18 process. But before you get to Matthew 18, what all you have to do to get to that spot first?

But but this isn't a reconciliation issue right off the bat. The bigger issue is, is there are doctrines that have been in place that have hurt and damaged a lot of people.

That's the stuff that has to be answered for. Reconciliation can't occur until those things are actually addressed and dealt with.

Yeah, you can't have biblical reconciliation if one of the parties is not going to admit to sin.

Right, if someone's in sin and they don't admit to it or they, you know, like we had. And we'll get to it in a bit.

But where Tony really didn't want to reconcile, he just wanted to move on. You mentioned Chuck's comments.

I put it up, but you didn't read it. Chuck just said the larger issue is not personal reconciliation issue. It's a dangerous doctrine and practice issue.

It's predatory perversion of pastoral ministry in a local church issue. And and this is where I do see a distinction, because we may get to a thing where Mike Reid reached out to you and I asking that he come on here, he alone with one of the people that have made accusations against him alone.

And we do mediation. This show really isn't set up for mediation. Mediation should be done in private.

We've asked. And I know that I've been asking you each week. Right. On Monday, I ask you. And on Tuesday, on Thursdays, I ask you, have you reached out to Mike Reid to invite him on?

And every day you say, yes, I have. A lot of times he responds, sometimes a little late.

But, you know, we are. Look, we we have said, because I know

I've heard you say that. If Mike wants to come on, not to address reconciliation, he needs to come on to address the doctrines and the practices, that's what we're bringing up here, because that's what this platform is is going to be for is addressing things like that.

If he wants to to deal with reconciliation between Kevin and him, I'd be happy to help out with that or provide someone that could.

You know, I'm not I'm not as you know, I'm, you know, I know

Chuck was was in and, you know, I have some things I'll bring up with Chuck later, because I think

I think there and, you know, maybe I'll just bring it up now. There were there were two things and Chuck make I'll say it.

And then Chuck has to wait to to to be able to to defend himself. There were two things that I think at a last week's show that we're concerned.

I when I was in the backstage, I wasn't always listening to the whole thing. I was trying to do some of the things.

One of the things was that there was a that I heard afterwards was that he that Chuck had said something about Bobby enabling

Tony or enabling Mike Reed as much as some other people enable some other false teachers like, you know,

Benny Hinn and all. Well, yes, specifically, it was regarding the enablers that knew what was going on behind the scenes with both

Todd Bentley and Tulian. And and so in in terms of of of this specific issue here,

I did receive a phone call from Bobby. So Bobby called me literally the next day after the show last

Thursday. So I talked to him on Friday and. And and and the one thing that I want to do is make sure we we correct any type of of record here.

Yeah. And this is and this is the bottom line. I mean, Chuck's going to come in and he's going to he's going to talk about why he put him in the same category.

When I spoke with Bobby, this is what Bobby told me. We had a you know,

Bobby is a friend of mine. Love the brother to pieces. Our families, you know, get along.

I love his family, you know, all that good stuff. He stayed in my home. So, you know, he we had a nice talk about this.

And here's here's what Bobby told me. He's he says that they're weird practices.

Right off the bat, he acknowledges that Mike has weird practices. I after we talked a few minutes about what he means by weird practices, we're on the same page.

You know, he also said that I wouldn't go to church. I wouldn't bring my family to to go on to go under that pastoral ministry.

And he's told me that in the past. And I think I said that on the first show we did two weeks ago. But the issue the issue was is.

Bobby, six to seven months ago, I know, was talking to Kevin Yance, who's going to be on here in a few minutes as well.

And Bobby was supposed to do an investigation, right? I mean, this is Bobby was going to do an investigation.

That's what a lot of people thought. That's what Mike Reed claimed to me is that Bobby did a full investigation. Bobby didn't do that.

Bobby told me I didn't investigate. I went there to hang out with my friend Tony and do some with him.

And and it wasn't about I didn't investigate it. But wait, hold on. Hold on. Let me because because you just said, son,

I thought when I know you and I were on the phone at one point, you had said that there was two people you mentioned,

Bobby, that had that Mike said did investigate. So you're saying

Bobby said he never did. Bobby said he never investigated. He said I literally know that without calling.

He didn't call Mike a liar, but he said that's not true. And he was Mike Reed may not know.

I mean, does Mike know that he didn't investigate? Well, OK, so in the Zoom meetings and Zoom calls we had,

I mean, Chris, we will get to your question here in a moment. When when

Mike Reed in one of the three Zoom meetings we had over the last, I don't know, nine to 10 days, he told me that two guys and I won't mention the other person's name because he's not he's not been mentioned anywhere else.

I'm going to leave him out. And I haven't talked to talk. I haven't talked to him at all. But he he mentioned these two guys, one of which is

Bobby, that investigated him and they came away from their investigation. And Mike said,

I he said, I gave full access to anybody within the church, including the two elders to talk to.

And that's not that's not what Bobby said. Bobby was very clear. I didn't investigate.

He didn't go there to investigate. He didn't do any type of investigation. He literally was going just to evangelize.

So then I said, OK, Bobby, that's fine. Let me talk to you if you had investigated, because look,

I actually I think you dropped the ball, like because there are people, every person that I called over the last couple of months that were the eyewitnesses, every one of them said to me in some words or another that I was expecting this call six months ago.

They were expecting this call. Yes, Ted Black. Kevin is here.

We're going to bring him on in just a minute. You can't answer questions you don't put up on screen. You have to read the question.

Sorry. Well, I was talking to Ted. But so I said, I'll teach you how to do this show.

I know. I know. So I said, you have you didn't call these people that were expecting your phone call, because every one of them told me that they were expecting this phone call six months ago and they were expecting it from Bobby.

So that's fine. Bobby didn't didn't investigate for whatever reason. No problem. Mike claims he did. Bobby didn't do that.

So what I informed Bobby of is a brother. Look, I've literally talked to including

Kevin and his wife. I've talked to 13 people that have attended some members, some people who attended, but 13 people who went to GFC.

I also talked with a few other people who are in the Quad Cities area that don't go to the church there, that actually avoid

GFC when they're evangelizing out of the streets because they've known about these doctrines for longer than Chuck has.

So so I said, Bobby, do you realize you've got 30 people that are members of GFC right now?

You have more than twice that number that showed up at a picnic. Two years ago, when

Kevin and his wife moved from Davenport and went out to to the state that they're in right now, 60 people showed up.

They all left the church. All are hurt from the church in some way, some type of spiritual abuse, some much worse than others.

But also, and this wasn't even all of them. There's many more people that that never showed up at this.

It's about there's a trail of destruction that was left behind. The people that I had a chance to talk to is a lot.

Don't even want to talk about behind. Yeah. Right. I mean, these are the issues. And so I guess

I guess to sum up in all this is that is that, you know, based on what

Bobby tells me, I can't put him in the same class as an enabler is to lean because Bobby tells me, and I believe

Bobby, what he tells me, that he doesn't he doesn't support my group's practices. I think he started to see the dangers of those practices based on what

I was telling him from the eyewitness accounts of the people I actually spoke to. He told me that he wouldn't bring his family there at all and that he has told

Tony in multiple phone calls that he shouldn't be at that church either.

Yeah. And so so I think, you know, the thing that caught me was because I know Mike had had or at least from what you told me that Mike had said that he did the investigation.

So Mike may not realize that that investigation didn't happen. But there's a different thing

I do see with son. I'll get to in a little bit here is that it does seem that there is a pattern where he'll use a name to give credibility when that person doesn't actually support what he says.

So so one thing I thought that that I disagreed with Chuck when I relistened was calling out

Bobby and and putting him in that same class. I think I I have had limited conversations with Bobby in the last few years, but he doesn't strike me as someone who's going to endorse that and just turn a blind eye.

But he may also not be someone that wants to deal with stuff. The other thing I thought that Chuck had had done.

And this is probably a little unfair because I'm calling Chuck out while he can't respond, but he'll get a chance later toward the end of the show.

And I because I was driving, I couldn't I didn't couldn't write it down. And maybe I'll have to go back and relisten to to give

Chuck specifics. But I felt that he was assigning motive to what

Mike's why Mike was doing what he was doing in some things. And I like I said, I can't remember the specific of it, but that was the exact issue that we had with Tony at that meeting was

Tony was using Tony was actually now that I think about it with the stuff that we're seeing from Mike, there was some similarity there, you know, in in in the in the behavior, but in moving the goalpost and some of the claims.

But he was he was making claims that he knew he knew my motives better than I knew my motives.

And that's where you you had basically called Matt and said, you're judging his motives. You know, he's telling you this is what he what he why he does what he does.

And you're saying, you know, better. And so, Donny, Jack says that I need a raise or no,

Donny, I'm just trying to show that I have more hair on my face than Anthony has on his head. Let me get back to this. So so Mike Reid responded to me.

I noticed that the picture Andrew keeps putting up looks nothing like him. I mean, that was what from like 30 years ago or something because I don't change.

I look the same just now I have facial hair. So now remember, what's what's the issue that we're having?

The issue now I granted I'm saying that the issue between Tony and I doesn't involve a third party.

Unless Tony's, you know, unrepentant. But you'll notice that he doesn't want to address the issue.

What did I leave him saying that he needs to give specifics? And this is a concerning thing, because a person who is just making claims doesn't give those specifics.

He's going to try in a bit. But he says, Andrew, in order for Tony to seek forgiveness for sin, he would need to be sent, be told of his sin against you.

Matthew 18, 15. Uh, he his understanding of your meeting at Shepcon was that the two of you were reconciled.

If you have charges of his sin against you, if you have charges of sin against you, please make them known to him.

Now, what is he asking for right there? Do you notice what he's doing? He wants specifics. What did

I just ask him for specifics? Right. Yet he wants me to give specifics, which we'll see in a bit.

I've already dealt with. I've already given the specifics to Tony, as I'll point out in a bit.

So then Mike says, as far as lies and slander, we have proven to Anthony that he has promoted a venue for Ninth Commandment violations and that has not been met with any public retractions.

For instance, he demonstrably lied concerning Maria's testimony.

There are many others. And that is that is what we would like to demonstrate to you.

Demonstrate to you, do that. You would stop these from occurring on the podcast that Anthony is using.

I trust that your desire is to have a truthful testimony with proper cross -examination,

Proverbs 18, 17, to consider the matter. Well, I certainly do not see this as, quote, playing games, unquote.

That's a reference to the comment I made about playing games. As there are the as these are most serious allegations, colts and wolves being made on your podcast, and they are serious.

And that's why I said that I did challenge Chuck and I still will to prove out the five points of a colt.

He said, if these things are not true, I am sure you wouldn't want to be part of slandering against the

Lord's bride. It is my desire to discuss these things with you and Anthony prior to any more airing of lies, slander and gossip.

May God bless you and your ministry going forward. Now, one of the things I want you to notice with this before I get to my response to him is

I want you to notice what seems to be clear to him. The goal that he has is for us to stop doing these podcasts.

But my challenge is going to be, is it about true biblical reconciliation?

And, you know, what we would see is forgiveness and admitting to sin, because I, what

I noticed in this, and this is a pattern you see with many people, this is why I want to go through this.

Um, I really want to go through this because I want you guys, whether it's this situation or any other situation you have, okay,

I want you to, to be able to pick up on tactics used.

And, and KT is saying, and this is going to be important. She says, I remember Tony indicating Maria questioning her salvation after going there.

So that was, was that slander? Well, that's the very point KT. And I'm going to give that in my answer.

But here, I got to point something out though. That is just, I mean, it's, it's ridiculous.

Of all the doctrinal teachings that he has, right.

Of all the things we brought up in the week with Kevin and last week with Chuck, all the things he brought up, every doctrinal point, every teaching that is dangerous, all of the ramifications there of the people that were hurt in specific ways, because the practices of those doctrines, not one of those has he come back and said, that's a blatant lie, right?

He comes up with the thing about Maria that Maria, but here's the thing. This is the thing to notice the thing with Maria, because this is going to come up.

So let me give the answer. And then he, cause I think, I believe, look, I think the issue with Maria came up again, but yeah, so he believes the thing of Maria is, is a lie.

And so I said, this is my response. And you can see my responses are shorter than his, I think, but, but his are better written for the record.

I think everyone knows that by the way, humble clay said, Anthony and Andrew have both shown no bias in the covering of these issues.

And I appreciate that. It's hard for me to show bias when I'm pretty much ignorant. I mean, like I said,

I mean, look, if Mike comes on, I'll hear for myself what he says, but I haven't yet to hear from him, what his doctrine is from him.

I hear it from, well, I guess I got a video clip of some of his doctrine that I'll play, but let's all be clear about something.

I mean, cause one of the charges that's been levied against me by Mike at least privately, but I mean,

I I've heard it publicly from other people as well, is that I didn't investigate. I didn't,

I only investigated one side. I didn't investigate the other. And there's a couple of things that I would have to say about this.

