Defendant in Harvest Bible Chapel Defamation Case Posts Insider Emails with Accusations of Deception and Control (UPDATED with HBC Response)

UPDATE: HBC has responded to Julie Roys’ post. Without talking to Mr. Williams, they believe he didn’t mean it.

We believe that Randy Williams is not the man portrayed in the texts publicized by Julie Roys. He has never said anything to the leaders of our church in the many years we have served with him that resembles the content of the texts she published today. If Randy Williams was secretly antagonistic about the health of our collective governance, it was not known to any of us. We offer him the grace we all need in the context of regrettable words or actions. Love prompts us to believe he does regret these words. After a positive and warm lunch with Jason Acres today, Randy has not been available to us by text or phone. Based upon what is known about his love for our church and Pastor James, we believe he must have read what Julie Roys published and felt devastated. Love compels us to believe the best; if that is not the case, we will of course make it known here. Key points are below (if you’re in a hurry, read points 10-13).

Read the entire response here where current elders contest what pastors White and Borinstein wrote in their texts.


(original post)

Call this the fruits of discovery.

This morning, Julie Roys, journalist and one of five defendants in Harvest Bible Chapel’s defamation lawsuit, posted emails of a current elder accusing senior pastor James MacDonald of control and manipulation. The elder and former chairman of the executive committee Randy Williams also indicated that the church had endured financial mismanagement, and governance failure. Roys reproduced the email thread on her blog.

The emails were obtained as the results of a subpoena by Roys attorney as a part of her defense in the defamation suit brought by Harvest Bible Chapel. Roys also obtained text messages from others who had concerns about the leadership of MacDonald. For instance, according to material provided by Roys, pastor of a Harvest Bible Chapel in North Indianapolis Brian White said

The problem is James. His control, his manipulation, his anger, his torching of others to protect his reputation, the wake of his irresponsible financial stewardship and direction of his organization. The continued manipulation of people and narratives. The problem is James.

In that text thread, another HBC pastor, Bill Borinstein (at the time of this writing, pastor at HBC North Phoenix) wrote:

No church would ever allow their Sr Pastor and leadership team to act over a long period of time with such a blatant lack of transparency or in a culture of fear. . . . We were told by James in a meeting that HBC paid for the systems upgrade and they were giving it to us for free (yet we were charge(d) $500K), we were never told that 10% of our funds were given to WITW (Walk in the Word), we were never told that the bylaws of our organization were changed in 2014 . . . we were never told about a 100 year lease the HBF was signatory to or that the HBF would be paying operating expenses for the training center in Croton (including staff), we were never told that designated funds for Harvest Gives were being held and not paid out… do I need to go on. . . .

I know not one pastor who cares that James lives in a $4-$5 million* dollar house, what they care about is his publicly lying about it and the lengths he went to hide it (all while he was president of our organization). Where is the integrity in that? . .

There are too many people in our fellowship who know too much, who have seen too much of James. They have seen how employees have been treated, they have been in rooms where they have been berated or seen others berated, they have heard about his blow up at HCA (Harvest Christian Academy), the blowup at the Sr pastors retreat, the blowup at our leadership meeting in downtown Chicago, they have sat in restaurants when he has dressed down servers, they have heard the stories from the many ex-employees scattered around the country, from the ex-elders who have left because they could not in good conscience stay in that culture anymore. 1 Tim 3:2 says, “Therefore an overseer must be above reproach…” You are dealing with 100+ pastors who know that passage. We are not perfect, we do not expect James to be perfect. What we have seen and experienced is not above reproach . . .”

Borinstein and White are on the board of the Great Commission Collective which is the subject of the HBC elder update in 2017 and no longer has a relationship with James MacDonald. An earlier version of this post referred to Borinstein and White as HBC elders. That is not the case. I apologize for any confusion that caused.

What Can Elders Do?

Recently, I asked HBC how a senior pastor may be removed and if it was true that removal required an unanimous vote, including James MacDonald. Sherri Smith answered, “According to page 22 of the bylaws of Harvest Bible Chapel (, unanimous under Executive Committee does not include anyone under corrective who could not participate in a decision concerning themselves. The Elder Board does not need to be unanimous, just in general agreement or “consensus” that the decision is best for the church.”

