STEVE KOZAR AND DANIEL LONG'S DERANGED RESPONSE TO RUSLAN CRITICISM

When "Discernment" is Dishonest: Is Ruslan KD Really "Evil?"

A question for Steve Kozar: What is an ad hominem attack?

Ad hominem: A criticism directed against a person rather than against what that person says.

To my knowledge, none of Ruslan KD’s critics have engaged in ad hominem attacks. The concerns have been directed at his relentless pursuit of money—identified in scripture as greed and love of money—which Ruslan himself has articulated in the most disgusting terms. (Hebrews 13:5; 1 Timothy 6:10; Luke 12:15). Chris LaSala notes: "Ruslan KD has always planned to make merchandise of his followers. He has tried to monetize everything from prayer journals, Christian concerts, t shirts, therapy sessions, upper tier Patreon subscriptions, and more. This man is not a Christian, he is a lover of money and he is a friend of the world. He also promotes cigar smoking, tattoos, carnal hip hop artists, and he green lights women wearing yoga pants. He is also a free gracer disguised as a repentance preacher."1 

Kozar and Long have responded by attacking Michael Grant, Sean Christie (Revealing Truth), Jordan Riley, and others, asserting that Ruslan’s critics are "lying and taking him out of context". That is an exceptionally strong allegation and is demonstrably false. 

Ruslan's damage control: "When I came onto YouTube the objective was not to be a public Christian."2 

Anyone who chooses to operate on YouTube is functioning in a public arena. Ruslan’s claim that he was a full‑time musician who was “a rapper who was Christian, not a Christian rapper” is a distinction without substance. 

The monetisation‑focused statements now circulating online originate from Ruslan’s own recorded material, largely between 2018 and 2021, during the period in which he was advising aspiring Christian creatives on building financially viable platforms. In a recent interview he accused his critics of participating in “cancel culture” and claimed that his intent was merely to motivate Christian artists, not to address ordinary believers. The difficulty with that defence is obvious: at what point does a Christian supposedly remove the “Christian” hat and replace it with an “artist” hat? What framework of values is he communicating to Christians who identify as artists? Scripture does not permit compartmentalising the Christian life. Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men.. (Colossians 3:23).

Kozar and Long's claim that Ruslan has "repented" is absurd. Ruslan has recently reaffirmed his own monetisation‑focused statements: "But we went back and particularly looked at 'how do I monetize people' and 'stop pussy footing around, you want to build a business around your art  and not a ministry'. And I stand by those 100%."

Ruslan > I want.. I want.. I want .. 

"I want to be free so I got zero overhead.. I don't want no bill.. I don't got to pay mortgage.. I want to be part of a church plant and be able to give and help.. I want to live in southern California, I have to.. I am going to live in Southern California. I have to figure out how to get into a million dollar home and pay it off.. I need seven figures.. I would love to be in a position someday where I just have F.U. money." His manner of speaking aside, the substance is clear: he wants to participate in ministry while exempting himself from the ordinary responsibilities and obligations that other people must carry. He has expressed a desire for income levels far beyond what most people will ever attain. 

But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one.(1 Corinthians 5:11 cf. 2 Thessalonians 3:6; Romans 16:16-17).

Only blatant deceivers and narcissists would consider charging people for “meet and greet” access to so‑called "celebrity preachers". The pricing for Ruslan’s March 2026 Bless God Summit — including a $75 meet‑and‑greet ticket — speaks for itself. The broader pattern is even more egregious offering an additional $450 for a celebrity meet‑and‑greet, and children being charged $422 to meet a “celebrity preacher.” This commercialisation of alleged religious figures is indefensible.  All Christians are obligated to uphold consistent Christian values and to serve as public witnesses to Christ. No believer should even mention or be speaking about "F.U. money"  and "monetizing people" in any context. 

Ruslan's financial compromises alone warrants rejecting this ministry outright. But the wider problem is structural: the entire Bless God Summit genre is theologically unsound, commercially driven, and ecumenical in substance. It is not Christian ministry in any meaningful doctrinal sense.

Although Ruslan disputes Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox structures and practices, he still treats both traditions as doctrinally aligned with the gospel and draws no substantive line between their teaching and what he considers biblical truth. He refers to "Our respective streams of Christianity.. I love my Eastern Orthodox and Catholic brothers and sisters.. We (Protestants) believe that you have a valid church and a valid communion."4

The heart of the ecumenical heresy is soteriological. Bible believers who trust that we are saved by grace through faith alone are at complete odds with Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. The Roman Catholic/Eastern Orthodox premise is that we are saved by faith plus works. Although they share our vocabulary, they load those terms with different theological content. Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy diverge from one another in various aspects, yet they stand together in treating the sacraments as efficacious channels of grace and as necessary components of salvation. This is another gospel and is anathema biblically. (Galatians 1:8-9).

Ruslan's questionable list of speakers at his ecumenical summit included Mike Winger, Gavin Ortlund, Sean McDowell, Wes Huff, Michael Knowles, Lila Rose (Roman Catholic) and other dubious characters. He consistently elevates some of the most destructive influencers operating in the church today—Carl Lentz, TD Jakes, Gabe Poirot, and the self‑styled “demon slayer” contingent: Mike Signorelli, Isaiah Saldivar, "Apostle" Alexander Pagani, and Vlad Savchuk.

I can only describe Steve Kozar and Daniel Long's response to Ruslan's critics as deranged. They fail to articulate even the most basic definitions, and the claim that Ruslan has “repented” is demonstrably false. Ruslan’s own recorded statements are sufficient to indict him without further analysis. Their reaction warrants serious scrutiny: at minimum, their discernment should be questioned, and the motives behind issuing blatantly false claims of this nature should be examined. These two self-appointed "discerners"  are already in serious error due to their Lutheran commitment to baptismal regeneration—a significant deviation from sound biblical soteriology—the pattern is predictable. (Isaiah 5:20).

Brothers, join in imitating me, and keep your eyes on those who walk according to the example you have in us. For many, of whom I have often told you and now tell you even with tears, walk as enemies of the cross of Christ. Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things. But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power that enables him even to subject all things to himself. (Philippians 3:17-21).

1. Demonic Merchandiser Ruslan KD Claims His Followers Are Not As Important To Him As His Bank Account
2. Ruslan Exposed: Addressing the "Allegations"
3. (386) THIS Famous "Christian" YouTuber Must Be AVOIDED | Ruslan KD Exposed - YouTube
4. The Real Reason I Won't Convert to Orthodox or Catholic Christianity

ONE CHURCH LEICESTER: DAVID HIND PROPHESIES TO A BUILDING!

 One Church Together | 30th August 2026, 11.30am

Prophesying to a building? David Hind: "We prophesy to this building to be built in the name of Jesus.. I believe that we are living in the middle of a miracle.. God has spoken to us about many things.. it is just a matter of time." Scripture does not present prophesying to inanimate objects as a normative or authorized prophetic practice. When biblical figures address non‑living things, the speech is judgment‑declaration to people through the object, not communication with the object itself. Believers are encouraged to make all kinds of petitions and requests to God. (Ephesians 6:18; 1 Timothy 2:1). However, 'name‑and‑claim’ decrees and declarations are inauthentic and have no grounding in the Spirit’s work as revealed in scripture. (1 Timothy 4:1). If someone prophesies to an inanimate object it is a clear sign that something is seriously wrong.  