I mean, let's imagine we have, let's imagine we have an entire room of, of people and, and in that room of people, one person walks out, sees one other person out of that room and sees a murder happen.

Right now, am I going to, if I'm an investigator, go and ask every single person in this room, none of which who actually witnessed what happened, what their testimony is, or I'm going to go right to the person who witnessed the murder happen, right?

And that's the issue here is that the claims are being made, not by one person, not by two people, either by dozens and dozens of people, these claims are being made about not only the practice of Mike, but also the way that they manifest themselves, people being injured spiritually by these doctors and let's ask them questions.

Cause they're the eyewitnesses. They're the ones who actually had the injuries from the perpetrator.

Well, and, and let's, let's, let's deal with some, I mentioned last week at the end, because this is a

Ackman's razor. What's the simplest thing to believe that people who work together in one church are telling a lie or that dozens of people who don't talk to each other who don't work together are telling lies.

It is harder to believe that several people would have the same stories. Without there being truth to it.

Now I have yet to hear from Mike that he doesn't teach the things that were claimed.

Um, you know, that's, that's one of the things. Um, but, but I have seven weeks of texts back and forth asking him to come on continuously.

Um, I have five and a half hours of zoom meetings. Now think about this. The claim has also been made well, and Mike telling me during these zoom meetings, we've had very long zoom meetings, some of them, um, like five hours or something or three hours or five and a half, five and a half, maybe a touch longer hours on zoom meetings.

Me with Mike Reed is too old. They're sitting next to him five and a half hours.

I continue to ask, are these doctrines true? Do you teach these? And I'm, and I'm trying to give them a way out.

I'm saying, look, the stuff that is on audio recording. Do you, did you once believe that and now not teach it anymore?

I mean, just, just tell me what's going, you know, just tell me what you believe. I literally have spent now.

Almost the same amount of time with Mike Reed as I have with Kevin Yons in terms of actually asking pointed questions about, uh,

GFC. I mean, that's, that's shocking. Now I got three hours of material with Kevin for one podcast, let alone many other hours that we're going to do in the future, but I literally have nothing from Mike in terms of doctrine.

Cause the only thing they say is that you keep committing ninth commandment violations. And I keep saying, give me a specific list of lies that are being spread on this podcast.

Give me a specific list of lies that I am saying, right. We'll get to some of those here. Cause he is going to, he's going to attempt to give some.

So yeah, let me, so, so here was my response to that. I do think it's, we need to bring in though, this response, let's bring in Chuck and Kevin and start opening up for some questions because I want,

I want this to be educational for folks to see how people behave. So, cause here's, here's, so my response was

Tony's been told of his sin at Chepcon, but he knew at G3 when

I asked to talk that we were not reconciled. He never repented of his sin.

He just wanted to move on. That's not reconciliation. If you want things cleared up, then

I expect to, to see you tomorrow night to answer specifically on these doctrines that you can demonstrate that you do not teach.

This is the one issue, right? Notice how I'm focused on the teachings. Cause that's what we've been focusing on.

He said, what sin, so this is Mike now, what sin has Tony not repented of clearing things up in a public setting with no attempt to clear them up privately is no biblical model of reconciliation.

Therefore we will not participate in a non -biblical way of clearing things up until there is an attempt to clear it up privately.

We D we desire that the local assembly adjudicate the matter of sin in a local assembly prior to having apologetics live, take the role of local assembly.

Now, let me be clear. This is not public assembly. This is not church. The point is, um,

I did address it privately for months. Uh, and then I flew across the country to address it privately.

So I've gone to great lengths to, to reconcile. Uh, but here's my response.

I said, since you referenced Matthew 18, 15, maybe you could read it more, read that as specifically the word alone.

Um, sorry, but if Tony is ignorant of his sin, that then he would need to contact me, stop refusing to respond to phone calls, emails, and Marco Polo videos.

So that is nothing for you and I to discuss. However, when you made charges of slander without, without support, that would be slander itself.

You need to make a specific list of the claims of slander, gossip, and lying.

If you do not, uh, if, if you do not, I will not be reading anything more from you until you provide a specific list of general accusations.

Notice what I do. And this is something that those of you who watch regularly, you know, that I do this. Stay on point.

What he's doing is doing distractions, right? He, he, he wants to talk about Maria's testimony again.

He says, when we, we, well, when we have shown the audio proof that was said about Maria was a lie and Anthony has not cleared that up, it shows a lack of fair mindedness that is being claimed.

There are other examples that we've pointed to pointed out to Anthony to no avail that that is not an unbiased podcast.

You read a statement, correcting me for statements I never made. Uh, therefore no evidence.

Uh, therefore there is no evidence of me claiming that Phil Johnson was a supporter of my ministry.

I never stated that because that would be a lie. You, however, assumed

I, it was accurate and therefore need to be corrected. You have no proof.

I said that only gossip, slander, not true. So Anthony, I asked you for the proof it was provided.

So here's the thing. Now notice he's making the statement. I want to show you how this works.

Proof is where you actually play something like this of a, this is a, the full conversation of Mike Reed on his dangerous doctrines and practices.

This is the, the, the phone conversation that was mentioned with Chuck and, and, uh,

Anthony. But this is now why do you listen? Because what you're going to hear is you're going to, he's, you notice the words that he said.

He said, first off that it was a lie about Maria in the audio. No one was talking about the, or any audio of the testimony.

What was mentioned was a blog article. And I'm going to end up saying that cause I ended up saying my responses.

Um, you're still not listing specific lies. And as for Maria's testimony, I read it for myself.

So I'm sorry. I know you just told a lie. The issue was Tony's blog article that was, that mentioned it.

You see. So what did he do? He jumped to something that is true. This is this thing to spot with people like this.

They're going to tell a half truth. I don't know what, or at least I'm going to assume that it's a truth. I don't haven't listened to the audio of her testimony, but I'm going to assume in her testimony.

She said, as, as he's going to claim that she was, you know, Christian for many years. Okay. But see, the thing is that wasn't the discussion.

The discussion was the blog article that even KT referenced that she saw. Many people have saw that.

Phil Johnson told me himself that he saw that. So, so I know several people that saw that same thing.

Okay. This is the thing. Notice what he, what he does instead of referencing the specific charge, he goes to something he could say is true and then accuses

Anthony of lying. No, he lied because of the issue. We are talking about was the blog article, not an audio.

Okay. Now let me play this clip from that conversation. And what you're going to hear is he's going to bring

Phil Johnson into this. And the question is why bring Phil in? Well, the reason he's bringing

Phil in, in the conversation is credibility, which is the very thing that was charged.

Nobody said that Phil endorsed his ministry. So again, it's a, it's a word game because he said, there's no evidence of me claiming

Phil Johnson was a supporter of my ministry. That's right. But nobody said that you see.

So he says something that's true that we could agree to. You're right. I won't find evidence of that because Phil never did it, but we will hear this.

One of the things that I explained to Pastor Jeff, which doesn't matter or doesn't matter, but maybe

Bobby for your benefit, and maybe you've noticed, maybe you don't, when I first became a pastor,

I had lots of concerns about how to do ministry, and one of the things that I did was try to reach out to pastors that I respected, at least based on what

I knew. And I, before I started meeting with women alone,

I called Grace Community Church in Joplin, Phil Johnson, before I knew who Phil Johnson was,

I called the Bethlehem Baptist, I'm going to know who I talked to, a pastor of the day. Spent 45 minutes to an hour with each of them discussing this topic.

Neither one of them forbade it. They both agreed heartily, which

I acknowledge and accept and correct this. Okay.

So you see there, neither one of them forbade it. Now, this is the thing.

Notice the way people will play with their words here. It's true.

They didn't forbade it. That also doesn't mean they endorsed it, but why would he bring this up?

He's bringing it up because it is an implied endorsement. There's no other reason to bring it up.

The reason to bring it up, exactly. That's the issue there. And that's the thing that was of charge here.

And so that was the first lie. Now you'd think that I just caught him in a lie, right? I just pointed out that the lie was over the blog article, not the audio.

You'd think he would repent, right? Because he's very concerned about biblical reconciliation, correct? He says that.

That's what he says. And this is how you could tell the difference between someone that says something and someone that means something.

I flew across the country to try and bring reconciliation. He's going to ignore that and just go on.

He goes, I'm talking about the claim that Maria was saved under Mike's ministry when the audio of recording of her membership testimony was sent to Anthony and clearly states that the salvation was many years before.

This is a miscommunication. No, it wasn't a miscommunication. None of us that I heard any of you guys talk.

And I know for me, it was about the blog article. You see moving of the goalposts over and over.

Cause what is he not doing? He's not giving the specifics of sin. And so I will say this to you,

Andrew, the same thing happens with the teenage girl who stood up and gave her name, full name and her specific sins, right?

This is put on sermon audio for people to hear. And, and, uh, when we brought this up,

I think it was two weeks ago. He chastised me for that as well. And he ended up to defend himself.

He said, that's not exactly what happened. And he, he sent me an audio of this girl, um, saying

I did this on my own free will and all these kinds of things. So come something completely different from what actually happens, right?

I mean, it's whether it was staged by her or he and her together, what I have, I have no idea, but different than what the actual charge was, which the, this is silly to have people talk about their sin in front of the church members out loud, it's sillier to have people talk about their, um, sexual sin in front of church members, it's downright dangerous.

When you have a young girl who gets up and talks about her sexual sin in front of lots of boys who are of the age.

I mean, this is it. That's the issue in that. Um, and then posting online for everybody to hear for who knows how long before it was pulled down.

Yeah. Less is this less says, um, Anthony's way, way of questioning and interviewing makes it hard to lie.

I would not want to be interviewed by him if I was lying or I think he meant gossip. Gossiping.

Yeah. Joe, Joe says, Mike is talented at moving the goalposts and creating a strong man argument to avoid addressing the real issues at hand.

And Joe, that's an excellent point. Cause that's what you're seeing here. And I, we have a little bit more of this, um, that I want to go through.

So, cause he says, and so Mike responded and said, and specifically it is a lie that I claimed

Phil, Phil Johnson. Uh, he meant to say agreed with me, agreed with my ministry.

But the thing is he did, he said he did it by the reverse. He did it in the audio that you just played.

I just played. And I said, that was an audio phone call that with Chuck. So that's another lie on your part.

You are not, you are mounting up the lies and not making and are not, and are making not,

I've really got to work on grammar before sending things off. Proofreading would be good and, and not providing the list

I requested. So you see, this is the thing that he keeps doing. He's focusing every everywhere else, but the actual issue.

And every time he presents something, what is he doing? He's telling something that's true, but it's a, it's a logical fallacy because he's dealing with something other than the actual thing being discussed.

So we're discussing a true strong fallacy. It is because we're in, in a sense, it's a strong man because he's not giving a different definition.

But he we're, we're talking about a, and he's saying, but B is true. And so it isn't in a way that he then said, he then went on to say, it was stated on your show that Maria could, could not be a member until she said she was saved under Mike's ministry.

Now he, now here's the thing. Let me put the quotes and let me say, he said it was stated on your show.

Quote, Maria could not be a member until she was saved under Mike's ministry. Unquote, parentheses, not an exact quote, but very close.

Yeah. Those are what I said at all in quotes, but then says, but it's not a quote. Okay. I, I don't remember that.

Okay. I don't know. Granted, you guys went for like eight hours between the two shows. So I probably missed a lot, but, um, so I, I can't speak to that.

Well, no, I, that insinuation was not made. There was stuff added to it. It's kind of like, it's kind of like in Genesis three, when, uh, when the serpent was speaking to Eve and was just changing it a little bit, right.

Um, that's exactly what he was doing right there is, is changing it. We talked about this, this issue that there have been multiple people

I have personally spoken with that have stated that, uh, there several people were unsaved.

Others were really shaken in their faith based on a way that they hunt down what they would call sin in their pursuit of holiness.

Um, and that there were several people who, who got, you know, again, unsaved.

It's not real, but you know, yeah, right.

And so Maria, when you look blog posts, it seems to match up with what I heard everybody else.

Yeah. And Stephanie, Stephanie says, I didn't hear anything close to that quote in either podcast.

Yeah, it's true. Now, again, what might he say? He may be saying that this is false.

Well, it sounds like you're agreeing it's false and that it wasn't said. So, so what I did was

I told him prove that timestamp or provide that time cap is what I meant to say. Um, I said, now stop with the red herrings cause that's what these are.

What's a red herring. A red herring is a logical fallacy where instead of addressing the issue at hand, you address everything else.

So I said, now stop with the red herrings. I've asked you three times for the list and all I get is distractions.

Is there a specific list of slander? Because so far you have provided examples of you lying.

So he said. That is a lie that it is a lie that I never, that I ever kissed or attempted to kiss any woman on the lips other than my wife during the entire pastorate.

And yet that has been stated as a fact by Chuck that I have, uh, even after we warned

Anthony about that lie and he didn't even challenge the validity of it. And I said, that was, that was not stated.