Here is the relevant section:

Removal of Senior Pastor. Subject to the rights, if any, under any contract or covenants of employment with the Church, the Senior Pastor shall only be removed, by unanimous recommendation of the Executive Committee and by the consensus of the Elder Board at any general or special meeting duly noticed pursuant to Section 7.05 of these Bylaws. The Senior Pastor shall only be removed from office, subject to the terms of any employment agreement or covenants, for any of the following reasons: (i) disqualifies himself as a result of a violation of the Sexual Immorality Policy; (ii) engaging in conduct that is in opposition to the best interest of the Church; (iii) teaching doctrines inconsistent with the Bible; (iv) neglect of duties; (v) resignation; or (vi) death, long-term disability or incapacity.

I also asked for a comment or reaction from HBC to Roys’ post but they did not reply by the time I posted. I will add any responses here.


Image: By Esther 5000 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0,

39 thoughts on “Defendant in Harvest Bible Chapel Defamation Case Posts Insider Emails with Accusations of Deception and Control (UPDATED with HBC Response)”

  1. There is a way to remove the pastor without his consent. It seems the executive committee could vote to amend the by-laws and then fire him under the amended by-laws.

    The bylaws say:

    7.02 (a)(i) Executive Committee (a) … It is the responsibility of the Executive Committee to serve as the legal authority for the Church;

    Typically, state corporate law says that the bylaws can be amended by a majority vote of the board of directors, which would be the executive committee if 7.02(a)(i) is a correct statement of what is in the articles of incorporation. The articles and background state law are like the constitution, and the bylaws are like a statute.

    To be sure, the by-laws forbid amendment except by the Elder Board:

    14.01 Amendments to Bylaws. These Bylaws may only be altered, amended, restated or repealed, and new or restated Bylaws may only be adopted by a Consensus of the Elder Board.

    My educated guess, though (which some lawyer might be able to better tell us) is that 14.01 is void as a matter of state corporate law, which would not allow the bylaws to say how they can be amended.

    If, however, these are not just the by-laws, but also serve as the articles of incorporation of the corporation, then they perhaps cannot be so easily amended. I don’t know how non-profit corporations do charter changes in Illinois. I was able to find contact info for HBC corporation online with the Illinois Secy of State, but you have to apply by mail with a fee of about $27.50 to get the Articles sent to you.

  2. Is it really that hard for the church to ask one of their elders if he sent a text or ask the recipient of the text? Really HBC, that’s all you got?

  3. The HBC response is clever. It is the work of skilled strategists— which means, perhaps, that HBC has hired skilled professionals instead of relying on its own clumsy efforts.

    1. There’s clearly a shift from “say nothing” to “mount what looks like a transparent, full, but unapologetic defense”.

    2. It was clever to get so many elders (all of them) on record publicly as support the pastor, so it will be harder mentally for them to try to get rid of him.

    3. The apparent honesty with respect to revealing performance evaluations and counsellor evaluations is a nice trick. Note that the evaluations are not actually revealed— they are *quoted* from. It’s standard for evaluations to list both strong points and weak points. Where are the weak points? Kept secret, of course.

    4. To think about: who is HBC’s target audience with these notes? They are so long that the general public won’t read them, or current HBC members, though the sheer length will help even if they don’t read it through. Are the HBC elders themselves the audience? Or worried allies in the evangelical celebrity world (e.g. Christianity Today, whose morale would need bucking up after their embarassing recent article–see Or certain big donors? Or…? Any ideas? The answer to this question would reveal who Pastor MacDonald is really worried about at this point.

    1. You’ve done excellent work on this case, Eric. My opinion of the questions you raise regarding target audience? They are in a war to control the public narrative about the church. Current members. Potential members. Here’s the bigger issue: HBC and its pastor are a huge brand. They have to protect the brand because they saw the potential of a church/brand falling when Mars Hill Seattle shut down. This is actually in the realm of potential outcomes. Spinning the narrative in their favor is to protect the brand, making part of the target audience consumers, affiliates, partners, Walk in the Word donors, buyers of Vertical Church band recordings, etc.

      Some of those related, independent “brands”, Walk in the Word, Harvest Bible Fellowship, etc., were once nonprofits. WITW was essentially brought under the church umbrella, if I’m not mistaken, and the Fellowship was dissolved so that the church could start it’s own church planting thing (Vertical Church Network) under the church umbrella. So those little “brands” are now just parts of the big brand and (although the church disputed this in the report) they might all be contributing to paying the bills, paying the debt, paying salaries, etc. There is so much at stake. Basically, James is the brand, and if he becomes bad for business, the whole brand could collapse.

