[google28b52e0868d1e307.html]

Search This Blog

Tuesday, 16 June 2026

JOE SCHIMMEL BLESSED HOPE CHAPEL ALLEGATIONS: JUNE 15 UPDATE


Investigations Blessed Hope Chapel

Leadership Accountability Primary Source Evidence Institutional Cover- 15 2026 update
The Church That Investigated Itself: An Open Letter Demanding Independent Accountability at Blessed Hope Chapel

In September 2025, members of Blessed Hope Chapel sent a letter to Joe Schimmel and the elder board demanding an independent investigation. The letter was widely circulated. Leadership never responded. What follows is not merely the contents of that letter — it is the full investigative record of what happened before it was written, what happened after it was ignored, and why more than 30 families ultimately walked out the door.
The Berean Examiner · Investigative Staff
Original: March 27, 2026 · Updated: June 15, 2026
Simi Valley, California

Multiple members of Blessed Hope Chapel — whistleblowers with a collective decades of service inside the church — sent a letter to the elder board calling for an independent investigation into allegations of pastoral misconduct, cover-up, and unaccountable leadership. The document was widely circulated among the congregation. Leadership never responded.

We have obtained the original document. We have verified its authenticity. But this article is no longer merely a repository for that letter — it is a full investigative reconstruction of how a church with no accountability structure, led by a pastor who had built a public ministry on exposing corruption in others, allowed allegations against his own daughter to go uninvestigated, deployed a false narrative to protect the institution, and lost more than half its congregation in the aftermath.

What follows is organized by what the evidence shows — not by when we discovered it, but by how the story actually unfolded. Each section builds on the one before it. By the end, the question is not whether something went wrong at Blessed Hope Chapel. The question is whether the structure that allowed it to go wrong still exists.

Section 1
The Governance Trap — One Family, Every Lever of Power


Before any allegation can be evaluated, the structure that received those allegations must be understood. The governance architecture at Blessed Hope Chapel was not merely "a church with family in leadership." It was a closed fiduciary loop — a self-reinforcing system where the accused, the investigator, the judge, the jury, the treasurer, and the appeal court were all the same family. This was not a situation where an investigation was botched. This was a situation where an investigation was structurally impossible.

Structural Analysis: The Closed Fiduciary Loop

Pastor Joe Schimmel

Senior Pastor · Final Authority
Father of the Accused Father-in-Law of Complicit Elder Husband of Financial Controller

Lisa Schimmel

De Facto Financial Controller
Handles All Finances Zero Oversight

Chad Davidson

Elder · Youth Pastor
Son-in-Law of Joe Husband of the Accused

Holly Davidson

Subject of Misconduct Allegations
Daughter of Joe Daughter of Lisa Wife of Chad

One family holds every lever of institutional power. The accused, the investigator, the judge, the jury, and the treasurer are the same people.

"Imagine going to court where the judge is the defendant's dad, the jury foreman is her husband, the court treasurer is her mother, and the bailiff who blocks the exits is her brother. You would never call that a fair trial. You would call it a family meeting. That is what Blessed Hope Chapel asked its congregation to accept as accountability."

No Independent Judge

The senior pastor was the accused's father. Any internal "investigation" was predetermined — Joe Schimmel was never going to find his own daughter guilty, and Chad Davidson was never going to find his own wife guilty.

No Independent Treasurer

Lisa Schimmel handled all church finances with zero oversight. Any investigation that touched finances would threaten Lisa's financial control. The family had a direct financial incentive to suppress any outside inquiry.

No Independent Appeal

There was no outside board, no denominational oversight, no external accountability body above Joe Schimmel. The church was a closed system. The family was the institution.

No Witness Protection

Whistleblowers were subjected to multi-hour leadership meetings, publicly marked "to avoid" from the pulpit, and character-assassinated at a men's retreat. The closed loop actively punished those who sought investigation.

This is not a governance failure. This is a governance design. No amount of internal process could have produced justice when every lever of institutional power was held by the family of the accused. The only mechanism that could have broken the loop — an independent, third-party investigation — was the one mechanism that Joe Schimmel, Chad Davidson, and the elder board refused at every turn.

Section 2
The Predator Lie — The Smoking Gun May 13, 2025


If the governance trap explains how everything else was possible, the Predator Lie is what the governance trap was built to protect. It is, by a significant margin, the single most legally and morally damning angle in the entire investigative record — and it was buried as a single bullet point in the original publication of this article. That was a mistake. Here it is in full.

On May 13, 2025, Joe Schimmel did multiple things in rapid succession. He left a voicemail for a family stating — in his own voice — that the church had "a case of sexual assault against the guy." He sent text messages to multiple families branding a young male congregant a "predator." He told former congregants the same accusation in person and allegedly by phone.