And Anthony and I heard Anthony correct that you lied four times in this exchange and you continue to move the goalpost and refuse to provide any actual list of slander lies, gossips as, uh, for every example you provide was a lie on your part.

Please repent. And then he went on. I didn't read this until just now. So this,

I haven't read before. Um, so, but, but here was the thing with the kissing thing. He, he, it was stated that he tried to kiss a woman on her, on the lips.

She claimed he was reaching for the lips and turn the face. That's what I heard. And that's, then that's exactly what she said.

And so it's not a lie of you repeating what she said. Right. Okay. If, if, if you said he kissed her, if, if you are

Chuck or Kevin said that Mike kissed her on the lips, that would be a lie and that's not what was stated.

And furthermore, I even made the special point to say that in all the people that I talked to and all the heinous things that we heard, one thing we did not hear was female being kissed on her lips by him.

Yeah. And, and that's, that's the thing I heard you correct several times. Now he said here, he said, start at three hours, four minutes, 30 seconds.

And you will hear Chuck clearly state quote, Mike did kiss that woman unquote. So that was stated brother.

And Anthony did not correct him. Now, let me, let me stop with that one and just respond to that here. Um, yeah, he, you,

Mike did kiss that woman. You see what, you see what the, what was the context on the lips?

What does he do when he answers this to prove a lie? He dropped the context.

And I don't know if that's how he interprets scripture, but I know that this, that is a violation of the ways you interpret scripture.

Okay. Um, and so wait, I just noticed

Chuck said, if I continue to play playing that audio, you'll hear that. I call Mike on his deception of using

Phil and then Mike stumbles. Okay. Well, we might get to that, but it's like three minutes apart.

If I'm not mistaken, three minutes, but here he's going to give a list of, of lies.

I'm looking at it now. So here, here's the first slide. The first lie is that it was a lie that Mike did kiss that woman.

Well, the woman said that Mike kissed her. Now the question is, did

Chuck say he kissed her on the lips? I didn't hear that, but that was the context.

So here's a lie quote, Mike knows how many times per week every couple is having marital relations unquote from Chuck.

Okay. Now, is that a lie? He says it's a lie.

We'll ask this of Chuck later. Um, I took that as saying that I, and this is a challenge

I would have for Chuck is that, how do you know that Chuck? Okay. That'll be a question when, when we get

Chuck in, because in a question like that, in a statement that Chuck may, and this is where, you know, look,

Chuck, you're, you're, come on, you give me a hard time all you want, you know, I could take it, but the, the point being is,

I think I personally felt Chuck, you were, you were being strong and a little bit harder and making statements maybe out of emotion,

I don't know, but, but, or maybe, you know, but it could be what you believe, but I think it is.

I think it's that, that Chuck was literally the lone person who is warning everybody four years ago.

And it seems like nobody was listening. Yeah. Well, but here's the thing I want to point out though.

It's, it's not a lie. If Chuck believes this. Okay. Now, this is why

I said we let's define what a lie is, right? It's knowing something and saying the opposite.

So if, if, if Chuck knows that Mike doesn't know the, how many times people are having marital relations, if Chuck knows that Chuck, that Mike doesn't know that, and he made that statement, that would be a lie, but if Chuck believes that Mike does know that that's not a lie, it could be wrong, but no, no.

I want you all to notice. This is what people do. When someone says that they're wrong.

Okay. When someone points out something that they're doing wrong, they suddenly jumped to conclusions. Like you're breaking the ninth commandment.

No, you're not breaking the ninth commandment. If you're not knowingly you knowing the truth and saying the opposite, that's the difference.

So I, this could be a lie. If Chuck knows that Mike doesn't know this another lie,

Chuck claims, we went to Shepcon to recruit Tony. Um, I believe

Kevin stated that that was the reason they went to Shepcon and he was there with them as part of the church.

Is it well here, I'll bring, I'll bring, I mean, we, we need to bring, yeah. Let's let me bring you in.

Well, okay. I'll bring Chuck in since I threw him under the bus. Um, so Chuck, let me ask you the question with this.

Tire marks. Well, better than, you know, if they were on that bald head,

I'm just saying I do have more facial hair than all three of these guys have on their complete head.

It makes me look like Mel Gibson. I never thought of that before. Chuck, you made the statement.

Um, you know, the, unless as Anthony, Andrew and Anthony would make very good, uh, make very good and righteous lawyers in the secular world.

It is, it is why they're, uh, it is good. They're in the church. Actually. I don't know about Anthony, but I could tell you being raised in a

Jewish home, you're, you're trained to debate without the emotion. People think like you have all this emotion when you, you debate.

I don't feel, think that I do because they don't realize that, you know, I was trained to just, I mean,

I debated with all my siblings. It was a dinner time pass. It's a pastime that we do at dinner. My dad would just throw out a topic.

Slavery. I remember this slavery. I had to, I had to argue for slavery. I was like, wow, how do you do that one?

So my brother won that one. Hands down. Life is good in Egypt. There's flesh parts. So, so Mike, do you know for a fact that I just called you

Mike Chuck, Chuck, do you know for a fact if Mike knows every couple's relations or was that a, a conclusion that you drew from the information you had?

That was a statement made to me multiple times by multiple men that attended and were members of Mike's church.

Hard for me to call it a church. But no, I, I did much research out of love and concern for the folks there and out of a desire to handle the situation rightly.

At the outset, I spent months dealing with this, talking with all the parties involved and, and texting, emailing, calling.

And then once that final phone call took place, it was recorded and Mike and Tony and Bobby all hung up.

Then my responsibility was to warn the church at large of the situation.

And then some folks began to contact me that had left Grace Fellowship Church.

And I spoke with them. They put me in contact with others. I spoke to the pastor of Sycamore, Sycamore Baptist, Reformed Baptist Church there in the

Davenport area. And he's received over 18 former members of Grace Fellowship Church and, and tried to help heal their wounds and be a blessing to them.

And so much, much testimony has gone into everything that I've said, including that. So, so was I there?

Did I witness Mike's testimony from them? Yes. As far as you know, this is what you believe from the research you've done, that you believe that Mike knows this.

Absolutely. Okay. So there, that wouldn't be a lie. Kevin, the claim that you, that they went to ShepCon to recruit

Tony, you were part of that group, correct? Yeah, I went to Shepherd's Conference in 2015.

I was with Nick Roland and Mike Reed at the time. I was,

I didn't have direct knowledge that this was a recruiting trip to get Tony to come to Iowa.

It was intended to get to meet Tony. I think that the elders there had appreciated

Tony's ministry. They wanted to get closer to him. They wanted, you know, whether they wanted to learn from him or whether ultimately,

I mean, I was, I was a deacon at the time. I was not in the inner circle of the eldership.

So I don't, I don't know what they discussed. So, but I don't have direct knowledge that this was exactly a recruiting trip for Tony.

So I couldn't say that. However, that, that did kind of end up how it turned out.

So Chuck, you believed it was a recruiting trip? Do you know for a fact it's not?

It had the appearance and the effect of a recruiting trip. And so when, you know, when we speak, you know, it's one thing to be in a court of law and it's another to be speaking off the cuff.

And so that appearance and the effect of a recruiting trip. And that's the point that I'm seeing here is that, you know, there's things that I think, look, after what, four and a half hours you guys went,

I mean, I was, you know, I'm sorry, I'm older maybe than you guys. I had to take several bathroom breaks in that.

OK, so I know I missed some things. All right. You'll understand the bladder when you guys hit your 50s.

So the thing, though, is, is that there's, there could be claims that were made that are your perception that doesn't make it a lie.

Sure. You've now corrected him. If he doesn't repent of this, guess what?

He just committed slander because he now he now knows that you weren't committing a lie.

He said he said another lie. Tony moves to Quad Cities to plant the church in Kuala under GFC.

I was at the thing about Africa. Keokuk, Keokuk, was it was at the church in Africa or something?

No, no. Just that was part of. And but I don't

I don't quite know what the because this statement is just it says a lie. Tony moves to to their moves to Quad Cities to plant a church in Creole under GFC.

I that's that's not a complete thought. So I'm not I'm not sure what the lie is on that one.

So the perception that Tony had that he gave to me, as I can recollect from four years ago.

But here's here's the thing. I can I can speak to that, that my perception from Tony from four years ago was that he thought he was going to be involved in planting a church in Keokuk.

But here's the deal. Mike wants to get caught up in these minor details and ignore the glaring, glaring doctrines and practices that are harming men and women.

And it put men, women and children in extreme danger. He's a master at sleight of hand, if you will.

And so, yeah, and that's what I want to I want to get to. I want to finish these two more lies, because I just I don't want since we started with this,

I don't want to be accused of not reading the full thing and not addressing them all because I didn't respond to this. So I'm doing it now live one one hour, 27 minute timestamp on Chuck's interview, a lie that cannot be cross examined.

And then he has end quotes, I don't know where the beginning quote was, a testimony that could not be collaborated by anyone who has been out with me on college campuses for years.

I'd have to listen to an hour, 27 minutes to hear what that is. Oh, so, yeah, one of his one of his questions about you masturbate.

Yes, exactly. So, yeah, I don't go with Mike. Did you say that you were an eyewitness to that?

Yes. Yes. And it can't be a lie. UCLA campus. And there was at least one other witness to that.

So. OK, so another lie that Anthony has been forewarned about.

Which quote, by name, unquote, two hours, 57 minutes and 39 seconds to two hours, 58 minutes and 10 seconds lie.

Anthony Warren warned about as well, quote, Mike calls people out for their sin from the pulpit, unquote.

No evidence of that. There is many more. I many more. But I will see if these are interest of you.

Oh, my. Please, Kevin, you you were there. Not not only do

I have. Wow. A whole lie of Mike's part. Man, I mean, that that's.

OK, so Mike, did you really say that? I mean, I can't

I can't believe that my own my own daughter has been called out from the pulpit.

My Mike's son, Jack, multiple times, you know, and then he began to be confronted about that specific practice.

Then he switched the practice from action. And he did this for years, many years.

Wait a minute. Calling people by name. Wait a minute. We OK, because, again, remember, what's my goal in this?

Hold on, check. My goal in this is to help people see to be able to parse through, because this is not uncommon with lots of people.

The question that you have to do is say, what does it mean? There's no evidence of that. You have to ask, what does he mean by evidence?

Your eyewitness testimony doesn't count. And by the way, this is something that, Anthony, I did want to say much earlier.

This is what atheists do. Yeah, but hold on. I deleted it.

Yeah, well, if he deleted it all worse, but you would you would have to delete too many sermons because that has been a consistent practice from the very get go.

And, you know, I will say when he some I don't remember exactly who it was, but it became a point in time where he switched from naming them specifically to saying you unbelievers in the room.

We we see Chris saying, I've heard my call mouth from the pulpit. Now, Anthony, there's something that was said earlier

I wanted to address when you started this whole thing and you were going to you said you wanted to reach out and talk to these witnesses.

And you'll remember this, that I told you that I happened to be friendly with a longtime detective,

Jim Wallace. He was with the L .A. Sheriff's Department. Jay Warner Wallace is what he goes by as an author, to not be confused with the liberal

Jim Wallace. But but Jim has been a 20 year detective. He has worked cold case homicides.

His expertise is eyewitness testimony. And one of the things I knew you were going to do a Skype call and I told you if they're if they're willing, instead of you investigating it,

I would pay for, you know, Jim's time and I'd ask him to do it if he needed to be paid. And I said that everything you're doing is eyewitness testimony.

You know, I happen to know someone who is this is his specialty. He is like a world renowned expert in eyewitness testimony.

So, you know, we would have him do the investigation on this and see who's right.

And I believe that you went after you had that meeting. I asked you how, when I asked with that specifically.

And I'll let you tell me what tell everyone what you told me. I, you know what,

I don't remember, Andrew, you said they weren't interested about Wallace. Yeah, no, they weren't interested at all in that.

So because I did explain who he was, his books, he's got what God's crime scene, I think, is what the type or something like that.

His first was Cold Case Christianity, which is is really using his skills as a cold case, you know, as as, you know, doing cold cases to, you know, for for that purpose.

And even as a presuppositionalist, why I don't agree with with the evidential approach like that book has, it really is.

It was a wonderful approach. Yeah, just for the Christian to build faith.

Right. It was awesome. But here's here's I'm going to put this up on screen real quick because this is what

I would I would like. I'm going to do this so that I'm trying to just format it really quick.

But I have 12 questions. Yeah. So while we're waiting,

Andrew, let me let me get to the first question because he's been waiting very patiently. So, Chris Hudson, thank you for waiting patiently.

I told you a few minutes wanting to avoid that question. That's a great question that absolutely needs to be answered.

And so Christopher Hudson says this with all the issues with Grace Fellowship Church, would it be considered unwise to do joint street evangelism efforts with Tony Miano?

So, Kevin, you first and then Chuck. Kevin, what what do you say? I'll put my before they jump in,

I'll explain. I can't do ministry with Tony Miano because he's an unrepentant sin.