      1. HBC is curious as a brand, because it split. Most HBC churches are fine, normal, churches. The original, though, in Elgin, has a pastor who lies and does other bad things. So Pastor Macdonald actually is bad for the brand. What you mean is that he is a major asset of the Elgin church. He is very talented and charismatic, and has a lot of loyalty. So he also has a lot of bargaining leverage with church leaders, because they’re afraid that if he leaves, people will leave and money will leave. Quite possibly they’re wrong on that— at some point, a pastor like him becomes a drag as much as an advantage, even from a business point of view. And there’s *always* a succession problem, so firing JM now really mean something like bringing the need for a successor ten years closer, not eliminating the need.

        1. He’s bad for business now. But I think that is the underlying flaw in anything church branding their pastor or big ideas… people are bad for business! Especially powerful people who could be prone to a public fall from grace. Now if… IF… HBC (the mother church in Rolling Meadows/Elgin and it’s satellites) has a Mars Hill style fall, which I am guessing is a possibility, will those other HBC churches keep open and their name? If they were to stay open and change their name, then you know the church was internally strong but they don’t want the name association.

          And as for a succession plan and problem… I’d love to see people talking about that issue more. It will be very interesting in the coming years as these popular megachurch founders, baby boomers and slightly younger, age out and retire, to see if their churches stay strong. My understanding was that Hybels tried for a while to put in a succession plan, and eventually had a smooth transition in place until… well, yeah.

  4. I had some interesting balancing comments on Harvest and Pastor James, which you can view on Roys’ Facebook page under the appropriate Harvest-related posts.

    Oh, wait, no you can’t because they were removed and I was blocked. Outrageously judgmental and accusatory posts stay up, but opposing comments come down. Very “brave”.

    I was very careful to be circumspect in what I said on Julie’s FB page, but I suspect that one comment she may have found objectionable was my question about Biblical justification for collecting a paycheck in exchange for “telling it to the church”, in response to her post about the Biblical justification for lawsuits.

    This is the M.O. for The Elephant’s Debt blog, as well. When it became apparent that no matter how reasoned or polite I was in pushing back against their narrative and the accompanying curated presentation of facts used to undergird it (for instance, many posts about the “debt”, but no posts or documentation about the value of the corresponding assets, or assertions that MacDonald’s behavior in elder meetings was so poor that it had to be kept a tight secret, yet at the same time saying it was nefarious to create a larger, more open and rotating elder board composed of men from all of the satellite campuses. No slight of hand there, right?), they opted not to post those remarks. When I began taking screenshots of my comments and indicated to them that I would publish them myself, I got an immediate response. I believe this reveals their motives.

    Obviously, James MacDonald and Harvest will have to contend with this as a reality, and no one can do that for them. I have zero interest in suggesting that the experiences of others are untrue or unimportant, or that Pastor James’ sins are defensible. I see what others see. All I have to work with is my own experience as a lay leader at Harvest for over 10 years, and from that I can say with absolute certainty that any association of the term “cult” with Harvest is flatly absurd.

    Flatly. Absurd. If anything, it’s too easy for people to exist there for years with no direct accountability or personal attention at all, if that’s what they elect to do. They can attend for as long as they wish, do nothing, and give nothing. All they have to do is avoid joining a small group (or talking to staff or other involved congregants, who will immediately invite them to join a small group).

    My wife and I both still thank God in our prayers for the rock solid growth we experienced and discipleship we received there. It was a wonderful church and all I hope is that God has His way with it, one way or another.

    1. War-El, it is clear that HBC has hired a clever and unscrupulous public relations firm. One thing I would expect such a firm to do is “astroturfing”, sending supportive emails pretending them to be grassroots support. I wonder if you are astroturfing. Would you be willing to tell us your real name?

      1. I am absolutely grassroots. I and my wife are just people who went to Harvest (Rolling Meadows) from 2003(ish?) until 2015, when we relocated to Tennessee. We led a small group for several years, and then oversaw small groups for several years. We lead a small group at our new church.