What Joe Schimmel did not do is file a police report. What he did not do is tell the young man's family what he was telling others. What he did not do is tell the congregation that Holly Davidson herself later reportedly denied any assault occurred. The accusation was deployed strategically — not to protect anyone, but to construct a narrative. By branding the young congregant a predator, Joe Schimmel reframed Holly Davidson from the subject of the congregation's concerns into a victim, and reframed the young man from a congregant seeking accountability into a threat.

The Two Doors — No Third Exit

Door One

The allegation was true. Joe Schimmel had credible knowledge that a sexual assault occurred. He told multiple families. He left a voicemail stating it plainly.

Conclusion: Joe Schimmel violated California Penal Code 11166 — the state's mandatory reporting law. As a pastor in California, he is a mandated reporter of known or reasonably suspected child abuse and sexual assault. He filed no police report. This is a crime.

Door Two

The allegation was false. Joe Schimmel fabricated or exaggerated a sexual assault accusation to neutralize a young congregant who was asking uncomfortable questions. Holly Davidson herself later reportedly denied any assault occurred.

Conclusion: Joe Schimmel committed defamation per se under California law. Falsely accusing someone of a crime to third parties is the textbook definition. Damages are presumed — no need to prove specific financial loss. Text messages to multiple families constitute libel, the more serious form of defamation. Each communication to each recipient is a separate publication, multiplying his civil exposure.

There is no third door. Joe Schimmel cannot walk through Door One — doing so admits he violated California's mandatory reporting law. He cannot walk through Door Two — doing so admits he committed defamation per se against a young congregant. Either he broke the law, or he exposed himself to a lawsuit for destroying a young man's reputation with a knowingly false accusation. His silence protects him from neither.

On the same day Joe Schimmel was branding a young congregant a predator, his own network pastor Jonathan Ball was privately documenting that Holly Davidson "failed in having good boundaries" and that Chad Davidson "asked for forgiveness for his failures." The senior pastor was constructing a narrative of victim-as-aggressor while one of his own network pastors was writing the truth that would ultimately expose that narrative as false. The congregation heard only the weapon. May 13, 2025 was not merely a day when a pastor made an accusation. It was the date the official narrative and the documented truth split into two irreconcilable directions — and the people in the pews were never told.

Direct Quotes — Pastor Jonathan Ball's Written Correspondence (May 13, 2025)

"Holly has … stated her failures."

"She did fail in having good boundaries."

Source: Written correspondence from Pastor Jonathan Ball. Original document on file with The Berean Examiner. Ball's correspondence concludes that both Holly Davidson and Chad Davidson sinned — a conclusion the church leadership has never publicly acknowledged.

What the Evidence Shows

1. Joe Schimmel left a voicemail on or around May 13, 2025 stating the church had "a case of sexual assault against the guy." The voicemail exists.

2. Joe Schimmel spread the accusation through multiple channels — text messages, voicemail, in-person conversations, and allegedly by phone. Multiple recipients across all four channels have independently confirmed receiving the same claim.

3. No police report was filed by Joe Schimmel or by Blessed Hope Chapel leadership. If a sexual assault had actually occurred, California law required reporting. No report exists.

4. Holly Davidson reportedly denied any assault occurred. The alleged "victim" herself did not corroborate the claim being used to destroy a young man's reputation.

5. The young man's family was not informed of the accusation being circulated about their son. They learned of it from other families who had received the texts.

The Question Joe Schimmel Cannot Answer

Did he fail to report a sexual assault to law enforcement — a criminal offense? Or did he commit defamation per se by falsely accusing a young congregant to multiple families — exposing himself to civil liability with damages presumed by law? Joe Schimmel has never publicly addressed this question. He has never apologized to the young man he branded a predator. He has never explained why he told multiple families about a sexual assault but filed no police report.

"You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor." — Exodus 20:16

Section 3
The Men Who Cemented the False Narrative — Joe Bokaie & Brian StegallNamed & Confirmed


It is one thing for a pastor to construct a false narrative from the platform. It is another for that pastor to be joined by other men who lend their credibility to the effort — transforming one man's deflection into what multiple attendees have described as a coordinated character assassination. At what was billed as a men's retreat on biblical manhood and spiritual warfare, two men from one of BHC's satellite groups stepped forward to align with — and amplify — Joe Schimmel's narrative against an absent family. Their names are Joe Bokaie and Brian Stegall.

The Men's Retreat — What Happened


At approximately 66 men gathered for what was described as a retreat focused on spiritual growth, Pastor Joe Schimmel dedicated more than 1.5 hours to a sustained negative portrayal of a specific family that had recently ended its affiliation with the church. The family was not present to defend themselves. Holly Davidson was never mentioned. The young congregant was never mentioned. The unresolved sexual misconduct allegations were never mentioned. The family's actual reason for leaving — the refusal of an independent, third-party investigation — was never mentioned.