He's unwilling and refusing to reconcile with another believer.

So I can't do ministry with him. He shouldn't be doing ministry. Yeah. Yeah, sure.

I definitely agree with what Andrew just said. But but for me to answer the question on a personal level,

I've done street ministry with Tony. Like Chuck has said, I love

Tony. I love Mike Reed. I love the people at GFC. We know them very intimately and very well.

But, you know, knowing what these what the doctrines specifically that are being taught and Anthony mentioned it earlier, the amount you

I've called it a trail of destruction. I think you said something very similar to it. There's a lot of people that have been hurt under this.

And so if this is what you want to partner with, I don't think that that's a godly desire.

I think what we need here is the truth to be exposed for these men to come to repentance, you know, and to step down for ministry because I believe they're disqualified.

I, you know, I said in a comment there, if Mike is caught directly in these lies and Andrew has very convincing evidence that that is true, he is disqualified.

I've said before he does not practice sound speech and lies are not sound speech.

It's not being above reproach. He is disqualified. So I would say I would not do street ministry with anybody under that, under that umbrella.

Well, OK, let me challenge you, though, you know, because there is a difference here. Just because Tony is under that umbrella or under that church does not make

Tony guilty of Mike's sin, because what you did was the question was about Tony. And what you did was address what

Mike is doing. So there'd be a distinction there. No, not because of because of you're going to say because of that,

Tony says everything he does is under the ministry of the church and that all the money donated to him for ministry.

When you're on the street, you're not necessarily donating money. No, the problem is anybody who supports his ministry is also supporting

GFC. I mean, that is very, very clear from Tony's blogs and not everyone reads.

I mean, I haven't read that. They don't know that when Tony, I want to be fair with it, though. I know, but I'm telling everybody that I mean, you go read for yourself on Cross and Countess, but Chuck, go ahead and talk.

Yeah. So anyway, anyone else have anything to say? Oh, was Chuck going to say something? Oh, I'm sorry. It was me.

From my good looks, right? So, you know, when

Tony went to Grace Village Church, he didn't just become a quiet member.

Now, he signed on completely. He adopted all of Mike's dangerous doctrines.

And Tony immediately helped Mike put out a series of Ask the Pastor teachings where Tony and Mike together taught and defended

Mike's most dangerous doctrines. The meeting alone with the women systematically for the private meetings, the kissing of the women and the claim that pedophiles can become pastors and meet alone with children like Mike as a adulterer, as a pastor who meets alone with women.

So Tony helped teach and defend all of those things. He has not recanted them.

He has not repented of them. They have tried to hide them since they come under scrutiny, but there's been no repentance there.

And so Tony is completely complicit in all of that and more. And so to unite with Tony in gospel work is to be united with Mike Reed's dangerous doctrines and practices and to help advance them in the earth.

It lends credibility to Tony and credibility to Mike Reed and to these aberrant and abhorrent practices.

OK, so we got. Yeah. Can I add one more thing? Because, you know, authority, one of the things that I.

Yeah, Kevin, Kevin, go to Rob. He came in with a question. Then I have questions that I want to have.

Kevin Rose. Yeah, I mean, you're frozen. I don't know if you can hear that here. So, Rob, let me add you in.

And for folks who may remember, Rob was on here before he did a debate. Written about and he did a debate.

He was a Lutheran, debated Ken Cook, who was going to be doing a debate next week on baptism with another

Lutheran. But Rob, welcome. Did you have a question for us tonight? Yeah, actually, you know, since I actually subscribe to your upcoming talk with Justin Peters and stuff like that, it has to do with, you know, reaching out and stuff like that.

And I know like Dr. Anthony Sylvester does a fair share of like street team stuff. He just hogs the box.

You know, I guess I was trying to. Try to truncate some of ways that we could reach out to people, please, oppositionally, in light of maybe people not being super in love with the idea of like stopping and talking for a long period of time.

I like some fast and quick and dirty like ways to kind of engage in a conversation.

You know, I believe that if you could get somebody interested, whether they're risking their health or not, they're going to stay to have a conversation.

But just maybe some thoughts along those lines, I guess, was one of my questions.

Well, I don't know. I think if people are willing to stick around for protesting and standing on top of police cars to break police windows,

I guess they could stick around for a conversation. You know,

I didn't I didn't notice anyone complaining about those protests and that they weren't wearing masks, you know, like the ones

Anthony goes to where they're asking for the government to be open and everyone's saying, oh, look how dangerous they are putting everyone's life at risk.

OK, well, maybe here's another question in light of that. Well, or maybe somewhat related, like how

Anthony both. Well, and Chuck as well, anybody, you know, how would you deal with somebody maybe being like super confrontational, you trying to start a conversation, you know, due to oversensitivity to COVID -19 or or, you know, whatever legitimate fears or not, you know, maybe being super aggressive, you know.

I mean, it's going to be different for different situations. I mean, I think when I get out and do open air, I may.

I don't know that I'll do this. Anthony probably won't, but I may wear a mask and just put a microphone on just so that those people that have that it just takes that it doesn't my whole philosophy has been to do everything to keep me from being an offense to the gospel, but the gospel is offensive enough.

Let it be the offense. And that's what, you know, I would want to do. Yeah, a mask over your face would help you be less of an offense to.

That's why I'm putting my face in there, man. I don't think it's enough to help Andrew do this show with my mask on.

But, yeah, I mean, there's there's different things that I think, you know, Chuck and Anthony would handle it differently, though.

You know, I it'd be hard for me to say because I don't know what the confrontation would be.

Right. If someone's being confrontational over COVID when I'm doing open air and they're saying that I shouldn't be doing it.

I may I probably just off the cuff thinking I probably would point out the fact that, yes, you know,

COVID could be dangerous, but there's a chance you don't get that. But there's no chance you're avoiding, you know,

God's judgment. And so I would probably use the transition. Last last question, you know,

I'm sorry I interrupted the previous conversation. I apologize. This is Project Live. We do answer whatever questions come up.

So I happen to come across some information that in my area there's at least 50 percent unchurched group of people and through demographic research and stuff like that.

What is a way that I can try to reach out to those groups of people and without, you know, like happening to do like a bunch of stuff?

Like like try to direct my approach to try to talk to many of those people as possible.

Chuck, that might be a good question for you. I mean, Chuck has a church that you mentioned last week, a church that's very evangelistic.

What do you what do you think as far as reaching out to the community? Well, I pastor in Portland, Oregon and very conservative there.

Yes. Portland's boast is being the most atheist city in America. And so what

I've often said is Chesty Puller at the Frozen Chosen there in North Korea said to his men when they were surrounded, hey, good news, men.

We can attack in any direction. And so that that's that's the good news here.

It's probably a much larger percentage than 50. We walk out the door and every every cult is there.

Every false religion is there. But that's one thing to do, just start walking out the door and knock on the doors of your friends and neighbors there and say, hi, how you doing?

We're here to talk to you about Jesus Christ. And we've done that for years and had many, many, many, many thousands of profitable conversations.

Had people stand out in the cold, freezing to death, stand out in the heat, sweating, invite us in and feed us, invite us in and turn off their television.

We end up having a Bible study with their family. I mean, gospel adventures abound when you just start knocking on the door and say you're here to talk to them about Jesus Christ.

One of my favorite questions, too, at the door is if you were to die today, would you go to heaven? And typically they they say yes, unless they're an ardent atheist.

And then the next question is why or how? And then, you know, their worldview and what they're trusting in.

And you can bring the word of God to bear upon it. So door to door is a wonderful way, depending on your community. I don't know where you live.

Yeah, it doesn't work in New Jersey. Well, I've I've done it in more than I mean,

Portland is pretty sporty. If it works in Portland, I'd say it works in New Jersey. But but open air as well, of course, just I've gone straight to the mosque.

I've gone straight to the Catholic Church and just engage the folks there. We knocked on the mosque door and said we're there to talk about Jesus Christ on Friday night, their most populated prayer night.

And they invited us in. We had a wonderful conversation the entire evening. We left when we figured it was time we ought to leave.

And so directly taking the gospel to the Muslims where they're at, graciously, kindly,

Catholics, graciously, kindly going there and just one on one talking to them.

And on some occasions preaching when the crowd grew large outside, bringing the gospel right right to them.

Jehovah's Witnesses that we have large regional Jehovah's Witness conferences. And so, you know, you can find

Jehovah's Witnesses here and there are Mormons in your community two by two. And that's always wonderful if you see them pull over and engage them.

But the conferences, brother, they bring thousands of them together. Hey, now we can stand and we can preach the true

Christ and the true gospel to thousands of parish Jehovah's Witnesses all over.

Yeah, I live in southwestern Pennsylvania. So we're the land of Jehovah's Witnesses. Yes. Yes. I would say, you know, by and large, like it's weird, like the

Roman Catholics kind of stick to their own. And Jehovah's Witnesses, though, started here, kind of aren't that present.

Mormons pop up here and there. Like the cults aren't really that bad. It's more of like, I would say, a cultural

Malou, you know, an avoidance of, you know, anything to do with church.

It kind of, you know, kind of somewhat country, you know, rural kind of attitude.

And it's just slowly people drifted away from church and going to church. You know, this this generation's parents didn't go to church.

So therefore, this generation doesn't get either. That kind of thing kind of seems to be what's prevalent.

So chardon variety agnostics is what I call it. So yeah, most folks, you find them at parades, you find them at parades, those kind of public events.

You find them by the tens of thousands where we're at in one parade. You can walk the entire parade route and preach the gospel to all of them and hand out tracts along the sides.

It's it's just a wonderful opportunity. Yeah. So, I mean, I think there's some some ideas we had, of course.

So I'm sure, Rob, you'll be in next week to watching, you know, you won't be able to ask questions, but next week will be a debate with similar to debate with as yours, which with on baptism.

So I'm sure you'll you'll be watching. I'm going to put you in backstage for now, and I'm going to put up.

Mason had a question before I go to the maybe I'll end the show with these 12 questions from Mike Reed to answer.

But we should do it after this question and we'll end the show with it as well. Well, brothers, at the beginning of the show, there were several things addressed to me.

Oh, yeah. Yeah, we get that's right. You are answering to do, young man. All right.

Mason tracks are still. Yeah. Next time I got to get the forehead.

All right. Mason, good night, says, hey, brothers, could you address the wider group activities?

For example, say Tony is at an event such as SFOI, which is

Sports Fan Outreach International. It's an outreach goes to the Super Bowl every year. I've been involved in.

I've done some leading us in teams there such as that outreach. And you are, too.

Would you feel OK doing that? I ask, what do you guys say?

I mean, for me, I guess I wouldn't have as much an issue maybe if he's there on some other team.

It doesn't involve me. Yeah, but that's that's you. Right. So, yeah.

So so Chuck, how would you how do you feel about that? So it's one thing, right, to go and be preaching with Tony at one of his events or one of GFC's events, because then you'd be certainly supporting doctrines of Mike and the elders at GFC.

But what about at a at an event like this? Let's say they let's say the Super Bowl outreaches out in Tampa Bay, Florida.

So, I mean, my prayer is that outstanding events like that and the wonderful men who lead them up would hear the truth about what's going on at Grace Fellowship Church, hear the truth about the dangerous doctrines and practices

Mike Reed teaches and engages in and Tony's involvement in helping teach them and propagate them to the earth and that Tony would receive a great deal of support from the church.

He would receive a call to repent and an invitation to stay home until such a time that he does repent.

So that that's my hope on the broader scale, on the broader level, that these these fine ministries that Tony has been yoked with for good reason, because historically he was a faithful minister of the gospel and a defender of truth.

He had sound morality and sound theology. Presently, he still preaches the gospel, but the gospel for Tony has become the sheep's wool for the fangs that Mike has given him with these these doctrines.

And these are these are no light issue. These are incredibly dangerous. And Mike is propagating them in the earth, carrying them, exporting them to Africa.

And Tony's actually wrote the curriculum for Mike that he took to Africa to teach the pastors to meet alone with the women.

And so my hope, my prayer is that Tony would be uninvited until such a time that he thoroughly repents and recants of these things.

If Tony is there, my counsel to other ministers of the gospel would be not to not to be on his team, to refuse to work with him out of love for Christ, out of love for the church of Christ and out of love even for the gospel they're ministering, because what

Tony's involved in brings shame and ill repute upon the gospel. So Chuck Marcy says,

Pastor Chuck, have you ever thought of putting together a conference about evangelism? Yes, Marcy.

We had an annual conference for many years. We haven't had one for a few years now. We still... Anthony, have you and I spoken at that one?

You know, we do one in Jersey, Ohio, NorCal. He's been to North Carolina.

In the future, brother, in the future. At least we're not to his standard. That's how I see how it is.

We're not good enough for his conference. Our heads will be down. Not true, not true.

We have, Marcy, and God willing, we will again. And what sweet and wonderful times they were.

We carried the gospel in the midst of the conference. We taught, we preached and instructed and equipped the saints from the pulpit in the church.