        The thing about a megachurch like Harvest is that you can go to the weekend services and hear the preaching, and you will grow like crazy. Harvest was FULL of people from church backgrounds where they did not get strong Biblical teaching. They always knew something was wrong, but didn’t realize they were not being fed or challenged until they arrived at Harvest. But eventually you have to ask yourself, “Is this a church?” Because you are growing, but you do not have fellowship. All of the smaller, personal aspects of attending a small church come from being in a small group. It’s how you get connected to your pastors, resources, etc. For all practical purposes, James MacDonald is not your actual pastor. He’s a teaching pastor. He’s not coming to see you in the hospital, your family pastor is. You have a family pastor, a campus pastor, elders, small group leaders. Those are the people you do life with, and those are the people who are your church family. Whenever I called with a personal problem, someone was all over it. If you thought James MacDonald and Kathy were supposed to come meet you at Portillo’s and help you walk through your problem, you were going to disappointed with the perfectly godly, experienced pastor who dropped everything to minister to you.

        In terms of things like Pastor James’ salary, I didn’t feel like I needed to know what he makes. If I can look at the audited church budget and see the total expenditures for salaries, benefits, and expenses, and it is appropriate as a percentage of the budget (which it was), and if his compensation is being audited for parity with salaries for persons in similar roles (which it was), then the rest does not particularly concern me. I have been part of a voting congregation of 200 or so in another church that took proposals from the board for salaries of the pastors and then voted on them. If that church’s stats on average giving were correct, by tithing standards our typical congregant made about $10k a year (I’m just spitballing; it’s the concept that is important), so the odds of runaway generosity leading to runaway staff salaries were slim.

        I used to have a policy of using my real name online, and I also have a policy of trying my best never to say anything to anyone online that I would not say in person. I used to use my real name on Warren’s blog, and elsewhere. I still try to be sincere and polite, but a couple of rather scary experiences have led me to believe it is not safe to disclose one’s real name in some forums unless you are willing to do all the rest of the accompanying work needed to protect your home and family. For instance, I had an online discussion with someone who did not like what I had to say, and who I did not know, who proceeded to describe to me certain features of my house. I don’t stalk other people, so it never even occurred to me that someone would stalk me, especially since I try to be reasonable. I am sure that Warren and Julie Roys and others also have to contend with disturbing people.

        Hopefully my tone and the nature of what I am saying, along with the fact that I do not defend everything Harvest does or act like the allegations against James MacDonald are not important, is enough to suggest to you that I’m not showing up here to carry water for anything I don’t actually believe. I’m not a big fan of pearl clutching people on white knight crusades, so I tend to speak up with balancing thoughts if I have them anyway.

        1. Maybe. One characteristics of a good PR campaign, though, is that it monitors what’s happening in weblog comments and responds quickly, like you just did. I’d still like to know your name so I could check your claims. If you live in Tennessee, that’s far enough from Illinois that I shouldn’t think you’d be in significant danger.

          1. Sorry, but that’s a boundary I feel entitled to and which I won’t be crossing unless there’s a very good reason. All I can tell you is that six months ago I was commenting here under this alias (and for many years before that), and six months from now I will be commenting on here under this alias. Other regulars here know me. They know I didn’t just show up yesterday for the benefit of talking about Harvest Bible Chapel. If you have specific questions, I would be glad to answer them as straightforwardly as possible. Or if you have doubts about anything I have said, I would be happy to clarify with info that is easily verified. I will tell you flatly that I was never part of any circle of higher leadership, nor did I spend my time in proximity to James MacDonald. I talked with him personally a handful of times over all of those years, and obviously knew some people who knew him much better, but I am not purporting to be anything other than a guy who went there for many years and loved it, and has to reconcile all of that growth and joy with the current mess. My wife and I are very disappointed and sick about the whole thing.

          2. All I can say is watch the video link I posted elsewhere on the page. If you still think these guys are great because of what they achieved for themselves and not for Jesus, well I cannot help you.

          3. I am aware of many verses which say that when a person sins, they need to repent, and then they need to take appropriate redemptive and restorative action. I see nothing that suggests that when someone sins, everything they touch immediately turns to crap, and everything they ever accomplished that was of value for God is erased and means nothing. If that’s actually the case, it sucks to be me and you. I’m praying God will have his way with Harvest, no matter what that means. God doesn’t need James MacDonald or anyone else.

            I know firsthand the good fruit from Harvest Bible Chapel and the sincere faith and work of many, many godly people there. It was the most socioeconomically diverse and generous church I have ever been a part of. People were on fire for the Word and for sincere Christian living, not for James MacDonald.

            You are free to believe whatever you like. Perhaps you spent time at Harvest and know more than what you are told by others. I don’t know.