On one occasion, while the crowd was pressing in on him to hear the word of God, he was standing by the lake of Gennesaret, and he saw two boats by the lake, but the fishermen had gone out of them and were washing their nets. Getting into one of the boats, which was Simon’s, he asked him to put out a little from the land. And he sat down and taught the people from the boat. And when he had finished speaking, he said to Simon, “Put out into the deep and let down your nets for a catch.” And Simon answered, “Master, we toiled all night and took nothing! But at your word I will let down the nets.” And when they had done this, they enclosed a large number of fish, and their nets were breaking. They signaled to their partners in the other boat to come and help them. And they came and filled both the boats, so that they began to sink. 8But when Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord.” 9For he and all who were with him were astonished at the catch of fish that they had taken, 10and so also were James and John, sons of Zebedee, who were partners with Simon. And Jesus said to Simon, “Do not be afraid; from now on you will be catching men.”11And when they had brought their boats to land, they left everything and followed him. (Luke 5:1-11).

It is telling that verses 8–10 were omitted from the reading. Those verses supply the central point of the miracle: its evangelistic purpose—to catch men. "Do not be afraid; from now on you will be catching men.” That line throws decisive light on the entire narrative and requires us to read it as Christ’s deliberate instruction in the work to which these men were being appointed.

The habit of commandeering Jesus’ miracles as personal life‑applications is a familiar marker of false teachers. Hind’s handling of the phrase “push out a little from the shore” reduces the text to a pretext for self‑congratulation and completely bypasses the passage’s actual meaning.

Hind’s altar call at the beginning of his "sermon"—devoid of the gospel—collapsed into the usual emotional prompts: “If you want Jesus in your boat, come to the front,” When that failed and no one responded, he made a later attempt with the standard miracle rhetoric. He implied that some were on the cusp of a miracle and urged those seeking healing, family salvation, prodigals restored, career breakthroughs, a child, a marriage, or any other “miracle”, to step forward and “be released.” The miraculous catch of fish was invoked as proof that expectations would be exceeded, and he called on the musicians to “sing something over you" and those who responded were urged to “receive something". Hinds encouragement "to keep expectant that it is just a matter of time" is very dangerous. He inserts himself into the very thing people most desperately hope for, and that misplaced hope can eclipse their hope in Christ Himself. 

I have attended many such meetings where false prophets prey on people's vulnerabilities. This form of ungodly rhetoric constitutes spiritual abuse. The emotional intensity is predictable, but the pattern is the same: verses taken out of context, inflated promises, manufactured hope, and the inevitable collapse into confusion and disappointment—often damaging faith. Praying for healing, salvation, and restoration is biblical, but when the anticipated “miracle” does not materialize, the only faithful conclusion remains: “Your will be done." Repeating the mantra "we are in the middle of a miracle" does not make it so. 

In the same chapter, Jesus instructs believers to anticipate divisions even within their own households (Luke 12:51–53; cf. Micah 7:6; Matthew 10:34). These texts underscore why presumptuous expectations are unwarranted and why faith must be grounded in the Lord Himself rather than in human assumptions. I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world. (John 16:33).

Hind’s relentless self‑promotion—especially the vaunted merger of two openly apostate NAR assemblies five years ago—is repulsive in its essence. This is not God‑honouring speech. It is the textbook case of “glorying in their shame”, minds locked onto earthly metrics. The catalogue of red flags already documented in previous posts makes their true allegiance unmistakable. Scripture is clear: legitimate boasting is confined to the Lord alone. Self‑commendation is worthless; only the Lord’s verdict stands. (2 Corinthians 10:17–18).

Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ (Matthew 7:21-23).

If further confirmation were needed, Hind even inserts a clip from The Chosen. His comment—“It’s wrong in one point because Jesus was in the boat”—barely scratches the surface. The series is fundamentally unsound and should not be promoted. It is riddled with inaccurate quotations and distorted portrayals of Jesus and the disciples, including a wholly fabricated depiction of Judas Iscariot. Angel Studios, the producing company, is Mormon‑founded and carries clear LDS associations. The CEO and the Executive Producer of The Chosen are Mormons. The danger is obvious: Christians are being led to grow attached to unbiblical dramatizations and as a result their discernment is eroded. Jonathan Roumie, who plays Jesus, is a Roman Catholic; baptized originally in the Greek Orthodox Church, he later entered Roman Catholicism and is publicly active in Catholic ministry. From his own lips, Roumie admits that he is a Freemason and a Nights Templar. Need I say more?

NAR leaders routinely assert a superior “anointing” that allegedly elevates them above ordinary believers and grants their teaching special authority. David Hind’s self‑assigned status as an “apostolic leader of leaders” is a textbook example of narcissistic inflation—grandiose claims of spiritual rank where no such anointing exists.

The megachurch collapse 

My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you make it a den of robbers. (Matthew 21:13).

Hind's wannabe megachurch model is fast going out of fashion. 

Paula White now cannot fill a hundred seats on a Sunday morning:🚨PAULA WHITE‼️The Fall of a MegaChurch EMPIRE

The fall of Joel Osteen's Lakewood Church: The Fall of Joel Osteen's Lakewood Church: What Really Happened?  

Greg Locke's Global Vision Bible Church falls from 3,000 members to under 300: Greg Locke‼️The True Story Behind Global Vision Bible Church 90% Collapse

There are many more examples.. Gateway Church, Hillsong, Willow Creek, Mars Hill, Saddleback Church: Megachurches Are Losing Members at an Alarming Rate

It has taken a long time and there are many casualties, but the pattern has finally broken. Many believers are no longer submitting to the wolves that lead false churches. They are walking away from abusive, money‑driven pastors and the corrupt systems that sustain them.

The dark history of Pentecostalism: Best Kept Secret: The Hidden Catalyst Behind Pentecostalism’s Second Wave | Hyde Park Cult

DANIEL LONG AND STEVE KOZAR "DISCERNERS" WITHOUT DISCERNMENT

Long & Kozar love & appreciate the Ruslan KD podcast?

These two self‑styled “discerners” appear to have abandoned all sense of humility and proportion. Steve Kozar, in his characteristic arrogance, now suggests that he and Daniel Long represent the initial “snowball” of resistance to NAR and charismatic deception, and that their influence is prompting charismatics to follow suit. This claim is baseless. The fact that many believers have discerned and exposed false teachers without any reference to Long or Kozar is attributable solely to the sanctifying work of God in their lives; the example of those two figures has no theological relevance to that outcome. (Galatians 6:3; 1 Corinthians 8:2; Proverbs 3:7).

Long and Kozar behave like superiors patronizing their inferiors. Long: "We do listen to these guys, we take what they say, we appreciate them." Do they realise how patronizing they sound? More concerning is their demonstrated lack of discernment in endorsing Ruslan KD and Mike Winger, both central figures in the so‑called “Evangelical swamp” aka the “Christian YouTube Establishment”. Kozar’s nodding and tacit approval places him at the same level. I hold no regard for either of these Lutherans, given their commitment to baptismal regeneration — a substantive deviation from sound soteriology.

Ruslan’s pursuit of “F.U. money” and his stated intent to monetize Christians should not receive approval from anyone. This pattern of conduct aligns precisely with the forms of ungodliness scripture warns against. (Matthew 6:21,24; Proverbs 23:4-5; 1 John 2:15-17). 

Ruslan quotes:

"How do I monetize these people?"
"How do I build a business?"
"What is my bank account going to look like in the next two to three years?"
"I have to make more than six figures.. I need seven figures."
"You will grow your audience, and then you've got to find a unique way to monetize them."
"I am not doing anything for less than $500 an hour."

"I love TD Jakes."

"I would love to be in a position someday where I have F.U. money."

Only blatant deceivers and narcissists would consider charging people for “meet and greet” access to so‑called "celebrity preachers". The pricing for Ruslan’s March 2026 Bless God Summit — including a $75 meet‑and‑greet ticket — speaks for itself. The broader pattern is even more egregious offering an additional $450 for a celebrity meet‑and‑greet, and children being charged $422 to meet a “celebrity preacher.” This commercialisation of alleged religious figures is indefensible.

But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people. (2 Timothy 3:1-5).

Paul's example for believers to imitate. 

Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us, because we were not idle when we were with you, nor did we eat anyone’s bread without paying for it, but with toil and labor we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you. It was not because we do not have that right, but to give you in ourselves an example to imitate. For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat. For we hear that some among you walk in idleness, not busy at work, but busybodies. Now such persons we command and encourage in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work quietly and to earn their own living. (2 Thessalonians 3:6-12).

For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs. (1 Timothy 6:10; Matthew 6:24; Hebrews 13:5).

Ruslan's questionable list of speakers at his ecumenical summit included Mike Winger, Gavin Ortlund, Sean McDowell, Wes Huff, Michael Knowles, Lila Rose (Roman Catholic) and other dubious characters. He consistently elevates some of the most destructive influencers operating in the church today—Carl Lentz, TD Jakes, Gabe Poirot, and the self‑styled “demon slayer” contingent: Mike Signorelli, Isaiah Saldivar, "Apostle" Alexander Pagani, and Vlad Savchuk.

Although Winger has exposed various NAR figures and elements of its "cover-up culture", he nevertheless fails to address the dangers of ecumenism or the overtly worldly values embraced by Ruslan and his "Bless God Summit". His endorsement of Ruslan, his alignment with TPUSA, and his claim that false prophets can be rehabilitated into ministry are all fundamentally incompatible with any serious reading of scripture.

Ruslan refers to "Our respective streams of Christianity.. I love my Eastern Orthodox and Catholic brothers and sisters.. We (Protestants) believe that you have a valid church and a valid communion."1  

The sobering reality is that while Ruslan and his associates elevate themselves, generate substantial revenue, and engage in ecumenical theatrics at an upscale resort, their conduct ultimately undermines the gospel of Jesus Christ. (Matthew 7:20).

1. The Real Reason I Won't Convert to Orthodox or Catholic Christianity

WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING: FALSE PROPHETS AND BIBLE TEACHERS IN THE LAST DAYS: BLESS GOD SUMMIT> RUSLAN / MIKE WINGER / MICHAEL GRANT

CHRIS ROSEBROUGH: "REVERSE RAPTURE" DECEPTION

F4F | Carolyn Dennis Reverse Rapture Deception

I have previously noted that Chris Rosebrough’s treatment of end‑times deception remains hamstrung by his Lutheran eschatology. In this video Rosebrough targets yet another NAR operator: Carolyne Dennis, a self‑appointed "prophet" and founder of Declaring Your Destiny International. Dennis claims to possess eschatological intelligence delivered ‘directly from the Father.’ In 2025 she began a two part series in which she declared that "the reverse rapture, the great and terrible day, is imminent and upon us." Her assertions function as yet another example of NAR self‑authorization masquerading as revelation.1

In Part 1, Carolyne Dennis constructs her ‘prophecy’ from Joel 2:1–11 and she asserts that a so‑called ‘reverse rapture’ will come like a thief in the night, during which time God will remove the wicked from the earth in a single day. She also appeals to the book of Enoch and claims that Enoch was the son of Cain (Genesis 4:18). This is her first verifiable error. The prophetic Enoch is a different figure entirely: Scripture identifies him as the son of Jared and the father of Methuselah, who lived 365 years before being taken by God (Genesis 5:21–24). He is not a descendant of Cain.

Dennis proceeds to redefine the ‘great and terrible day’ from Zephaniah 1:14–16 and alleges that the ‘spirit of Nephilim’ is presently inhabiting people on earth—individuals she describes as irredeemably evil and destined for destruction on that day. She instructs her followers as part of the 'in crowd' to ‘decree and declare’ that they are in the right place at the right time. This is merely NAR‑style verbal posturing; affirmations with no scriptural foundation are empty and carry no spiritual authority. This is the predictable, low‑grade fruit of NAR theology: sensationalism, misused scripture, and self‑authorizing revelation. None of her claims withstand biblical scrutiny, yet she has amassed a concerning 44.5k subscribers.

I will not engage with the book of Enoch in this post; scripture alone is the standard by which we test the spirits. (1 John 4:1). Carolyne Dennis inverts the biblical order of events. Scripture indicates that the cosmic disturbances described in Joel 2 occur before the Day of the Lord. The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and awesome Day of the LORD. (Joel 2:31). The wicked are not removed from the earth; they remain after the resurrection of the saints (the rapture) and are subjected to the outpouring of divine wrath, initially through the trumpet judgments following the breaking of the seventh seal. (Revelation 8–11). These trumpet judgments precede the bowl judgments of Revelation 16. The rapture and the onset of God’s wrath take place on the same day, though they are not simultaneous. (1 Thessalonians 5:2; 2 Peter 3:10). The "thief in the night" imagery underscores the sudden and unexpected nature of that day (Matthew 24:43), though it will not overtake believers. (1 Thessalonians 5:4).

Rosebrough’s theological tradition constrains his categories, and the result is a flattened eschatology. He gives the impression that the day of the Lord, the return of Christ, the day of judgment, the end of the world, the visible second coming, and the arrival of the new heaven and new earth are all a single, undifferentiated event. His appeal to Matthew 7:22— a text referring to the great white throne judgment—further illustrates the conflation. In effect, he collapses multiple distinct biblical events into one final ‘wind‑up’ of creation, speaking as though everything concludes at once without any exegetical distinctions. 

Lutheran amillennial eschatology reflects a long‑standing tradition that conflate distinct end‑time passages, a pattern traceable to Luther’s own rejection of the book of Revelation. Luther described Revelation as "neither apostolic nor prophetic” and stated, “My spirit cannot accommodate itself to this book,” judging its imagery to obscure rather than clarify. This unfortunate position has produced a constricted eschatological framework within Lutheranism, and the resulting deficiencies require correction. The field has advanced significantly since the Reformation, and Rosebrough and others would benefit from engaging the relevant biblical material rather than relying on inherited assumptions from their tradition.

Biblically, the resurrection of believers (the rapture) initiates the Day of the Lord and precedes the outpouring of divine wrath. (1 Thessalonians 5:9). The cosmic disturbances associated with the Day of the Lord appear across the prophetic and apostolic witness: Isaiah 13:9–10; Joel 2:30–31; Zephaniah 1:14–16; Acts 2:20; Matthew 24:29–30; Revelation 6:12–17. Armageddon, by contrast, occurs when Christ personally and visibly returns with His armies. (Revelation 19:11ff.). This climactic intervention brings the sequence of wrath to its conclusion, executed directly by Christ Himself.

The seals are opened by the Lamb (Jesus Christ), who stands at the centre of the throne in heaven, while the subsequent acts of wrath are administered through the agency of the angels.

“Who is worthy to break the seals and open the scroll?” (Revelation 5:2).

Then I saw a Lamb who appeared to have been slain, standing in the center of the throne, encircled by the four living creatures and the elders. The Lamb had seven horns and seven eyes, which represent the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth. And He came and took the scroll from the right hand of the One seated on the throne.
When He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp, and they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. And they sang a new song:
“Worthy are You to take the scroll and open its seals,
because You were slain,
and by Your blood You purchased for God
those from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.
You have made them to be a kingdom
and priests to serve our God,
and they will reign upon the earth.”(Revelation 5:6-10).

 

When the Lamb opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour. (Revelation 8:1).

And I watched as the Lamb opened the sixth seal, and there was a great earthquake, and the sun became black like sackcloth of goat hair, and the whole moon turned blood red, and the stars of the sky fell to the earth like unripe figs dropping from a tree shaken by a great wind. The sky receded like a scroll being rolled up, and every mountain and island was moved from its place. (Revelation 6:12-14).

Those who dwell on the earth (the earth dwellers) are the target of these judgements. 

Then the kings of the earth, the nobles, the commanders, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and free man hid in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains. And they said to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of the One seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb. For the great day of Their wrath has come, and who is able to withstand it?” (Revelation 6:15-17).