And then we went out to the street every day in Portland, up in Seattle and in the surrounding area.

So it was a wonderful design and blessing. Well, let us know when you're going to do that again,

Anthony. I'll come up, not just speak, but we'll participate. We'll get you to work in the pulpit as well.

Yeah. So let me do this. And I want to share some, Chuck, and then

I want to get to the issues that, the issues I brought up with you. Because I do think that I want to get answers to them.

So let me just share real quick. These are 12 questions that I have for Mike Reed.

Okay. Now, I want you to notice, I did the same exact thing when it came to dealing with a cult known as the

Church of Wells. Is to list some very specific yes, no type questions that make the issues clear.

And this is what I've heard over the last two weeks. This is what

I think needs to be answered by Mike. If the answer to these are different than what these men have said, and they know that, then that would be something to say they're slander and lying.

Or if his position has changed, because I think all of these questions, we know the answers to according to audio that we have.

Unedited, uncut audio that Chuck has on his website. So maybe his position has changed since then.

Then he could state that. And that, see, if he, if, look, if his position changed, then that would justify why he, because I know you guys referenced him taking down audios.

And I think last week Chuck said that there was reasons, but I didn't hear what that reason was.

But here's the 12 questions that I would like to see Mike Reed answer. And Anthony, I know you have a list of questions that you sent to Mike.

Maybe if Mike does come on, these could be the questions, because these are the 12 questions

I think are of importance for Mike to answer. So one, do you meet with women alone on a regular basis?

Yes or no? Now, this is not, you know, do I meet with the same woman over and over again, like every week?

This is, do you have a regular practice of meeting with women alone that are not your wife?

Two, do you ask details about spousal intimacy? Yes or no?

Have you ever said, quote, to trust the elders, unquote, is to, quote, to trust

God, unquote. So let's say that again. Have you ever said to not trust the elders is to not trust

God? Did I say it wrong? Yeah, you said it wrong. They're equating themselves on the level of God in terms of how they interpret scripture.

Yes. It's every other church, every other pastor, every other theologian. Their interpretation is the right way.

So that's what that question is about. And then follow up to that was something I heard said was, have you ever said whatever the elders would counsel you for your life is perfect?

In other words, when the elders give counsel, do you believe that is the right counsel?

So even if they think scripture says otherwise, do you, have you ever said that?

Have you ever said that GFC, Grace Fellowship Church, is the only true church in Quad Cities?

Now, have you said it? This was something that was, why do

I bring these, those three? The reason those three, the last three, if you're quoting the elders counsel, the elders trusting the elders is trusting

God, or the elders counsel is being equivalent to being perfect. We're saying it's the only city. Those are cultic terms.

Once a person puts himself at the level of saying that they speak for God, does that sound familiar?

Yes, the Pope says that. Yes, Joseph Smith says that. Yes, Muhammad said that. That gives you an idea where that comes from.

That's not from the Bible. If you didn't say that, then just clearly lay that out. Say no.

Number six, do you believe the elders have nearly unlimited authority in the lives of the congregants?

And this was brought up last week with this whole slave and this plantation model. Do you believe that you have ultimate, an almost,

I'm putting the word nearly there, right? Nearly so it's not an absolute, but pretty close to an unlimited authority.

And in people's lives, do you think you have the right to talk about sexual intimacy with someone else's wife?

Number seven, have you said to someone or have you said if someone owns guns is in military or police, they have premeditated murder in their hearts?

Chuck brought that out. Now, I should say at this point, I talked in a joking way about choking someone out that kisses my wife.

That probably was a little bit more offensive to someone. I didn't realize that he was a pacifist, so he probably explains why he might have been upset.

Anthony, you said he was upset with me making that comment. It was a joke and wasn't meant to be.

I didn't understand his pacifist backgrounds. But did you actually say to someone that if they own a gun or they're in the police or they're military, they have a premeditated murder in their heart?

Okay, just if you said it, we don't need rationalization of why. It's just yes or no to each of these.

Do you share details about counseling sessions with other members? Well, that one we already know the answer to.

As we read tonight, the answer would be he would say no and eyewitnesses would say yes.

I guess all you have to do is produce those where he does it. But we'll leave that there.

Do you share details? Actually, here, Stephanie says, does Mike discuss intimate details with these women?

This is the question. Mike is deflecting by hanging his charge on whether he knows this about every person in the church.

So that was what Stephanie had said. I can answer that directly. The answer to Stephanie's question is yes on both of those.

Yeah, and that's exactly the point of what we're bringing up here in some of these questions, right? So because this is a key saying that this show is being used to provide slander.

Well, these are the doctrines that have come out. If Mike doesn't believe these things, then say no.

Show where you have changed your view from what has been said in the past. And these guys say is documented. Show where you change your view.

And then what would be is, okay, these guys have to recognize you've changed your view and you repent of this.

And you have to make that public, that you repent of all this. And there has to be evidence that that behavior stopped, right?

Now, if they're accusing you guys of slander, when they actually do believe these things and do teach these things, then that's not slander.

It's not lying in any way, if they actually teach it. Number nine, did you ever imply that men and women should be able to kiss someone else on the lips that is not his or her spouse?

We're not saying, did you do it? Did you ever apply? Because, well,

I think, Chuck, you played audio of that. We have a bunch of audio of that, yeah. Ten, have you ever shared details of your own sexual intimacy with any people in your counseling sessions with members of the opposite sex?

Yes or no? Number 11, do you believe you are infallible against sexual immorality?

Yes or no? Number 12, by name, what specific pastors, theologians, and or teachers have condoned the practice of meeting with women alone in counseling sessions?

Now, I think, again, he would say to that, none. But, you know,

I'm not sure about that. He's used people's names in the past. He did that with me in January at G3.

He just kind of throws them out there. Okay, well, you had, what, a five -hour session?

Five and a half hours on Zoom meetings, and we had 45 -50 minutes at G3. During that time, did he reference

Phil Johnson? Not saying he condones it, but did he use Phil Johnson's name the same way he did with Chuck to say that Phil knew about it and didn't deny it?

In other words, to say that, you know, to use it in such a way as he did with Chuck is to use it in the negative sense.

Did he do that? Yes. At G3, specifically, he did it with Josh Bice, Vodie Bauckham, and Phil Johnson.

Specifically, he did it with those three. On the Zoom meetings we've had, he specifically referenced

Phil again, and he referenced Bobby and the other guy, Evangelist, who supposedly investigated him.

And Phil, I mean, I could pull this up again, but Phil made it crystal clear that he doesn't support that.

Here's a question as I pull up Phil's thing. Why don't you read

Stephanie's question for these guys? Yeah, so Stephanie, thank you for another question here.

For Mike, Tony, and the elders, would repentance mean stepping down from their positions?

Would repentance mean they recognize they are disqualified? So, let's ask the pastor first,

Chuck. Pretty simple questions there to answer. And then, Kevin, I'll let you give your thoughts too.

Yes, I was just writing to Stephanie. Good question. Yeah, for Mike, Tony, and the elders, would repentance mean stepping down from their positions?

Absolutely. They are woefully unqualified. They have taught, and defended, and acted on these doctrines for years.

And it's not just these doctrines. It's people like Kevin, and Gin Yont, and many, many others who have suffered beneath these things, these abuses of the pastoral ministry and position.

And so, absolutely, they need to step down. I fully believe the Church should be dissolved, and the true saints there should find genuine churches like the

Sycamore Reformed Baptist Church there in that local area. Would repentance mean they recognize they are disqualified?

Yes. Yes, absolutely. But, yeah, praying for that.

May God grant that. Amen. So, Kevin, what do you say about that?

Well, this is one of the things that I did write about in my last article.

And if we closely examine the qualifications of an elder in 1

Timothy 3 and Titus 1, you know, there are some things here that point us as to what disqualifies a man.

One of those items is a man that is sound of speech. And we have argued a number of different things that Mike has said, not only to my own wife, but to members of the congregation, that indicate,

I mean, it's very clear that this is not sound speech. Now, is this a one -off incident, or is it a pattern in his life?

And I will tell you from my experience, it is a pattern. And so, and even a friend of mine, okay, a friend of mine that their family was also excommunicated from the church, had confronted

Mike on some of these things. And Mike said to him, so what you are saying is, if I admit to these things,

I'm admitting that I'm disqualified. So, I believe Mike knows that if he admits to these things, he's disqualified, which is why he continues to double down on his teachings and continues to stick with them.

Now, if five years ago, he had said, you know what, we're making some course corrections on some of these things, and come out in the church service and said, we're changing our opinion on these things.

We don't believe anymore that I need to meet to the level that I'm meeting with women and these sorts of things.

I think there was an opportunity, but this has gone on so long, and now it's being exposed, and it's continuing to be exposed.

And what does Mike do? He can't really repent of them now and hang on to any sort of legitimacy with himself and with the other members of the church.

So, there's no doubt he's disqualified. And I'm not questioning you.

I am, but I'm not. I'm not questioning your trustworthiness. But if Mike said that, if that's what

Mike said and Mike believes, and he's continuing with it, then Mike is the one who is not only lying to himself and not to himself, but to everyone else because he obviously would know.

But when he accuses you and Chuck of slander, he's actually the one committing slander. Okay? Because, I mean, what

I've seen from you guys is specifics. Here's something from Ted Black. He said, if anyone missed it, this is what

I posted earlier. Mike gave my now ex -wife a homework assignment to have intimacy so many times a week and then report back to him as if we fulfilled that assignment.

So, let me read real quick again what Phil Johnson said. Let's be clear.

He's an eyewitness. Correct. He is somebody… Multiple eyewitnesses that I'm hearing. …happened to him and his ex -wife now.

I can affirm that, what Ted said. Mike had done that with myself and my wife as well.

There was things like that. Maybe not the exact same assignment, but similar to it.

Now, I mean, I should almost replay that audio clip of him staying with Phil Johnson. But, you know, in case people weren't here last week, this is what

Phil Johnson said about Mike Reed. Okay? This is what he gave me and it says, quote, whoever made the claim that Phil Johnson has no problem with his close pastoring techniques…

Now, keep in mind, this is Phil saying. What is it that Mike did say?

He implied that Phil didn't have a problem with it. Not that he endorsed it, but he didn't have a problem with it.

That's what Phil's addressing. Whoever made the claim that Phil Johnson has no problems with his close pastoring techniques is dishonest.

I have major problems with Mike Reed's view on eldership and counseling. And I have personally told him that.

Specifically, I think the ideas referred to as close pastoring techniques are abusive, inappropriate, unnecessary, invasive, and fraught with evil intentions.

That is particularly true of his one -on -one counseling sessions where he asks intimate questions of other men's wives replete with kisses.

If he is claiming that he has my impreture on any of those things, he certainly knows better.

If it's true that he is using my name to ward off criticism of these cultish practices, he is being deliberately dishonest.

If anyone has email or proof in writing that he has invoked my name as a supporter of any of these things, send it to me and I'll confront him again.

And, Anthony, you have that because you just said he's done it recently. So this practice continues.

And I think what you're doing, Anthony, here is to expose this practice, to expose the fact that this is the behavior that we see with him.

Now, I said I wanted this to be educational, folks. I wanted you to see this is the way people behave.

When I see someone doing these type of tactics, I know they're trying to avoid not answer.

Okay? I read the exchange with he and I. Let me read an exchange,

Anthony, that Mike Reed sent to you and I on Facebook. He said, the elders of Grace Fellowship are willing to have me go on your podcast with specific conditions to be worked out later.

But in general, it would be as follows. Mediation Q &A with myself and one accuser.

Mediator is an unbiased party with little to no knowledge of the issues, pre -agreed upon and signed terms of agreement outlining topics that will and will not be covered and the manner of response.

And so he sent that to us. And I don't know if you ended up responding. I didn't get to it.

But the issue I see there is, again, it's the idea of trying to control the conversation.

To control the discussion. He's going to say what can and can't be discussed. Well, the reality is that what we're talking about here is his doctrines, not mediation.

As far as I know, and, you know, Kevin, you correct me if I'm wrong.

I haven't heard you say that there's, you've said that he's disqualified because of his handling of his words and things like that.

But have you specifically had a sin that you had against him where you've said he has sinned in this way?

Or is it the teachings and the doctrine and the practices that you've had issue with? Well, this is kind of the heart of one of the matters, which is

I have been accused of not practicing Matthew 18. So there's a couple different things.

Number one, when we first came out of the church, we didn't understand really very much about what

I've come to learn in the year and a half since we've left. Okay, so we have learned, we have educated ourselves.

So they would accuse me of accusing them and that I didn't practice

Matthew 18. Well, what I wrote to them in my final letter, we had a series of letters that went back and forth with them, is that this was not a

Matthew 18 issue because I was not bringing sin against them. What we said is we had some serious concerns about the doctrines, the practices of the church and how that was affecting our family.

And because of that, we simply wanted to leave. And for our efforts, we were, you know, we were excommunicated.