          4. Let me intrude on this thread by saying that I think War-El is certainly speaking here in good faith. In a megachurch, one can be involved at a level where you have no idea of bad things happening at the top or near the top. They simply don’t reach you. Megachurches, especially multisite ones, can be like big towns. You know your neighborhood and can like it but don’t know anything about what is happening across town.

          5. Thanks, mon frere. I agree. And, of course, this does not remove from anyone the responsibility of sizing up information that comes to light and responding accordingly. Which many of our friends have done and are doing. It is agonizing, but necessary. God’s will be done, not mine.

          6. I quite agree that Harvest was a good church, and it may still be one. I also agree that Pastor MacDonald is a big part of why it has been a good church. as you say, it is very important to realize that someone can be a willful sinner, or even an entirely false Christian, and still be a tool that God uses to advance His kingdom. Power corrupts, and a chief task of the elders is to make sure that a pastor with an aggressive personality has people around him who say No, not just for the church’s protection, but for the pastor’s.

          7. War-El has commented here for some time and I’m quite sure he isn’t a ringer for Harvest. He seems to be an honest sort. Whatever else you two may disagree on, I don’t think you need challenge his integrity.

          8. Thank you, Mr. Rahrer. You are a real person, . An important distinction, though: we need to challenge his integrity, but it is quite possible to meet my challenge, which you have done by vouching for him. I mention this because it is part of the big picture here: Christians’ reluctance to question the moral perfection of other people who call themselves Christians.

          9. Actually, I googled Mr. Rahrer and looked for evidence of any kind that he was real. Always keep in mind that it’s trivially easy to create a false identity on the web, and that it’s a standard tactic for fraud in politics, business, and seduction.

  5. Current Harvest Bible Chapel Elders,

    The situation is quickly escalating out of control. Before James can direct the narrative and spin the “attacks” against him and his church, the elder board needs to act quickly and decisively to gain control and protect the church and its members from further damage. While James is away, the elder board needs to vote unanimously and immediately announce the following changes:

    – Given the character issues recently brought to light through World Magazine and the current litigation, based on Titus 1:5-9, James S. MacDonald is immediately relieved of all duties and obligations to Harvest Bible Chapel and is removed from the Elder Board and from access to the Harvest pulpit and systems
    – Dissolve the Executive Elder Committee effective immediately
    – Ask for the resignations of any and all elders that are found to be complicit in James’ unbiblical leadership, character, and treatment of subordinates
    – Terminate the employment of any family members of James S. MacDonald currently working for Harvest Bible Chapel and any of its affiliates, including but not limited to: Luke MacDonald, Landon MacDonald, Abigail MacDonald, and Kathy MacDonald
    – Terminate the employment of any and all pastors and leaders that executed James’ unbiblical and unethical treatment of members and fellow leaders, including but not limited to: Rick Donald, Jeff Donaldson, and others
    – Remove Harvest Bible Chapel from any and all lawsuits currently in process
    – Announce the immediate search for a new high-quality Senior Pastor, with an emphasis on character and Bible-teaching gifts
    – Invite any former elders, pastors, leaders, and members to return to help the transition process in a Godly, Biblical, and humble manner
    – Announce that the current multi-site structure will be re-evaluated once the new leadership and elder board is in place
    – Announce that the current constitution will be completely rewritten in line with a Biblical distribution of authority and which supports the future structure of the church
    – Broadcast these changes to the congregation through an Elder Update, Press Release, and e-mail blast
    – Ensure all future communication with membership and the press is devoid of spin, wordsmithing, dishonesty, and protection of leaders
    – Release all ex-leaders and pastors from any existing anti-compete and non-disclosure agreements

    James will certainly sue to be re-instated, but with him no longer controlling the narrative with the congregation, he will be without his most important asset, control of the conversation. He would also need to be made aware that any lawsuit would result in the public release of all financial records previously under control of the XLT, including Salary, Bonus, and Benefits for all MacDonald family members, LLC ownership that resulted in financial conflicts of interest, and any shifts of funds between Harvest Bible Chapel entities. The potential impact on James’ future ministry opportunities should limit any litigation options.

    Although this would be an extremely difficult time for the church, it would protect the current congregation from future harm and ensure the Bride of Christ is led in a Biblical, humble, and God-honoring manner. Any loss of membership as a result of James’ departure would likely be offset by the many wounded and disillusioned that return with optimism, hoping for integrity and humility to return to the church they loved. May His Peace be over the entire process.