The apostle Paul links the return of Christ with the day of the Lord's wrath. (1 Thessalonians 4:13–5:9).

Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! The one sitting on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems, and he has a name written that no one knows but himself. He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God. And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses. From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords. (Revelation 19:11-16).   

1. THE REVERSE RAPTURE, THE GREAT AND TERRIBLE DAY - WHY? (PT 1) - A MESSAGE FROM GOD - AUGUST 27, 2025
1. HOW, WHEN & WHERE? - THE REVERSE RAPTURE, THE GREAT & TERRIBLE DAY (PT 2) - A MESSAGE FROM GOD

Further Links

The Second Coming Does Not Begin with Armageddon | Bible Prophecy Answers with Alan Kurschner
The Meaning and Timing of the New Heaven and the New Earth | Bible Prophecy Daily

ASSEMBLIES OF GOD DISTORTION OF THE BAPTISM IN THE HOLY SPIRIT

The doctrine of Spirit baptism as a distinct, secondary experience emerged within early twentieth‑century Pentecostal and later charismatic movements. The central question concerns whether the baptism in the Holy Spirit is a separate, post‑conversion event or is inherently tied to conversion itself. Pentecostal and charismatic traditions maintain that a subsequent Spirit baptism is necessary for empowerment and for the operation of spiritual gifts.

The phrase “baptism in the Holy Spirit” appears only a handful of times in the New Testament and these occurrences almost entirely refer to John the Baptist’s prophecy that Jesus would baptise in or with the Holy Spirit (Greek preposition ἐν).1 

I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. (Matthew 3:11 cf. Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33; Acts 1:5,11:16; 1 Corinthians 12:13).

Jesus promised his disciples that the baptism of the Holy Spirit would take place after His ascension.

And while staying with them he ordered them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, “you heard from me; for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” (Acts 1:4-5,8).

This prophecy reaches its fulfilment in Acts 2:1–36 at Pentecost, and in Acts 11:16 Peter retrospectively identifies the same fulfilment was now extended to the Gentiles. (Acts 10:44–48; 11:15–18). 

When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. (Acts 2:2-4).

As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning. And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ (Acts 11:15-16).

Further references to this phenomenon appear in Acts 8:14–17 and Acts 19:1–7, and Paul addresses the same subject in 1 Corinthians 12:12–13. Luke and Paul use the expression “filled with the Spirit” in sharply different ways. For Luke, it signifies episodic empowerment for witness; for Paul, it denotes ongoing moral transformation, the Spirit’s sustained, character‑forming work. Conflating these categories collapses two distinct frameworks and inevitably generates confusion.

The extraordinary events of Pentecost are descriptive, not prescriptive. Pentecost was a singular moment inaugurating the church age. Its dramatic signs marked the transition from the Old Covenant to the New and publicly authenticated God’s power and the reality of Christ’s resurrection. (Acts 2:32–33). A central feature of the event was its dismantling of cultural and linguistic barriers: visitors to Jerusalem heard the gospel in their own languages (Acts 2:8–11), a sign anticipating the global reach of the Christian faith and the inclusion of the nations promised in scripture. (Isaiah 49:6; cf. Joel 2:28-32).

Treating a historical narrative as a universal formula

Acts records boundary‑marking, unrepeatable events, not a normative spiritual sequence. Misinterpretation arises when isolated episodes (Acts 2, 8,10,19) are extracted from their historical function and re‑cast as a mandatory pattern for all believers. This collapses Luke’s narrative purpose into a modern experiential template and imposes a prescriptive framework the text itself does not establish.

The 20th century - enter Pentecostal theology and the "second blessing"

The modern doctrine of a subsequent post-conversion experience is only about 120 years old and has no precedent before the twentieth century. This construct arose in 1901 (Topeka) and 1906 (Azusa Street). Historically, the church held no such doctrine. Early writers such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen consistently tied the Spirit’s gift to conversion itself—regeneration, incorporation into the church, and the believer’s new life—not to a later crisis event. In the New Testament, Paul uses categories such as sealed, indwelt, anointed, and filled, treating the Spirit as the shared reality of all believers rather than as a second‑tier upgrade. In the 1890s, Pentecostal forerunner RC Horner, a Canadian holiness evangelist, introduced a theological distinction that became foundational for emerging Pentecostal thought. In Pentecost (1891) and Bible Doctrines (1909), Horner argued that Spirit baptism was not identical with the second blessing but constituted a third work of grace, subsequent to salvation and sanctification, intended to empower believers for service. False teacher Charles Fox Parham later built on this framework by identifying speaking in tongues as the biblical evidence of Spirit baptism.2  

The Assemblies of God (AoG), the largest Pentecostal denomination, incorporates this claimed post‑conversion baptism in the Spirit into its official confession of faith.

AoG: "All believers are entitled to and should ardently expect and earnestly seek the promise of the Father, the baptism in the Holy Spirit and fire, according to the command of our Lord Jesus Christ. This was the normal experience of all in the early Christian Church. With it comes the enduement of power for life and service, the bestowment of the gifts and their uses in the work of the ministry." 3  

Several difficulties arise from this interpretation. Paul directs believers to pursue the gifts of the Spirit, not a secondary “baptism in the Spirit”. (1 Corinthians 14:1; 12:1). The Spirit is given at conversion, and the distribution of gifts is governed by the Spirit’s own will. (1 Corinthians 12:11). The Assemblies of God adds that this alleged post‑conversion baptism is initially evidenced by the physical phenomenon of speaking in other tongues (glossolalia). The idea that Spirit baptism is a distinct, post‑conversion experience tied to tongues emerged in 1901 (Topeka) and 1906 (Azusa Street). This claim stands at odds with Paul’s rhetorical differentiation of the gifts—“Do all speak in tongues” (1 Corinthians 12:30)—which assumes that the gift of tongues is not universally bestowed.

Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, administrating, and various kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? But earnestly desire the higher gifts. (1 Corinthians 12:27-31).

Pentecostal interpreters often distinguish 1 Corinthians 12:13 from the other Spirit‑baptism passages, arguing that in this verse the Holy Spirit functions as the baptizer. Certain translations (e.g., NIV, Good News Translation) render the phrase “by the Spirit”. This reading is misleading because it transfers the agency to the Spirit rather than to Christ, who is consistently presented as the One who sends the Holy Spirit in every other passage. The New Testament consistently uses the passive voice (“you will be baptised”), signalling that the Spirit’s work is God‑initiated, not something believers trigger or perform. In my assessment, Pentecostal interpreters have mishandled the word of God by introducing a division that is neither warranted nor coherent, resulting in a distortion of the cohesive passages that bear directly on the unity and health of the body of Christ. (2 Timothy 2:15). Paul states unambiguously that all believers are baptized into one body and all partake of the same Spirit.

For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:13 cf. Ephesians 1:13-14;2:18,4:4; Titus 3:4-7).

Professor Anthony C Thiselton: "Any theology that might imply that this one baptism in 13a in which believers were baptized by [or in] one Spirit might mark off some postconversion experience or status enjoyed only by some Christians attacks and undermines Paul’s entire argument and emphasis."4  

A further argument presented by Pentecostal interpreters is that the disciples were commissioned and received the Spirit before Pentecost. (John 20:22). The apparent tension arises because scripture also affirms that the Spirit would be given after Jesus was glorified. (John 7:39; 16:7). The most coherent reading is that the disciples serve as forerunners, while Pentecost marks the point at which the Spirit is given to all believers. No single text establishes a template for a later, secondary experience.