Instead, the absent family was reframed as divisive, rebellious, and spiritually immature. And they were not the only ones speaking. Joe Bokaie and Brian Stegall, two men from one of BHC's satellite groups — reportedly seeking to gain favor with Pastor Joe — allegedly joined in and fabricated additional false accusations against the family. What began as one pastor's deflection became, in the words of multiple attendees, a coordinated effort to destroy the family's reputation before they could tell their own story.

Recording Obtained — Currently Under Editorial Analysis

The Berean Examiner has obtained a recording of this men's retreat session. Multiple attendees of that retreat have independently confirmed that the statements made by Pastor Joe Schimmel, Joe Bokaie, and Brian Stegall about the absent family were false — and that what transpired in that room was not a pastoral address. Multiple men have described it as blatant slander delivered from a position of spiritual authority, against people who were given no opportunity to defend themselves. The recording was subsequently distributed to a wide circle of men by Tony Palacio, a longtime associate of Good Fight Ministries — ensuring that the false statements reached an audience far beyond those present in the room. Joe Bokaie and Brian Stegall made those statements. Tony Palacio chose to spread them. All three know who they are. So do we.

The Split

The retreat session reportedly split even the family's home fellowship group — some members accepted the narrative presented and remained at BHC, while others recognized the manipulation and left alongside the family. The relational fallout, according to multiple former members, continues to this day.

The Realization

Many attendees left the session troubled and disagreed with how the matter was handled — but without enough context to fully articulate why. It was only later, after more families left for the same documented reasons and word spread about what had actually occurred, that the retreat session finally made sense to those who had been in the room.

Key Figures in the Retreat Session

Joe Schimmel

Led the session for 1.5+ hours

Joe Bokaie

BHC satellite group — aligned with narrative

Brian Stegall

BHC satellite group — amplified false accusations

"In a lawsuit the first to speak seems right, until someone comes forward and cross-examines." — Proverbs 18:17

The family was not present. They could not cross-examine. The pastor held the floor, the audience, and the spiritual authority — and used all three against people who had no voice in the room. Bokaie and Stegall ensured the narrative had more than one mouthpiece.

Section 4
The Mass Exodus — A Congregation Votes With Its Feet 30+ Families Gone

As of January 2026, more than 30 families — representing upwards of 50 individuals — have reportedly left Blessed Hope Chapel Simi Valley. Many cite the same reasons: the unresolved allegations against Holly Davidson, the elder board's refusal to authorize an independent investigation, and a leadership culture in which raising these concerns was treated not as faithfulness but as disloyalty. This was not one disgruntled family. This was a congregation walking out the door.

The departures included long-serving staff members — people who worked alongside Joe Schimmel and Chad Davidson daily, those with the clearest view of the dysfunction. Their departure is its own form of testimony. These were not critics from the outside looking in. These were insiders who saw the rot from the closest possible vantage point and concluded it could not be reformed from within.

Written Prediction — September 2025

"We fear the result to be a split in the church, or worse, the complete dissolution of the Simi Valley church fellowship."

As of January 2026: The prediction was not pessimism. It was a diagnosis. And it was accurate.

Former Staff & Congregants
16 Documented Concerns Against Chad Davidson


The following catalog is drawn from accounts provided to The Berean Examiner by former members and former staff of Blessed Hope Chapel — people who worked alongside Chad Davidson, served under his leadership, or entrusted their children to his youth ministry.

Spotlight: Big Bear Youth Retreat Disaster — June 2024

Date: June 10–14, 2024

Location: Big Bear Lake Christian Camp

Organizers: Chad & Holly Davidson

The "Abundant Life Youth Retreat" was hosted through Good Fight Ministries for Christian youth ages 14–19. Families from across the country sent their children based on the Davidsons' ministry reputations — and were not warned that Chad would bring non-believing wrestlers from his athletic program into an overnight retreat with their minor daughters.

1. Chad abandoned his own retreat — brought non-believing wrestlers, spent the majority of the event with them, left remaining staff without direction.

2. A near-incident at night — a young male was discovered leading a young girl away from the group. The intervention came from another youth, then a parent call back home, and a single Simi Valley parent volunteer — not leadership.

3. Lasting harm — after camp, a young girl was pursued by a wrestler (nonbeliever) and went through a serious personal struggle. Her mother sought help from Chad and Holly, who made her feel the problem was entirely hers.

4, Zero corrective action — Chad Davidson continues in youth ministry. Parents at any congregation he serves have not been informed of what occurred at Big Bear.

The single most alarming fact: Chad Davidson remains in youth ministry today — and parents have not been told what happened under his supervision.

1. Ignored staff members who pleaded with him directly — former staff members raised pleas for accountability face-to-face and were ignored.