    1. This is quite the conundrum, and I’m not sure a Mars Hill 2.0 is avoidable. James MacDonald is the brand. He’s not part of the brand, he IS the brand. Thousands of people joined the church or its plants because of the brand and this perception that the “Harvest way” is the way to do church. Do you think people will stick around to see what life is like post-JMac, enough people to keep paying off all those buildings they’ve bought up and pay down the debt?

      1. That’s the million dollar question (or $43MM question in this case). I feel there is a better chance of avoiding bankruptcy if they take control and manage this well, vs letting it collapse under its own weight.

  6. I would be very surprised if MacDonald is forced out. He founded the church, and built it into the $150 million enterprise it is today (and that’s just the church’s value, not any of the other organizations spun off from there). He’s clearly a forceful personality, a bully, and probably feels highly entitled, and almost certainly believes he’s still the best man for the job (success can go to one’s head, for sure).

    The elders know all this, and know how much their positions are owed to MacDonald, and no doubt will come under a lot of pressure from him to reach some form of agreement that sees him remaining in charge. Then there’s the issue of his legacy. I know he has at least one son in the ministry, and it’s pretty common for the founding pastor to want to keep it in the family — just like they did at the Osteen’s church in Houston.

    Of course, none of this is concordant with good governance of a church organization, but let’s get real here. This is what happens when so much power is concentrated in the hands of one man. It’s extremely hard to push out someone who both built the organization up from scratch and doesn’t want to go. he may have enemies in the church be he likely has a bunch of friends and allies too, and those who speak up against him will be taking a considerable risk in terms of their own future prospects.

    1. As someone noted above, JM can’t be forced out, because the by-laws forbid it, unless something can override the by-laws. That’s a matter of corporate law.

  7. Mars Hill Part Deux.
    Still remember when the two of them trolled MacArthur’s conference. Maybe he’ll end up joining him in Phoenix.

  8. Now everyone knows why Mark Driscoll and James MacDonald became such fast-friends. Sheep stick together, and so do wolves. Wolves who under the name of “Jesus” and “The Gospel” wanted to build a name for themselves and a tower to the sky. They should have read a little story about a city named Babel to see how this is going to play out….

    1. For those who are new to the idea that many or perhaps most of the famous Christian celebrities we watch are actually narcissists, I would recommend watching the following educational video. In it the Phd. Psychologist explains the four types and she has a great quote which is: “If I wrote a book on narcissism it becomes a how to guide for how to achieve in the New World Order” to be found at 10:36. We really need to rethink achievement in The Church in light of the Cross!

  9. The by-laws simply don’t say what Smith claims they do. It’s interesting that in addition to 8.04(b) which you quote, 8.03(e)(i) dealing with removal of officers *explicitly* gives the power of removal to the *other* members of the EC but *explicitly* carves out the Senior Pastor position from that process, leaving it to 8.04(b) which conspicuously *fails* to exclude the Senior Pastor from having a role in the decision.

    1. Yup, and what is “general agreement” or consensus? 15 out of the 29 remaining elders, not including the senior pastor who sits on the elder board? These details matter because they may be put to the test very soon. Unless James just resigns.

  10. Mars Hill 2.0 here we come! There are so many parallels but one big difference is this lawsuit. It is actually forcing a response which is doing just the opposite of what James wants. It is bringing out facts into the light and exposing them.

    I saw with Mars Hill and the GFA volunteer employees where things hit critical mass and a bunch of people who were stuffing the pain and evil done to them finally came together and found a voice. I suspect that we are on the brink of this happening again. This is a good thing for Jesus abides in the light and there is no darkness in Him. What has been hidden must be shouted from the mountain tops. This is God’s way of doing things.

    Rebuking evil leaders for corruption is not gossip. Never has been. Paul certainly did not teach that but modeled just the opposite. He named names and publicly confronted others who were doing what was wrong. May everything that has happened behind closed doors come out and be made public. With Jesus there are no closed doors or non-disclosure agreements drawn up by evil scribes. Good deeds are to be done in front of everyone so that God can get the credit. Where there are closed doors and other obvious attempts to hide facts there is every evil deed being done under the Son.

  11. When will these Harvest “Elders” actually be Elders. What a travesty that they are not leading and demand that James step down immediately. This is an affront on Jesus’ church. If they don’t do their Eldering job, then they need to step down.

Comments are closed.