Ellicott: "And saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost.—These words are not, on the one hand, to be understood as simply a promise of the future gift of the Holy Ghost, for they are a definite imperative, referring to the moment when they were spoken; nor are they, on the other hand, to be taken as the promised advent of the Paraclete (John 14:16 et seq.), for the gift of the Holy Ghost was not yet, because Jesus was not yet glorified (John 7:39; John 16:7 et seq.). The meaning is that He then gave to them a sign, which was itself to faithful hearts as the firstfruits of that which was to come. His act was sacramental, and with the outer and visible sign there was the inward and spiritual grace. The very word used was that used when He said to them, “Take (receive ye), eat; this is My body” (Matthew 26:26; Mark 14:22). It would come to them now with a fulness of sacred meaning. The Risen Body is present with them. The constant spiritual Presence in the person of the Paraclete is promised to them. They again hear the words “Receive ye,” and the very command implies the power to obey. (Comp. Excursus C: The Sacramental Teaching of St. John’s Gospel, p. 556.)" 5

Gann: "receive ... This gift fulfilled many promises that the Spirit would be sent (John 14:16, John 14:26; john 15:26; John 16:7, John 16:13). It foreshadows the arrival of the Spirit’s empowering presence at Pentecost (Acts 1:4-5; Acts 2:1–47)."6  

Pentecostal interpreters frequently appeal to Acts 8:14–17 and 19:1–7, where individuals identified as believers or disciples receive the Holy Spirit.

 

When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them. On their arrival, they prayed for them to receive the Holy Spirit. For the Holy Spirit had not yet fallen upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Peter and John laid their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. (Acts 8:14-17)

And he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” (Acts 19:2). 

In Acts 19:2, Paul encounters a group whose understanding of the faith had never advanced beyond John the Baptist’s message. His question—“Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”—exposes the deficiency. Genuine New Covenant faith presupposes the reception of the Spirit at conversion. Their ignorance prompts Paul to proclaim the full gospel, leading to baptism in Jesus’ name and the Spirit’s immediate, visible arrival. The episode underscores that salvation and the Spirit’s indwelling are inseparable aspects of conversion, demonstrating God’s intention to equip every genuine believer with His empowering presence. This group corresponds precisely to Apollos upon his arrival in Ephesus, who likewise knew only John’s baptism (Acts 18:24–26).

The destructive implications of this doctrine are evident. Pentecostal theology effectively constructs a two‑tier hierarchy of believers, treating those labelled “baptised in the Holy Spirit” as a more committed, more spiritual, and implicitly superior class. This contradicts Paul’s insistence that all believers share one Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:13). The widespread carnality evident within NAR–Pentecostal circles, their recurrent mishandling of scripture, and the compromised public witness of many of their leaders collectively render the claim of “superior spirituality” illusory. Their model of “Spirit baptism” demonstrably fails to produce Christian maturity or holiness,

These problems are intensified by the additional hierarchical layers introduced through so‑called Apostles and Prophets of the New Apostolic Reformation during the 1980s and 90s. Peter C Wagner’s framework has generated further divisions and has produced an unbiblical, distorted, and frequently abusive structure that bears little resemblance to the New Testament pattern. The defective fruit produced by many NAR “apostles and prophets” indicates the operation of a different spirit. (2 Corinthians 11:4; Matthew 7:16).

1. Strong's Greek: 1722. ἐν (en) -- in, on, at, by, with, among

2. Baptism with the Holy Spirit - Wikipedia
3. Statement of Faith – General Council of the Assemblies of God of the Mariana and Palau Islands
4. Anthony C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), 997–98.
5. John 20 Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
6. John 20 - Gann's Commentary on the Bible - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.org

Further Links

The Hidden Origin of the Assemblies of God: Race, Power, and Pentecostal Myth | Podcast Episode 528

WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING: FALSE PROPHETS AND BIBLE TEACHERS IN THE LAST DAYS: SIMON BRAKER FALSE PROPHET: BAPTISM WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT AND FIRE

ONE CHURCH LEICESTER: DAVID HIND'S £5 MILLION SPIN

One Church Together | 31st May 2026, 11.30am

Comfort, comfort my people, says your God.

Speak tenderly to Jerusalem,
and cry to her that her warfare is ended,
that her iniquity is pardoned,
that she has received from the Lord’s hand
double for all her sins.

A voice cries:
“In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord;
make straight in the desert a highway for our God.
Every valley shall be lifted up,
and every mountain and hill be made low;
the uneven ground shall become level,
and the rough places a plain.
And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed,
and all flesh shall see it together,
for the mouth of the Lord has spoken.”  (Isaiah 40:1-5).

It is remarkable how consistently David Hind alters the context and application of scripture in order to congratulate himself and align the text with his personal “vision” and building initiatives. He persistently sanitises the history of One Church, and that revisionism extends to All Nations Church (ANC), which was failing and close to collapse prior to its merger with TLC. The One Church website itself describes ANC as a “shipwreck” before the merger.1 This selective retelling of events reflects Hind’s willingness to be economical with the truth. (Psalm 12:2). In reality, the historical record is deeply concerning, as outlined in my previous posts. The false teaching and the platforming of NAR wolves by both churches is a matter that should provoke profound embarrassment, shame, and repentance. One Church continues to function as an NAR church, and with that comes the predictable abandonment of sound doctrine.

Isaiah 40:1-5 refers to the restoration of Jerusalem and the coming of Jesus Christ.   

A voice cries in the wilderness.. Verse 3 introduces the prophetic voice identified in the New Testament with John the Baptist, who prepares the way for Jesus Christ and calls for repentance. (Matthew 3:3; Mark 1:3; Luke 3:4; John 1:23).

If these verses teach anything, it is the call to repentance and holiness. They offer no justification for physical building projects, nor do they support ventures tied to secular sponsorship. To apply them in that direction is an exegetical distortion, not a legitimate interpretation.

The primacy of the gospel 

So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith. (Galatians 6:10).

You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. (James 4:4).

Whether the church should involve itself in secular partnerships—especially with corporate sponsors—raises a theological question, not merely a practical one. Scripture warns that alignment with the world’s systems signals hostility toward God, not neutrality. Any collaboration must therefore be assessed through the lens of fidelity to doctrine, not the optics of social engagement. 

Open Hands unholy history

Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? (2 Corinthians 6:14 cf. Ephesians 5:7).

Open Hands Trust received a National Lottery award of £446,626 in 2014, during Adam Simmonds’ period as Director and Trustee of Trinity Life Church. Entering into a binding funding agreement with the Big Lottery Fund — and its accompanying secular value framework — represents, in my assessment, a clear departure from the Christian principles TLC claimed to uphold. The pattern is familiar: biblical standards are set aside when worldly advantage is at stake. The outcome was financially beneficial, but the method was a betrayal of biblical values. The ends do not sanctify the means.

The projected cost of the new Open Hands Centre at 12 Frog Island is a staggering £5 million! Hind has already “prophesied” that God will cover the expense, a claim that conveniently prepares the ground for yet another round of pressure on his congregation to give beyond their means. The pattern is predictable: the financial burden is spiritualised, and members are led to believe that excessive giving is an act of service to God rather than a response to institutional ambition. 

It is also necessary to consider whether Open Hands’ planned expansion represents an ethically questionable attempt to dominate the local charity landscape and marginalise smaller organisations. 96% of charities operate on incomes below £1 million, yet the majority of available funding is captured by the largest entities. The wider debate about the impact of large charities crowding out smaller ones is ongoing.2  

Those churches that endorse Open Hands should consider the aberrant theology of One Church before rushing to support them. Are local church leaders so short-sighted that they do not realise that good works detached from sound doctrine achieve nothing? The pastoral calling is a divine commission to shepherd, instruct, and guard the church through faithful adherence to scripture. It includes the explicit responsibility to protect the flock from error. Yet in NAR circles, false teaching is not an aberration but a defining feature, revealing a complete abandonment of the theological duty that scripture assigns to pastors.