So, you know, we've not tried to make this a personal thing. Again, I've said earlier,

I love Mike and he was my pastor. I appreciated many of the things that happened under his ministry, if you will.

But we can't now, knowing what we know, we cannot ignore the things that are in front of us that you guys are really doing a good job in showing.

OK, so now, Chuck, let's let me get to the things, you know, because we're getting close to time. And unlike Anthony, I don't go over maybe a little bit, but not hours.

This isn't going to be a five hour show. OK, so my some of the issues I have with you, you know, you know, it seems that you and Anthony may have talked about this thing with Bobby.

I don't. This is me personally. OK, and granted, I'm not in with all the details that you guys know, but I believe that it was a overstepping, in my opinion, of you saying that Bobby was comparing them to guys that would be, you know, knowingly.

I forget the word that was used with with an enabler. Yeah. So I think that was an over.

What I said was that Tulian had his enablers. Todd Bentley had his enablers and Mike Reed and Tony Miano have their enablers and chief amongst them.

You find Bobby McCurry and I stand by that statement. It's a true statement. And I know that you don't you don't know all the history behind that,

Andrew. So I get that and I'm happy to to speak to that. But, Bobby, you do know this, I think.

And it's it's there in the link I provided to the dangerous doctrines of Mike Reed on YouTube.

But in that final phone call between Mike Reed, Tony Miano and myself,

Bobby was on there as well. And this is after, again, months of texts, emails and phone calls to all of them individually.

And now this is a corporate gathering coming together to discern exactly what's going on with Mike Reed in Davenport, Iowa.

And so final call, Bobby's on it. What Bobby heard on that call was, yes, indeed. Mike Reed meets alone systematically on a weekly basis for private shepherding of the women.

He heard, yes, indeed. Mike Reed believes he cannot fall in adultery.

He is unable to. His boast is Christ. He will not fall in adultery.

Therefore, he can do this practice. He can carry out this practice because it's safe.

He can't fall. When I said, are you better than King David? Then King David, a man after God's own heart, who fell with Bathsheba leading to the murder of Uriah.

He said King David wasn't even saved. When I said, what about the pastors?

So many pastors who have fallen after meeting with women consistently in counseling situations where there was no accountability.

He said those pastors weren't saved men. And so he was consistent in his doctrine. And then trying to show him a logical extension of his doctrine, that he is a serial adulterer who is now a professed repentant pastor who meets alone systematically with women.

If that's good for him, it's safe, morally safe for him, and he can't fall. Then it would be good and safe for child molesters to then repent, confess

Christ as Lord, become pastors and meet alone with children. Mike Reed signed on to that, yes, twice over.

He said, yes, they can do that. They can be a repentant pedophile, be a pastor, meet alone with children.

Bobby sat silent on that phone call, didn't bat an eye, didn't say a word in protest.

He heard Mike say it all. He's a firsthand witness. That's not the same because look,

I know in that G3, Anthony approached Bobby about this, right?

And by Anthony's testimony, Bobby just said, basically Bobby had like a, hey,

I'm not involved with it. Mike's here, go talk to Mike. And all he did was set that up.

So that doesn't sound like he's enabling, that sounds like he just doesn't want to deal with it.

He has someone that he's friends with in the church. He knows that he sounds like he knows there's problems.

He just doesn't want to deal with it. Maybe he doesn't want to lose the friendship. Maybe it's, you know,

I think that there have been several people that over this issue have lost relations with Tony.

And maybe he just figures, you know what? You're going to that church and he's trying to lovingly pull

Tony out the way he thinks is best. That wouldn't be necessarily enabling. No, that alone wouldn't be.

But my point is, that's the first point, that Bobby has full knowledge of Mike's doctrines and deeds.

He has full knowledge of what Mike does with women and that Mike lent that same ministry model to pedophiles.

And yet he was silent in all that. And over the years, many times Bobby has done things like this.

Let me see if I can get that. You won't see that. How about you just read that? Well, so that's

Bobby on Facebook. And I wasn't on Facebook at the time. Somebody sent it to me.

But Bobby saw someone talking about the issues on Facebook. And Bobby jumped into the conversation.

And it was in clear defense of Mike Reed and Tony.

And Bobby says it's a 16 -minute, and he puts asterisks at each end, edited video, suggesting that it was edited, which has been

Mike's defense all these years. Mike has that defense up on his website right now. Tony makes that defense constantly, that somehow

I have, with my Jedi editing techniques, I have made Mike say things.

He can't even get you in this program to learn how to use your mic. I know it. I know it. I'm amazing.

And so supposedly I have diabolically edited Mike's teachings to make him teach things he didn't actually teach.

And Bobby was using that same argument there. The man responds to him respectfully.

He, Mike, stands accused by his own words, is lacking discernment that he has done anything to be accused of improper behavior.

To this point, I doubt that he may do that in the future. That is a possibility. He's setting himself up as untouchable.

And so Bobby's done things like that on Facebook. Most recently here, once again on Facebook, when

I put out my most recent article in February on this topic, which was really in response to Kevin Yant's three articles, and then

I saw some claims that Kevin was a liar and a slander. And I thought, no,

I'm not going to sit by and let Mike defend his grievous practices and teachings by slandering

Kevin and his wife after they've already suffered under Mike's abusive so -called pastor so many years.

And so I spoke up again, writing that fresh blog. Bobby responded, not with my name in particular, but everyone knew exactly what he was talking about.

Bobby responds with a blog post, saying, The Lord is my help. This is something

I need to remember daily. Some of the most hurtful attacks in the Christian life are from within God's visible church.

But I have a strong tower who increases my love for him and those who falsely accuse and seek to divide, falsely accuse and seek to divide.

If Yant heard something about me on the internet from someone you've never met, and you've actually labored with me, known me, stayed in my home, et cetera, and you're willing to believe an unfounded rumor or hearsay,

I don't mind if you jettison me from all social media platforms today. If you're just OK with piling on these things like a keyboard warrior and won't actually ask me about them personally, you're really not the friend you or I thought you were.

Anyway, Tony Miano immediately grabbed onto this Facebook post from Bobby, and Tony says,

I couldn't have said it better. This encouraged me this morning. And indeed, they drew together.

They were feeling a little heat over their cover -up of predatory perversion of pastoral ministry as it was getting some exposure from my blog article and from Kevin's articles.

And so they were standing together in that. I responded on Facebook to Bobby. And I said, my dear friend

Bobby, you've been in my home, played catch with my children, held my first grandchild, preached in my pulpit and ministered the gospel alongside me on the street many times.

I loved you then as I do now. Everyone hates division. However, the Apostle Paul tells us in Acts 20, 28 through 31, that division will be necessary when dangerous false teachers and false teaching infiltrate from without and rise up from within the body of Christ.

He warns of savage wolves who will come in among us, not sparing the flock, speaking perverse things.

Who's telling lies, Bobby? And what are the supposed lies about? You shall not bear false witness should cause those engaged in deception to tremble because our omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent, holy

God wrote it with his finger on a tablet of stone. You're drawing sympathy from people that don't know that for over three years you've been defending and enabling

Mike Reed and Tony Miano's indefensible predatory perversion of pastoral ministry.

In which, quote, repentant adulterers become pastors who hug, kiss, and meet alone with all the women and teenage girls of the church for weekly private shepherding.

And repentant pedophiles can become pastors and meet alone with children. They don't know you're knowingly defending and enabling a wolf in sheep's clothing who digs into the sex lives of married couples, shares explicit details of his sex life, facilitate wives sharing details from their marriage beds, including frequency per week, techniques used with no information being off limit to the pastor.

They don't know you're defending and enabling a hyper -authoritarian pastor who lords over every detail of his enslaved congregants' lives, financial decisions, marital sex, no contraception, marriage to menopause babies, no

Christmas, no Easter, no voting, no guns, etc. They don't know you're defending and enabling a pastor who likens pastoral ministry to being a slave master on a plantation as he twists

Hebrews 13, 7, and 17 and expounds on his pastoral authority over finite details of his congregants' lives.

It's time to repent of your part in the cover -up of Mike Reed. I wrote this response on Facebook was you're lying, you're slandering.

And then within, I don't know, 20 minutes, 30 minutes, he deleted the entire post.

It all disappeared. And he blocked me on Facebook, which is exactly how he went about things years ago on Twitter when he did the same thing.

It was held accountable for it because the arguments that he makes, the accusations he makes, they can't stand in the light of day.

And that's enabling, that's defending, that's mitigating.

I don't think it's at the same level, though, as, you know,

Trevelyan and others. Well, no, no, I don't accuse them of being totally enabling.

I accuse them of being enablers. We disagree on that. Right? There are enablers that say similar things.

Hey, it's weird. Instead of saying it's wicked, it's weird. Bobby says it's weird. Is it just weird?

No, it's wicked. It's unconscionable. I understand what you're trying to say.

Yeah. I'm just disagreeing with you. And there's more. So let me just ask this real quick, because this was the other kind of charge

I made against you. I felt that, you know, toward the end of the show last week, you were judging

Mike's motives. Now, I've already said I can't remember the specifics.

So if I need to, I'll go get that and get it to you. But, you know, because this was one of the issues that, you know, you were an eyewitness to that we brought up with Tony.

When Tony was accusing me of being prideful and arrogant, you know, he was doing it and then assuming things, right?

He was telling me the motive. He was telling me that I secretly wanted someone to write a song about me because I was secretly wanting to have, you know, an affair with her.

You know, and, you know, it was like I wanted to be, I forget the exact wording he had, but, you know,

I want to be serenaded by her or whatever. You know, and it was like when

I say no, that was the furthest thing from my mind. It's like, yes, it was. Right. I don't,

I have to, just as I called him out on that, I have to call you out. If you're judging someone's motives, unless they've said it.

Now, there's been some things, as we already discussed on the program tonight, where it's your opinion.

Sure. And I think that you should be more careful to identify, because I think it would be helpful for folks to identify what is your opinion and what you have documented.

When you have had things documented, you've given it. But I think it's wrong to say

Mike did this for this reason. And when you're assessing a motive, I think that's wrong.

So, again, I don't recall what you're talking about, and you don't either.

So is it possible that I erred in that way? It is certainly possible in a four hour conversation.

I might have I might have given my opinion about what one of his motives was in one of these issues.

That is certainly possible. I mean, to be clear and dogmatic on the things that I know to be factual.

And I need to be I mean, to be clear when I have many witnesses corroborating behaviors that match the things that he's clearly taught.

But do I know all of his motives? I certainly don't. I don't know what what drives him. It's just so it's your opinion.

Well. All right. I have to get this. All right. Here's a question that Anthony put up from Humble Clay.

And this is important thing is this and I want to get to is what are the motives for Chuck and Kevin for lying?

Because, look, again, you see this behavior where someone's accusing everyone of lying, but they can't give you specifics.

And when they do give you specifics, they give you half truths. A half truth is a lie. When you state something for the purpose of of purposely deceiving someone, when you answer it.

And if this is what Mike was doing in the questions he was asking me, then they were deliberate lies.

I pointed out to him that we're talking about the audio with Maria's testimony or sorry, the blog with Maria's testimony, not an audio.

And yet he kept going to the audio. So even when corrected, he still went back to something that is the that's the truth, but it's out of the context of what's being said.

And that would make it a lie. And if he's doing it purposely, like if he's knowledgeable about what he's doing, then that's that is willful deception.

And a deception is a lie. And when you see people that do this, they tell you half truths and what they're saying is true.

But it's just in the wrong context or it's in the wrong time order. Or, you know, I see this a lot with people.

What they'll do is they'll say something's true over here. But three years later, this happened and they put them together as if it's the same timeline.

That's deceptive. That's a lie. When people do these things, it's a lie. Deception is a lie.

And so I can see with where there could be that on Mike's part in this discussion.

Because I mean, what Kevin, you just said blows my mind. If he knowingly knows that he would be disqualified by admitting to these things.

And so he continues doing it. If that's the case, then yeah, that's a motivation for keeping this going and for trying to silence everything.

And I want you to notice his goal in the messages he's had with me has been you must stop these programs.

Well, I'm sorry, Mike Reed. I don't get my marching orders from you. You want to come on and answer these 12 questions that I have for you.

We'll be happy to do it. For six or seven weeks now,

I've been reaching out to him continuously to come on. I've asked him multiple times on the Zoom meetings.

I also when he made the charge that I didn't properly investigate his side of things.

I then said, hey, I will gladly take the phone numbers of every one of your congregants. And I'd be happy to call them.

I would even call the other two elders. And to this day, I don't have any phone numbers.

So he's been completely 100 % unwilling to come on to the podcast to answer questions, which he received ahead of time.

He has questions in his hands, the very questions I'm going to ask him, he has in his hands. He does not want to come on to do that.

He doesn't want to allow me to talk to anybody there. And that's the reality. Well, here's the thing,

Anthony. The arguments that I've heard from him is that the three of you are slandering, lying, gossiping.