The historical trajectory of Pentecostalism—particularly within the Assemblies of God—is deeply troubling.* Pentecostal and NAR environments are especially known for suppressing scrutiny and critical thinking. Yet it is neither wrong nor disruptive to ask searching questions; in fact, it is a biblical obligation to think carefully and to test all things by scripture. Despite this, legitimate examination is often portrayed as disloyal or even spiritually suspect, contrary to the command of 1 John 4:1. Paul did not evade criticism; he addressed it directly and transparently.

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! (Isaiah 5:20).

This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. (1 John 1:5-10).

1. Our Story | One Church Leicester
2. Small vs. large charities: does size determine who gets funded? | Sector Debates | Plinth

* How the Assemblies of God Shaped Modern Charismatic Christianity - William Branham Historical Research

REVELATION TV: HOWARD CONDER'S COLLABORATION WITH AT BOSHOFF CRC

Revelation TV : Award Winning Christian TV

So, Howard Conder jetted off to the Revelation studios in Spain on the 22nd of May to work with the team of Christian Revival Churches (CRC). According to Leslie Conder, RTV are collaborating with CRC to "bring life to their Spanish studios". Apparently, "amazing plans" are underway with a "revival meeting" taking place the previous week on the 15th May, with more to follow: This Could Change Your Life [CRC Spain Encounter]

There is a significant problem here: CRC’s founder, At Boshoff, has generated sustained concerns across multiple platforms, yet Conder once again overlooks the red flags and aligns himself with a “church” that has been identified by some observers as cult‑adjacent. While CRC does not meet the strict sociological definition of a cult, a broader assessment finds it functions as a high‑control megachurch with clear cult‑like features. The issues centre on authoritarian structure, secrecy, and narrative management.

CRC was established by Boshoff in 1994 and presents itself as a global church movement committed to impacting nations and reaching people with the message of Jesus Christ, operating numerous campuses across various regions of the world.1  

As noted in a previous post, Boshoff, operating within the NAR framework, displays a characteristic “man‑of‑God syndrome" ~ the organisation is structured around his personal authority, marked by expectations of unquestioning loyalty and the framing of dissent as rebellion. Boshoff does not tolerate scrutiny, challenge, or meaningful accountability.2 His decision to divorce his wife without informing the congregation illustrates the pattern. Concealing major pastoral life events is a textbook form of institutional image‑protection, not normal congregational transparency. Former members also report guilt‑and‑shame dynamics consistent with high‑control environments.

It appears that no lessons have been learned by Conder and his associates, and his recent actions further demonstrate that he is not qualified to lead any form of Christian ministry. After years of receiving “prophetic words” from demonstrably unreliable sources, Conder continues to align himself with questionable figures and high‑control ministries.3 This pattern reflects a consistent failure of discernment and governance, raising legitimate concerns about his faith and suitability for leadership.

The Spanish studios were formally opened in April 2023, but activity declined soon afterwards as the organisation underwent significant operational downsizing. The facility was semi-abandoned, and continued to function at a reduced level while administrative responsibilities and much of the programme production were transferred back to the UK. The result is a semi‑active site that remains technically operational but no longer serves as the primary base of ministry operations.   

With substantial questions still outstanding, RTV has issued its own controlled account of events, attributing the situation to staffing difficulties, travel constraints, the loss of EU mobility, and the impact of COVID‑19. This explanation effectively reframes these factors as obstacles that nullified the various “prophetic words” the organisation had previously promoted, without addressing the deeper issue of why those prophecies failed or why the leadership relied on them in the first place. (Deuteronomy 18:23; 1 John 4:1). Below is an excerpt from the RTV statement.

REVELATION INTERNATIONAL CENTRE: SPAIN

SO WHAT WENT WRONG? 

"We had such high hopes for Revelation TV broadcasting from Spain, but the challenges began to build up.

We had moved our office based to Spain. There came a time when our office manager decided to retire. Another member of the office team needed to spend more time with family abroad so was unable to continue to commit to a full-time position. We advertised for several months for the post to be filled in Spain but were unable to fine admin staff with both fluent English and a good knowledge of The Bible. We had positive applications from the UK but, due to Brexit rules, they were unable to relocate to Spain to take up the position. In the end it became necessary to move the office and administration back to the UK as we had no staff!

However much our guests were willing to travel to Spain to be interviewed and share in programmes, there were always key people who could not or would not do so. It was expensive to pay for airfares, accommodation, and food as well as transport to and from the Spanish airport, and we found such guests questioning why we hadn’t simply brought them to our London studios!
We found that after we exited the EU there were far fewer suitable guests living in Spain.
We had always found it necessary to maintain a (small) studio in the UK which necessitated presenters and production staff being in the UK, but we were finding that we were becoming increasingly busy in London, and decreasingly busy in Spain.

As a leadership we found we were needed in both London and Spain. With Howard, who doesn’t like flying at the best of times, increasingly he found he was needed for interviews and programmes in the UK. It always seemed to be that we arrived in one country only to find we were needed back in the other because an issue had arisen. We had a good staff team, but all staff need management, and we were missing too much by being spread thinly.

Covid only acerbated the situated as the leadership were stuck in the Uk whilst most of the staff team were in Spain. Even so, we pressed on..

It was the Revelation Foundation trustees in the end who met and took the decision that Revelation needed to be based in one place. After much prayer and discussion, the decision was taken to move the base back to the UK. To all the Spanish team, we offered relocation to the UK … or a redundancy package.

As a leadership, we struggle to understand all that has gone on. Did we get our guidance wrong? Did we not hear from God correctly? We don’t have the answers, but leaders must make decisions and that is what we have done. We value your prayers. As I write we are seeking to understand the next step as to what the future should be for the Revelation International Centre."4

   

1. CRC Bloemfontein | Christian Revival Church
2. WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING: FALSE PROPHETS AND BIBLE TEACHERS IN THE LAST DAYS: AT BOSHOFF: ANOTHER TOXIC PASTOR TO MARK AND AVOID
3. WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING: FALSE PROPHETS AND BIBLE TEACHERS IN THE LAST DAYS: REVELATION TV: SPAIN ~ HOWARD CONDER'S WHITE ELEPHANT
4. Revelation TV : Award Winning Christian TV

Further Links

I Can't Believe How Arrogant This Pastor Is | At Boshoff Exposed
Pastor Ed Young & At Boshoff on Serving Man Rather than God
Ex CRC Members, what is the it really like? : r/southafrica

Megachurch Pastor With 120K Members Secretly Divorces Wife, Doesn't Tell Church - Protestia
The CRC phenomenon (2) - the concerns are valid

ONE CHURCH LEICESTER: SUSAN HIND "FREEDOM"

 FREEDOM | Susan Hind (26th April 2026)

These are waterless springs and mists driven by a storm. For them the gloom of utter darkness has been reserved. For, speaking loud boasts of folly, they entice by sensual passions of the flesh those who are barely escaping from those who live in error. They promise them freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption. For whatever overcomes a person, to that he is enslaved. For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them. What the true proverb says has happened to them: “The dog returns to its own vomit, and the sow, after washing herself, returns to wallow in the mire.” (2 Peter 2:17-22).

Many false teachers are in the habit of quoting single verses of scripture out of context. The verse below is a conditional promise made by Jesus > If you abide in my word.. the truth will set you free.

So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." (John 8:31-32).

Susan Hind: "We are going to position ourselves for an encounter with Jesus.."

There are several red flags in what Susan Hind presents in this video. She is clearly reading from a prepared source, and it raises the question of what material she is relying on. It would be important to identify whether her script is connected to Sozo or another inner‑healing model that lacks biblical grounding.

Much has already been written by various critics on the dangers of “inner healing”, and I have included some links at the end of this post. My concern is straightforward: the kind of “freedom” promoted by Susan Hind functionally displaces the role of the Holy Spirit and pushes people into an endless search for hidden causes they are then expected to “work through” on their own. Susan Hind proposes that the root issue may be generational—family problems supposedly passed down the line, unknown to us, requiring cutting off. Scripture does not support this framework. Any so‑called generational issues were dealt with decisively at the cross. A true believer has already been set free from the past. To revisit what Christ has already resolved is to step into unbelief and to treat His finished work as insufficient.

Susan Hind repeats Derek Prince’s category error when she claims, “A Christian can have a demon but not be possessed by one.” The statement is incoherent. It blurs the biblical distinction between demonic oppression and demonic possession and creates a third category that scripture does not recognise. 

She then expands the framework: believers supposedly grant “permission” to demonic spirits through fear, trauma, repeated lies, curses, occult involvement, or careless words spoken over themselves. According to her model, these  "open doors" form “strongholds” and may require special prayer or deliverance to be broken. This teaching is not merely unbiblical; it is accusatory and harmful. The claim that demonic oppression requires the believer’s permission shifts blame onto the Christian and undermines the finished work of Christ. Scripture states that anyone who is truly born again is a new creation—the old has gone, the new has come. The cross has already dealt decisively with the past. 

Susan Hind recounts various experiences, including direct words from God, visions and other claimed encounters. These alleged accounts should be approached with extreme caution. Many who have gone through the full cycle of deliverance practices—rebuking or expelling demons, making declarations, breaking family curses, and revisiting past wounds in pursuit of “freedom”—are left traumatised, disillusioned, and spiritually destabilised. The addictive nature of inner‑healing models often produces deterioration rather than growth, creating a constant sense that still more “deliverance” is required. Scripture teaches that on the cross, Jesus Christ removed the believer’s guilt and the penalty of sin. When a person is saved, they are pronounced NOT GUILTY - they are JUSTIFIED (Galatians 2:16), THEY HAVE RECEIVED THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD (2 Corinthians 5:21). TRUE BELIEVERS ARE BLESSED – THEY ARE DEFINITELY NOT CURSED (Galatians 3:13; Ephesians 1:3). This teaching is foundational to Christianity; it is not secondary. If any true believer is struggling with the truth of these statements, they should confess unbelief and petition the Lord for His help rather than revisiting the past. (1 John 1:9; Hebrews 5:7; Philippians 3:13). 

It is beyond dispute that One Church operates within the NAR framework and promotes doctrines and practices that are deeply problematic. The issues have already been documented at length in earlier posts. The only responsible response is to return to scripture and to sever ties with charismatic systems that promise instant solutions while drawing people into confusion, dependence, and false hope. None of these teachings has any biblical foundation. It is neither healthy nor scriptural to search for hidden reasons behind every feeling or difficulty. 

Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect. (Romans 12:2)

Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God. (Hebrews 12:1-2).

SOZO - AN EVIL INNER HEALING "MINISTRY"
NAR Deliverance Ministers EXPOSED! - Revival History - Episode 185 Branham Research Podcast

Derek Prince & Dark Legacy of the Shepherding Movement | Revival History | Charles Paisley | Ep 383

EP 22 | Is the Pressure to "Hear God's Voice" Preventing You from Actually Knowing Him?
WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING: FALSE PROPHETS AND BIBLE TEACHERS IN THE LAST DAYS: Search results for derek prince

CHRIS QUINTANA: WHITEWASHING CHUCK SMITH

Did Chuck Smith Make a False Prophecy? Here's What Scripture Says

Above: Chris Quintana's defence of Chuck Smith and his prediction that the rapture would occur in 1981 due to a misunderstanding of "this generation" in Matthew 24:34.

Chris Quintana spent several minutes insisting that Smith’s prediction was not a “Thus saith the Lord” prophecy—in other words, it was not a direct revelation from God. That distinction functions as an excuse, but it does not resolve the issue. Date‑setting is inherently reckless, and Calvary Chapel has been trying to defend Smith’s misstep ever since. Quintana’s approach feels like an attempt to whitewash a serious error—one that Smith never explained, never corrected, and never owned publicly.

Chuck Smith "I believe that the generation of 1948 is the last generation. Since a generation of judgment is forty years and the Tribulation period lasts seven years, I believe the Lord could come back for His Church any time before the Tribulation starts, which would mean anytime before 1981.

..However, it is possible that Jesus is dating the beginning of the generation from 1967, when Jerusalem was again under Israeli control for the first time since 587 B.C. We don’t know for sure which year actually marks the beginning of the last generation.”

“If the generation begins in 1967 instead of 1948, the timeline shifts, but the expectation remains within that window.” (1967 variant). pp. 35–36 of Chuck Smith’s 1978 booklet End Times. 

Smith’s 1981 rapture prediction was not an isolated remark; he repeated it in print, including in Future Survival (1973) and Snatched Away (1976), as documented by Calvary Chapel Wiki’s entry on the 1981 prediction.1  

People who acknowledge their mistakes demonstrate genuine integrity—something vital for all believers, but especially influential Bible teachers who carry public trust. Refusal to admit error is driven by fleshly impulses: fear of consequences and the instinct to preserve one’s image. Scripture offers no justification for either. Chuck Smith should have addressed his error publicly, but he chose not to. It is neither wise nor honest to excuse this or to attempt to sanitise his legacy by glossing over it.

Addressing the question: "this generation"

In Matthew 24:34, “this generation” is usually explained in one of three ways.

1. Preterist: Jesus is referring to His contemporaries.

2. Futurist: A future “fig tree generation”—the group alive when the end‑time events begin will live to see them completed.

3. Corporate Israel: “Generation” refers to Israel as a persistent, covenant‑breaking people, echoing Isaiah 6 and the recurring biblical theme of Israel’s resistance to God and rejection of the Messiah until the end of the age.

I find myself resonating with the third view, especially after hearing Peter Goeman’s argument.*

Further Concerns

Chuck Smith was ecumenical and made the unequivocal assertions that Roman Catholics are Christians! In his book, Answers For Today (1993), he made the following ecumenical statement:

"We should realize that we're all part of the Body of Christ and that there aren't any real divisions in the Body. We're all one. What a glorious day when we discover that God loves the Baptists! -- And the Presbyterians, and the Methodists, and the Catholics. We're all His and we all belong to Him. We see the whole Body of Christ, and we begin to strive together rather than striving against one another" (p157). (emphasis mine).

On another occasion, Smith stated unequivocally that Roman Catholics are Christians: "I had a cousin who was a mother superior in the Catholic Church and she was just a wonderful Christian. I loved her and we had great conversations together and I didn't try to convert her from Catholicism, nor did she try to convert me into becoming a Catholic.. it is just we both recognise that we had the same Lord and the same faith and so forth.." He goes on to say that the differences between Christians and Catholics are not that great - his conclusion: "Catholics are basically Christians too." 2  

Apart from Smith's false rapture prediction and ecumenism, he regularly appeared on the apostate TV network TBN. False teacher Paul Crouch referred to Smith as a "dear friend" after his death.3 Smith was also a "good friend" of false teacher Rick Warren. Friendships and associations with deceivers such as Paul Crouch and Rick Warren should be unacceptable to any believer committed to biblical integrity.

Smith also continued to sanction the ministry of his close associate, Don Stewart, after his adultery. Don Stewart left his wife and two teenage daughters for no good reason and married another woman in 2011. (Matthew 19:19).4 Smith and Stewart had a long association going back to the early days of Calvary Chapel at Costa Mesa, and they jointly hosted Pastors Perspective for a number of years. Don Stewart continues a high-profile ministry in association with Calvary Chapel despite being an adulterer! He is another "prophecy expert" and false teacher who relentlessly promotes the pretrib rapture error.