Okay. And this is all about reconciliation and the bride of Christ. Now, first off, I just got to say, and this is not,

I'm not agreeing with Chuck saying it's a cult. But when I hear people always talk about the church as the bride of Christ, and you question me and it's against the bride of Christ.

I hear that in the Church of Wells. I hear that in others. Okay. That's kind of cultic.

But here's the thing, Anthony. If it's all about reconciliation, here's the thing. I'm being really clear here.

We were clear last week. Tony Miano, a week later, still has not reached out to me for reconciliation.

If Tony Miano is in Mike Reed's church as a member in good standing with Mike Reed now knowing that there is a charge against Tony of sin that three men have been witness to.

Okay. That he's not dealing with. That he's refusing to deal with.

And Mike is still calling him a member in good standing. And yet Mike challenges everyone else saying that they need to follow

Matthew 18. When his style of Matthew 18 is meet with me and other men.

Well, okay. But while we're on this. Let me just finish. Because what that means is one of two things.

Either, and I'm not saying that Mike's a hypocrite, but it's either that he's a hypocrite or that he's trying to divert from the real issues.

I believe it's probably the latter. I believe he's trying to divert from the real issues at hand.

His teachings themselves. But the fact is any challenges to any of these men, these three men here saying that they need to reconcile with Mike when

Mike doesn't within his own church. Those he has authority over doesn't charge them to reconcile with people.

You can figure out what that would be. And then he has no right to challenge anybody else.

Anthony. So a couple of things here, because I know we should be ending really soon. And I want to make sure we get to these two parts.

So this question is going to be for Chuck. And then Kevin, I'm going to have you kind of go through timeline on this.

Because now, first of all, Chuck, the claim has been Matthew 18, Matthew 18,

Matthew 18, follow Matthew 18. I'm not so certain that this is a

Matthew 18 issue. And I know you make the argument it's not.

I know Andrew makes the argument it's not. So Chuck, Pastor Chuck, can you tell us pretty quickly here what this actually is?

What Matthew 18 actually is versus what you think this actually is? Well, Matthew 18 very clearly is a personal reconciliation text where I sit against Andrew or Andrew sits against me and we sit against each other and we need to work it out.

And Matthew 18 tells us how to do that, how to reconcile. So when a brother sins against a brother, that's

Matthew 18. That's what Jesus said to that. But we're dealing more with, in my estimation, a wolf in sheep's clothing.

For me at this point, dealing with this for years, having full knowledge of the situation and dealt much directly with my.

Well, let's be fair. I mean, let's say a wolf in sheep's clothing, right? I mean, because that's the charges against him.

Well, yes, as a group, I will say if possible. But Matthew 7 would speak more to that.

Verse 15, beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.

You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thorn bushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.

We have an excessive pile of really bad, rotten, horrible, dangerous, don't eat that fruit that we're warning people about.

It's the kind of fruit that a ravenous wolf or sheep in wolf's clothing come with.

And sheep in, excuse me, wolves in sheep's clothing, ravenous wolves, savage wolves, false teachers, false prophets, those all are somewhat interchangeable, the same type of character here in the

New Testament. And what we find is not a Matthew 18 situation, but much more of a

Titus 1 .9 and following situation, where it says to elders to hold fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and convict those who contradict.

And so men who come contradicting sound doctrine need to be exhorted and convicted.

Verse 10, for there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped.

So deceivers coming with false doctrine whose mouths must be stopped. That's my goal. My goal as a pastor is to stop the mouths of Mike Reed and those helping to propagate his dangerous doctrines and practices.

It continues, whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole households, harming households like the

Yont household, Kevin and Jen, and many others, Ted Black and his wife, whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole households, teaching things which they ought not for sake of dishonest gain.

One of them, a prophet of their own, said, Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.

Mike is accusing everyone who is exposing him of being a liar, just like these that we find here in Titus 1.

Verse 13, this testimony is true, therefore rebuke them sharply. When men are engaged in the kind of behavior and teaching that Mike Reed and Tony Miano, as his helper, are engaged in, they are to be rebuked sharply for the protection of the body of Christ locally and corporately.

That they may be found sound in the faith, that they ultimately might come to repentance and be made sound in the faith.

Verse 14, not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth to the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, and hear me,

Mike Reed's doctrines are defiled. To those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but even their mind and conscience are defiled.

When you look at Mike's practices and teachings regarding women and his pastoring of women or shepherding of women, and what he has lent to pedophiles, it is defiled.

What he calls moral is wicked and abominable. It's defiled.

Nothing is pure. But even their mind and conscience are defiled. They profess to know

God, but in works they deny him. They profess to know God. That's the sheep's wool.

But in works they deny him, being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified for every good work.

And so it's much more of a Titus 1, 9 through 16, I believe that was, or a Jude 3 and 4 issue where they turn the grace of God into lewdness, and they bring these horrific doctrines into Christ's church.

It's also, as Pastor Justin Pierce puts it, 1 Timothy 5, 19 and 20, which

I dealt with on my Rap Report podcast. No, actually we dealt with it here, sorry, Apologetics Live a few weeks ago with Matt Chandler.

Do not take a charge against an elder except by the evidence or two or three witnesses. We've had more than two or three witnesses with the comments here tonight.

And then verse 20 of that says, As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may fear.

And then Pastor Justin says, A pastor who has found sinning is to be publicly rebuked, so the whole body fears in sin.

And I think that's the passage that's being addressed here. What we're doing on this show is addressing these doctrines.

And the fact that Mike is not willing to come on to defend them, I mean, it almost leaves us with the only conclusion that he doesn't want to admit that this is what he actually teaches.

The result, maybe. Yeah, no, that's right. But here's, so here's the thing.

Hold on, someone's typing. Okay. Sorry. So yourself.

Yeah. So I would agree that it's not, that it's not a Matthew 18 issue, but let's give it to him.

Let's say that this is a Matthew 18 issue. Okay. Let's just give it to Mike, say

Matthew 18 issue. Seven. Okay. So let's say it is a Matthew 18 issue.

I have more than fulfilled Matthew 18. You have. Yeah. But you're a member of the church.

Kevin, you were a member of the church and deacon there. What did you do? Because you're the one who a lot of people have confided into.

You're the one who, you know, put me in contact with many, with 10 other witnesses that I talked to.

Right. 11 actually now. And, and, and there's many more that are out there that haven't talked to.

So what was your process before you left the church? When your eyes were open, what did you do?

Let's, let's, let's see how you fulfilled this process. Yeah. I really appreciate given an opportunity to say, talk about this publicly because the narrative that we heard from others in the church and, and especially as people came out after us was, was that Kevin and Jen sent a letter.

And they just didn't come back to church that they slipped out the door. They sent the elders a letter.

They refused to meet with them. And and that was it. So that's far from the truth.

We, we, we started working on this. Okay. So we left in February, February 4th of 2018 was our last

Sunday there. My first meeting with Mike was August 17th of 2007.

I went to his home. I met with him in his home office. You mean explaining 17. 2017.

Okay. Yeah. You said, sorry, 17. Not only that we,

My wife and I had been having concerns about this for several months before this, she even longer than that, but we had began discussing it.

We had been began praying about it. We were fasting. I was praying daily about it on my 20 minute drive to work.

I'd pray about it every single day on my drive to work. And my prayer was simply this Lord. What would you have us do?

We ask you either heal this place or show us a way out of it. That was my simple prayer.

Show us the way out or help us heal this place. So then it took me a group.

I'm not a confrontational guy. Most people that know me fairly well know that about me.

I'm not, I'm not a guy that desires and loves conflict. But I knew that Mike had to be confronted if you will, in my own mannerisms and in the way that I would.

So I asked to speak with him. I came over to his house. I said, we're having some concerns. I'm going to call it legalism for whatever better term.

I didn't really understand the whole situation. So I had a meeting with him in his home. It was, it was, it was a fine meeting.

As Mike will say, we always left with agreements. Okay. Now I will say that that's true on some level, kind of like what

Andrew was talking about earlier. He can say we left under some agreement because we did agree on some things.

Okay. But we didn't agree on an overall arching understanding of, of our issues that I was bringing to him about the church.

Okay. So I, I met with him on August 17th. I also met, had a second meeting.

I requested it and I have all these text messages and I, and I asked him if I could come over again.

I have something, I wrote this. I have something of a private nature to discuss today. Could we meet at your house?

So we did. I asked him about it again. We went through it again. Okay. Now this is an important thing because after one of these meetings, he asked me, can you write out and can you explain when we began to have our, our like -mindedness began to change?

So I wrote out a fairly long document in September of 2017 and explaining that things.

I had also began hearing things from other people. One of my friends said to me that Tyler had stated my wife was leading me in this area.

So so it was clear. Number one, some of the elders knew something was going on.

It wasn't just Mike, but it was, but I had the closest relationship with Mike. So I was having the conversations with him directly.

Okay. Then on Wednesday, October 5th, there was a deacon meeting that came into the elder meeting.

And Mike asked the question of the deacons, what's going on in the church. Why is there lack of joy in the church and why are certain things happening?

Why are this core group of people in the church? Why is there upset? So I believe at that point in time, and I can't,

I won't assign the motive to him, but it appears to me looking back in hindsight, that perhaps this was a baited question to draw me out.

So I, I spoke up in the meeting and I said, I believe it's legalism. And there was about a 45 minute discussion ensued.

I won't go into details, but you know, it revolved around what was legalism.

And then I left the meeting and the elders continued to meet for about 45 minutes to an hour after that.

And the reason I know that is because there's a church dinner and they didn't show up until it was time for church.

And then, so, so then there was, there was two more meetings that I had with Mike. One was at the coffee hound.

And then the fourth and last one where I met with Mike at a restaurant for lunch. And I followed up that meeting because once again,

Mike would say that we had just, we had agreement on all these things, but I sent him an email that he would have received.

I sent it a couple hours before the elder meeting. And I said, we're not in agreement here.

I want to clarify that. And I want you, and I want to clarify that you also brought up that there were other people coming to you with some of these things that I was coming to you with.

And therefore it must not just be me. It must not just be my wife is leading me into these things.

And even if my wife was leading me, does that change things? Are they wrong?

And so that was the timeline of, of that. And I remember distinctly calling my wife after that meeting.

And this was in mid to late December. And I said, I don't really see that there's any hope here.

I think we're going to have to leave the church. And then Jen's dad was real sick. She was, he was going to be dying and we had to go out to Albuquerque to, and then we didn't actually get around to the actual.

Leaving until February 4th. So that's the basic timeline of which I've been accused that I just, we just slipped out the door.

So, you know, again, the narrative is, is just not bear out. Yeah. And Kevin, you're, this is consistent with what

I've heard from multiple other people that they had meetings or attempted to, and returned deaths from having meetings.

Yeah. And there's one notable, notable exception, right? There's one, right.

One guy knew the tactics of Mike and the elders. They twist words.

They try to get you into these meetings, just like they've done with me in these zoom meetings. They do to really twist words and, and, and make into a pretzel so that you walk away with some type of agreement with them.

Right. And so when he left the church, what did he do? Yeah. Yeah. The, the meetings would be endless.

You can, you know, you can ask the, the pastor and the elders of Sycamore Baptist church about the endless meetings and over and over and, let's meet again.

Let's meet again. And there's never any end in sight. So we chose not to meet, but the one that you're talking about, one of the, the men that served as a deacon with me, he wrote a letter and he said, he said, we're leaving the church and we will not, we will not meet.

We will not have any discussion. And if, if you, if you want to meet or have any discussion, reread the first part of this note.

And that was it. They said, we are done. We are never coming back. And that was it. And I, I called up the man when

I saw it and heard about it. And I said, you're he's, he's a farmer. He's a simple man.

He's a thinking man, but he's not, you know, he's not the, he's not like Andrew, like real apologetic, like, but I told him,

I said, you're the smartest guy of all the whole lot of us, because you just said, you just slammed the door shut and said, forget it.

We're never coming back here again. And so I, that was one story that really stuck out of my head of all the, of all the people

I talked to personally, all the stories I heard over those 13 plus hours. And that was a big one because his whole point was that they've done this to everybody.

They've dragged him. He's like, I'm just not going to deal with it. So anyway,

Anthony has forced us to go long. Well, you speaking for an hour before you brought them onto the show is a cause to get along because that was what the show was about, but we do need to close the show.

And so I want to, I want to end with this and then I'm going to have you, Andrew, I'm going to, I'm going to do the second last part.

And then I'm going to have you do the last part, bringing those questions back up again. But here's the thing. Here's, this is a book that is out and this book came out,

I don't know, about four years ago or so. Second edition came out like two years ago and it, it goes through false religions.

I'm not going to say whose book it is or what book yet, but it goes through false religions and it, and it has, it has criteria for what a cult is.

Now I'm going to read these criteria. And as I read each criteria, Kevin and Chuck, I want you to tell me if it seems to match what you see at GFC and Mike does match with these criteria.

Okay. Here's the five criteria for a cult from this book. A guy, by the way, who spent over 10,

I think just 12 years, if I'm not mistaken, these cults, um, where you put this book together.

So, okay. Number one, scripture, twisting and de facto assertions of extra biblical revelation.

Scripture is often used with a disregard to context to justify unbiblical or extra biblical doctrines.

Check. Yes. And yes. Okay. Number two, authoritarianism.

Individual interpretation on subjects is not allowed. Only the cult leader can interpret and they are accountable to no one.

And this can apply to either the leader or the group of leaders, right? Like in a Catholic church would be the Pope and the magisterium together.

But, um, but so individual interpretation. So most of the time, a personal organization becomes the authority on the proper interpretation of the scriptures.

Would this apply? Yes. In all caps, I just put the link to the interview where Mike abuses

Hebrews 13, seven, 17, ruthlessly to lend himself infinite power. All the time.

Oh, yeah. Okay. So that, and I want to, I'm going to read one sentence. Okay. From one of my final letter to them, your responses to us are unfortunate.

The way you've responded has shown us yet again, that you are unwilling to understand our concern of authoritarianism.

A term I have recently learned through study on this topic that describes the leadership style and practical legalism in your own lives.

And then how things are imposed on the body of Christ. We have. Okay. That was one sentence that, that was what

I wrote. Authoritarianism. There's a big check there. Yes, absolutely. About this in detail.

So for anybody listening tonight that wants to know more, we discussed this in your interview two weeks ago at length.

Yes. They can hear all about that. Okay. Number three, exclusivism. Only the organization has the truth and all others are excluded from the truth.

Yeah. Yeah. That, that, that I think that the danger of abusive churches is is, you know, the exclusivity factor.

The, you know, we're, we're a higher level of holiness. We are, we are the marines.

We are the green berets of Christianity. We, we this is, this is just a little bit bigger deal than most other people.

That is, that is infill. That is throughout the culture of the church. No doubt about it.

Yeah. Again, the link I just provided that, That's the hard evidence, Mike, clearly spiritual elitism.

Yes, he says, if I'm wrong, that's between me and God. It's your job to submit it to me. And that's not a direct quote.

That's that's a near quote, but your job is to submit it to the pastor, whether he's right or wrong.

That's between him and God. Well, I can take that. I can take that even one step further.

And, um, you know, many years ago, okay, they don't use this analogy anymore, but they did it for quite a few years.

And one of the analogies was, and this is, this is designed to break down people. Okay. This is, this is a grooming technique that the teaching was for the women.

If your husband asked you to walk to the, to the grocery store, barefoot and backwards, would you do that?

And, and now listen, it's bad enough to even suggest that, right?

It's worse to say, and I can prove it in Mike's own words, because I have an email that he sent me, uh, that says we would counsel the woman to submit to her husband and then allow the elders to deal with that husband later on.

Now, clearly they're recognizing that this is sinful behavior, but they've instructed the women to obey the husband and then let the elders deal with them.

What in earth, what on earth kind of teaching is that? That, that is absurd.

See what I teach in that regard is you, you honor and obey your husband in every way that he's honoring, obeying the

Lord, where there's a conflict between, uh, uh, the word of God and what your husband says.

You obey the word and, and love your wife as Christ loved the church, walk barefoot, um, uphill, whatever the church, whatever you describe, but that, that is patently unloving and just ugly and abusive control.

And Mike, same control to us. So let's, cause we've got to wrap up. Yeah. Okay. So number four, isolationism, members of the organization are not to speak to outsiders about doctrine unless to convert them.

The organization often states that it has the truth and wants to protect its members. Yeah, there's no doubt about it.

You were all, if you were, if you, if you were to go have a conversation with somebody, the elders would say something like, well, maybe you should, maybe you should have one of the elders come along with you.

Um, you know, especially if you weren't quite as sharp as some of the other guys, like if you weren't, you know, real gifted in the scriptures or you didn't really understand the scriptures, they wouldn't want poor old

Joe to go talk to somebody and, and, uh, you know, he might screw something up.

So there's, that is definitely happening. And don't the Jehovah's witnesses and Mormons do that too?

A lot of curiosity. Bring in the big guns. Yeah. Okay. Number five. This is the last one.

I mean, so far you guys have all done. We got to hit the, I gotta, I gotta love Ted Black for a moment.

Um, he said, um, unless the elders think the husband isn't saved, isolationism, the most extreme form of isolationism practice at GFC by Mike Reed is when a husband stands up against a

Mike's abusive practices and teachings, he tells the wife, the husband isn't saved. He church disciplines, the husband puts them out of the church and he tells the wife to stay at the church.

He, he would destroy marriage after marriage. If the women, if the wives allowed it.

And sadly, in Ted Black's case, it ultimately culminated in the end of his marriage.

His wife stayed at the church under Mike Reed and Ted left, but Mike has given that counsel to many wives when their husbands leave, when they, when they fed up with Mike's abuses, he tells the wife to stay.

Yeah. And he actually told me the exact same thing. So, okay. Number five, last one endangerment.

Another trait that many include is endangerment. It is true that most cults teachings do lead to either physical or emotional endangerment of its members.

This one trait may not actually be true for all cults. So is there physical or emotional endangerment here?

Oh my goodness. And obviously the counseling of the 60 plus people who have left would, would testify to that, but yeah,

I'm sorry. Go on. Well, that, that's good. Go ahead. Go ahead, Chuck.

Go ahead. Our most consistent and serious issue is the endangerment of women and children with these doctrines and teachings where Mike meets with them systematically alone.

I mean, my goodness, he endangers them regularly. Mike kisses them.

Mike taught, quote, even on the lips, it's fine to kiss them even on the lips.

He may not do it, but he taught that it's fine. He just said, our culture is not ready for it. Mike endangers them by abusing their conscience, telling them the

God given conscience that screams out against meeting alone with the pastor and kissing the pastor and being kissed by him.

That's the devil talking to them, not, not, not the truth and that they need to repent of that.

I mean, all we need to do is hit the play button brothers and Mike will hang himself with his own words and he knows it, which is why he keeps saying edited, edited, edited.

If we simply hit the play button, Mike's teachings hang him thoroughly as the dangerous false teacher that he is.

He endangers women and children. Oh yes. That's my chief concern. Yeah, I agree with that.

It's why we, it's why we chose to take, to, to leave. We didn't want our children there any, any longer.

Um, there's, there's emotional scars with our two older daughters from things that happened there.

Uh, there are, there are, there are things that I choose not to speak about that, but, um, uh,

I, I'm, I have to be very careful. I want to be very careful, but there are, it is our concern.

It is the reason it is the primary reason we have decided to speak up is because the children that are in that place, they don't have a choice for the most part.

And it was one of my arguments from the very get go, which is all these, these children are going to, are going to reject

Christianity because they see this as a big set of rules. And they see it as, as, uh, uh,

I mean, they just most, I believe most of these children will reject the faith because they just, the joy gets sucked out of them.

I could go on and on. I gotta be careful, but, but yes, I would agree with that last one.

So, I mean, the bottom line is, is that according to this book written by actually our own pastor Andrew, um,

DFC literally fits in all five categories of a cult. I'm going to make a plea and then Andrew, you, uh, you're going to close this out here,

Tony, we love you. I don't know what happened. I don't know how you got trapped there, but there is a way out.

And, and I will tell you, there are people that have contacted us and have said, if Tony leaves the church, we will make sure he is taken care of.

Both from a church perspective and a financial perspective, there are people that are willing to help you.

And so, you know, this is, this is a plea to you. I have respected you for years. I have nothing against you whatsoever.

Nothing. I have, we, we have, we're doing these shows and are going to continue to many more, um, to expose the dangers there.

And, uh, and, uh, and like I said, there, there are people here that are ready to help you.

Um, you can get ahold of me and there's all kinds of ways you can privately get ahold of me and I will gladly point in the right direction, uh, for, for that help.

Um, so on that, uh, Andrew, I'm going to let you close up here. And I mean, look, as you know,

Anthony, uh, the claims of reconciliation, whatnot,

Matthew five also says, and this is, you know, Tony was making claims about me.

I flew across the country because someone was making claims, refusing to reconcile.

That's Matthew chapter five. You leave your offering. If your brother has son against you and you go and you reconcile and you love

Tony. And that's the, why you did it back in the day. I mean, we, we had only known each other for a couple of years at that point, maybe a year and a half.

And, uh, and I thought it was a crazy idea that you had. I'm like, why could you just call him, Andrew? Why do you have to fly all the way across the country and drag me with you?

I mean, you're wrong. I love shepherd's conference. That was my first one. And now I go over a year, but, but I mean, that was crazy, right?

But you took it seriously because you love your brother, Tony. Yeah. And that's the thing we, we have to take reconciliation, reconciliation, serious.

Um, now it seems pastor Mike talks about reconciliation. Now it's time for him to show it.

Um, you know, he needs to show it with, if, if he's, he's got a member in his church who I'm clearly saying you, you have me stating with two eyewitnesses, two or three witnesses now that, that are eyewitnesses to the unrepentance.

And so he cannot be a member in good standing. Um, but Mike Reed, these are the questions that I have for you.

And these are the questions I, I challenge anyone who talks to Mike Reed. These are the dozen questions to ask him.

If you want to know whether these claims that these men have said are true, the answers are encompassed in these questions.

It's not about reconciliation with Kevin or the Chuck's a liar. If the answer to these questions are yes, then

Chuck is not a liar. If the answers to these questions are yes, then Kevin's not a liar.

Anthony's not a liar. You know, it, it was interesting how we just seeing the comments as Anthony, as you're going through the, the question of Colt and seeing

Charles and, uh, from suffering to praise and Ted and, and others just saying yes, yes to all of them.

Those are multiple people who were in the church. Yeah. There's multiple witnesses here that are making this claim, um, questions for Mike Reed, and we're going to end the show with this.

Um, and, and so this is the questions and one, do you meet with women alone on a regular basis to, do you ask details about spousal intimacy?

Three. Have you ever said quote to trust the elders quote is to quote or is quote to trust

God, have you ever said that one wrong? Have you ever said to not trust the elders is to not trust

God? I don't know why I got that wrong. The same thing last time, at least I'm consistent for, have you ever said to never said that whatever the elders would counsel you for your life is perfect.

Five. Have you ever said that GFC is the only true church in quad cities?

Six. Do you believe the elders have nearly unlimited authority in the lives of their congregants?

Seven. Have you said if anyone owns a gun or is in military or, or police, they are, they have pre meditated murder in their hearts.

Eight. Do you share details about counseling sessions with other members?

Nine. Did you ever imply that men and women should be able to kiss someone else on the lips that is not his or her own spouse?

10. Have you ever shared details of your own sexual intimacy with any people in your counseling sessions with members of the opposite sex?

11. Do you believe you are infallible against sexual immorality?

12. By by name, what specific pastors, theologians, and or teachers have condoned the practice of meeting with women alone in counseling sessions?

These are the 12 questions we have for you, Mike. You don't want to read all of Anthony's. These are yes or no questions.

These are the charges that I heard laid against you. These are the ones you have to answer.

This is not a Matthew 18 issue. If these are your public teachings. There's been audio clips being played.

There's been testimony being made. If these things are true, then there isn't a need to reconcile with you until you resign from your position.

If you're practicing these things, I would argue you're disqualified from ministry. So the challenge to you is to answer these 12 questions.

If you say you have changed your position, please answer that. But if you refuse to answer.

That is telling. If you refuse to answer simple questions of your teaching, if you believe this is the word of God and you will not answer publicly on your teaching, that is quite condemning.

So Mike, these are the 12 questions that we have for you. We hope that you will answer them. I hope that he will come on.

I hope Anthony, that he will take the challenge that you've given, that he will come on and that we'll be able to get the answers to this because these are serious allegations.

I agree. I agree with Mike. Slanders are serious allegation. The problem is Mike, if you do teach these things, you have slandered these men.

And I don't mean if you can parse these things as I saw you do with me. No, if you're having to play games and parse your words, you're in sin.

Because when you're parsing words and you do that knowingly, then you know you're being just trying to be deceptive.

That, my friend, is a lie. You can't do that. Not and call yourself a shepherd.

These are not shepherding behaviors if these are true. We'll see if Mike answers these. We'll see what he does.

If he comes on, which I hope and pray he will, to answer these for himself, then we'll get those answers.

If he does not, well, we'll probably address this on another episode, but what we will do next week is we'll be having a debate.

It will be a debate with a Baptist and a Lutheran on baptism. And I do want to encourage you guys this

Saturday, May 30th, 2020, Justin Peters and I will be having a

Snatch Them From the Flames Home Edition. Snatch Them From the Flames is a discerning seminar we do. We'll go over how to have the sufficiency of scripture, how to handle scripture and interpreting the scriptures.

We'll have a lunch break. Then Justin will deal with an extended period on discerning false teachers.

Then I'll go through the whole book of Jude, answering the way of how to identify false teachers.

And so that will be extremely helpful, especially after tonight's episode.