Chuck Smith, Paul Cain and the Branham Movement

John Collins, founder of William Branham Historical Research and the Leaving the Message YouTube channel, has documented extensive, verifiable connections between Chuck Smith and Paul Cain, whose ministry is explicitly framed as a continuation of Branham‑style, Latter Rain‑adjacent revivalism. Smith’s early ministry context placed him within the same networks. Collins has published evidence of a 1989 confrontation involving Paul Cain, Chuck Smith, and Jack Deere, following Smith’s public exposure of Cain’s homosexuality, high-flying lifestyle, financial misconduct, and fraudulent spiritual gifts. During that meeting, Cain warned Smith that “certain things could come out”, a statement Cain himself acknowledged as “spiritual blackmail”. Smith subsequently backed down, issued a public apology, and retracted his accusations.5

John Collins links this event to the rise of "cover-up culture" within Charismatic Christianity, and he asks some very pertinent questions: "And they (the allegations) would have caused Paul Cain severe damage to his ministry, and I don't know that he really would have recovered from this. And again, look at this intersection in time. Had Paul Cain been stopped, then would there have been an IHOP KC, if not an IHOPKC, how far would the NAR have developed with its seven mountains mandate agenda?"6 

 

In 2004 Cain admitted to being an alcoholic and a homosexual and agreed to a process of restoration.6 

Chuck Smith's theological departures are too substantial to minimise or whitewash. His date setting, ecumenism and associations with dubious figures such as Paul Cain represent serious breaches; they are not peripheral missteps. This pattern indicates his willingness to subordinate scripture when it conflicted with his objectives.

I value Chris Quintana’s ministry and regularly listen to his verse‑by‑verse teaching on YouTube. Even so, his loyalty to Chuck Smith is misplaced and contradicts the scriptures. Calvary Chapel’s commitment to the pretribulation rapture introduces yet another significant doctrinal problem, deepening the already‑troubling theological legacy associated with Smith. Chris Quintana would be well advised to reconsider his alignment with Smith and engage honestly with the documented evidence.

*   (543) 144: Defining "This Generation" in Matthew 24 with Dr. Peter Goeman - YouTube

1. Calvary Chapel Wiki / 1981

2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nc9bNm62SCU

3.  https://www.tbn.org/press-releases/dr-paul-crouchs-statement-passing-pastor-chuck-smith

4. http://scatteredsheepreport.blogspot.com/2012/01/january-20-2012-show-my-perspective-on.html 

5. paul_cain_blackmails_chuck_smith_jack_deere_1989-10-09.pdf

6. Chuck Smith and the Rise of Cover Up Culture in Charismatic Christianity | 545

Further Links

http://calvarychapel.pbworks.com/w/page/. /1981 

Chuck Smith - William Branham Historical Research

7 Pretrib Problems and the Prewrath Rapture (Full Movie)

DANIEL LONG AND STEVE KOZAR: HERESY HUNTERS

(392) Are “HERESY HUNTERS” Hurting or Helping the Body of Christ? With Kozar and Long - YouTube

Daniel Long and Steve Kozar have produced substantial historical surveys of early Pentecostalism, particularly in their treatments of figures such as John Alexander Dowie, Frank W. Sandford, Charles Fox Parham, and John G. Lake. Their material is serviceable rather than original. Even so, I hope their work provides clarity for sincere believers who may be unknowingly drawn toward NAR theology, and that their videos function as an early warning mechanism for those not yet entangled in charismania.

Steve Kozar: "I want people to trust me, but more importantly, I want people to trust the content that I am giving them."

Kozar's content is accurate as far as it goes, BUT his theology is stunted, and it is incumbent that believers should test the spirits rather than blindly trust any teacher or influencer. (1 John 4:1; Acts 17:11).

While no one with a morsel of spiritual discernment would argue that the NAR is not corrupt at its foundations, Long and Kozar overlook several significant issues. They consistently elevate Mike Winger for exposing “cover‑up culture” and calling out obvious false prophets. Yes—Winger has exposed wolves like Benny Hinn, Shawn Bolz, Todd White, and Che Ahn. But at the same time it is troubling that he has publicly described Bill Johnson as “saved", “sincere” and “someone he would fellowship with.” He has also claimed that Todd White is “saved". Even after reviewing roughly sixty hours of White’s material, Winger claimed he did not see a false gospel. Winger’s underlying premise—that false prophets can be restored to ministry, and that institutions like Bethel can be reformed—is completely alien to my reading of Scripture. False prophets are predators (wolves), not candidates for restoration. Scripture instructs us to mark and avoid them, not rehabilitate them. (Romans 16:17–18).

Winger's exposure of cult leader Steven Koko, the so-called "predator of Panama", involved close collaboration with hypercharismatic false teacher Torben Sondergaard, founder of The Last Reformation.1 Sondergaard is a "thus saith the Lord" leg puller and demon slayer who hijacks people into false repentance. No bona fide Christian "influencer" should collaborate with false teachers like Sondergaard > the means do not justify the ends.

Mike Winger throws up one red flag after another!

Winger appears unable to recognise the ecumenical drift or the overtly worldly tone of the Bless God Summit and TPUSA. At the Summit, he shared a platform with Ruslan, Gavin Ortland, Wes Huff, Sean McDowell, and Roman Catholic activist Lila Rose, among other questionable teachers who are effectively reintroducing elements of the Galatian error. In addition, Ortland, Huff, McDowell, Ruslan and others have expressed sympathy toward Kirk Cameron’s heretical annihilationist position. Cameron recently convened Ortland, Dan Paterson, Chris Date and Paul Copan for ‘Hellgate’, a two‑and‑a‑half‑hour discussion centred on the nature and duration of hell.2 

Although he is praised for exposing false teachers, Winger aligns himself with individuals who are actively eroding the faith — and his own involvement contributes to that erosion.

Winger is part of a loose, self-reinforcing ecosystem of Christian YouTubers who:

• appear on each other’s channels

• endorse one another’s content

• share platforms at conferences and livestreams

• cross‑promote each other’s books, interviews, and debates

• shape what becomes “acceptable” or “mainstream” in online Christian discourse

This creates a de facto establishment — not official, but influential.

Michael Grant refers to this as "one big swamp that needs to get drained".3  

22 minutes, 26 seco @ I CAN'T BELIEVE HE SAID THAT! Bless God Summit - Day 1 Kicks Off With A Bang! (Rulsan KD / CBN)

The other person Kozar praised in this video is Justin Peters. Like Long and Kozar, Peters is accurate in his exposure of NAR false prophets. However, my huge concern is that he is a Calvinist. Limited atonement (TULIP) is unsupported by scripture and poses a spiritual danger on par with the NAR. It undermines the heart of the gospel by redefining soteriology itself. Those who promote Calvinism will be held to account for how they excluded vast numbers of people by insisting that Christ’s saving work was never intended for all who believe, but only for an exclusive elect.

Lutheran theology also retains serious doctrinal errors with profound implications for soteriology. The absence of the full counsel of God is evident in three key areas: baptismal regeneration, consubstantiation, and eschatology. (Acts 20:27). These positions remain rooted in Roman Catholic tradition rather than biblical authority. Ultimately, no defence will stand for those promoting these deviations from scripture. (Romans 14:12; 2 Corinthians 5:10; James 3:1).

1. This Is Disgusting – Why I Expose My Friend Koko and Join Mike Winger to Uncover Church Coverup

Why Mike Winger Started Exposing Bad Christian Leaders
2. ‘Hellgate’: Kirk Cameron Says He ‘Caught Hell’ Over Eternal Conscious Torment Debate
3. I CAN'T BELIEVE HE SAID THAT! Bless God Summit - Day 1 Kicks Off With A Bang! (Rulsan KD / CBN)

Torben Sondergaard

Torben Sondergaard Confused False Teacher!
Torben Sondergaard false teacher
(778) Torben Sondergaard: The Beginning of False Testimonies - YouTube