2. Refused an independent investigation — despite multiple families formally requesting a third-party review, Chad declined to advocate for the one measure that would have resolved the matter.

3. Dismissed Scripture-based concerns — when a couple confronted Chad directly with 1 Timothy 3:4–5 before departing in 2024, he was completely indifferent.

4. Failed household governance — children chronically unruly and disruptive in church gatherings; hygiene observed as filthy on numerous occasions.

5. Permitted his wife's inappropriate attire and demeanor — tight, low-cut, sexually provocative clothing worn openly before teenage boys and young male wrestlers she helped lead.

6. Enabled public misconduct — Holly's conduct was observable at public wrestling events, in Costa Rica (string bikini, surrounded by men from the church), and across social media.

Ignored boundary violations — Holly's conduct toward a young male congregant at the center of the allegations; her own written letter contained admissions that made her sound like the aggressor.

8. Remained passively silent — across every setting documented, Chad was present or aware and took no corrective action.

9. Exploded in anger on trips — witnesses describe an explosive confrontation from Chad during the Costa Rica trip.

10. Prioritized non-believing wrestlers — youth gatherings dominated by wrestlers rather than church youth; "elite wrestlers" expected to follow Chad to church.

11. Neglected retreat oversight — at Big Bear, Chad spent the majority of his time with wrestlers while youth went without adequate supervision.

12. Failed to intervene — the near-incident at Big Bear was averted by a teenager and a parent volunteer, not by any designated leader.

13. Left staff unsupported — one parent volunteer had to fill the gaps that Chad and Holly left at the Big Bear retreat.

14. Dismissed a concerned mother — after the Big Bear retreat, a mother whose daughter was pursued by a wrestler was made to feel the problem was entirely hers.

15. Refused to resign — despite the documented catalog of concerns, the mass exodus, and the elders' own internal findings, Chad Davidson has remained in youth ministry.

Former Staff & Congregants
33 Documented Concerns Against Joe Schimmel

The following catalog is drawn from accounts provided to The Berean Examiner by former members and former staff of Blessed Hope Chapel. Where Chad Davidson's failures were failures of a youth pastor and elder, Joe Schimmel's failures are failures of the Senior Pastor — the man who held ultimate authority, who could have intervened at any point, and who chose not to.

1. Lied from the pulpit — claimed he had never argued with anyone in 30+ years of ministry, directly contradicted by numerous former staff.

2. Called himself "top of the pyramid" in a public assembly — declared himself the apex of BHC's authority structure before a packed Monday Night Meeting.

3. No accountability structure above him — for 30 years, Joe Schimmel has held unilateral authority with no outside board or external oversight.

4. Called a young congregant a "predator" via voicemail and text message — without filing any police report or formal charge.

5. Claimed a sexual assault occurred — yet filed no police report, produced no victim statement, and The Berean Examiner found zero record of law enforcement contact.

6. Refused independent investigation repeatedly — the refusal became the central grievance of the exodus of 50+ people.

7. Shielded daughter Holly from accountability — serving simultaneously as her senior pastor and her father.

8. Weaponized the men's retreat against a departing family — dedicated 1.5+ hours to a sustained negative portrayal, assisted by Joe Bokaie and Brian Stegall.

9. Marked former members as "to avoid" publicly — at the Dec 8, 2025 Monday Night Meeting.

10. Spun departing families' stories inaccurately from the pulpit — retold stories labeling departing families as "immature, unstable, disgruntled."

11. Never disclosed annual financial reports — multiple long-term congregants confirmed no financial report was ever shared.

12. Wife Lisa Schimmel handles all church finances with zero oversight.

13. Son-in-law Chad Davidson serves as elder — nepotism unchecked.

14. Pressured an elderly man (80+ years old) to sign a false affidavit.

15. Knew Jonathan Ball's criminal record — 2002 conviction for making a false report to law enforcement — yet elevated him to associate pastor anyway.

16. Lisa Schimmel exercised de facto pastoral authority with no formal office or accountability.

17. Contradicted his own pastor's (Ball's) written findings — Ball wrote Holly "failed in having good boundaries," then Lisa's later letter claimed "Holly had not sinned."

18. Never apologized through the entire mass exodus of 50+ people.

19. Publicly exalted "Larry Legend" from the pulpit despite documented coercion of a female evangelist.

20. Failed to govern his household — Lisa acted unilaterally in the beach meeting, never bringing the matter to her husband or elders.

21. Church now meets in a Seventh Day Adventist facility — paying monthly rent to a denomination he would have labeled a false-teaching cult.

22. Built a discernment empire while practicing institutional cover-up.

23. Selective discipline — one elder was punished while another (family-connected) was protected.

24. Josiah Schimmel and Lisa Schimmel actively concealed Holly's conduct from Chad.

25. Misled donors with a fake "books were checked" assurance.

26. Publishes on his own church website: "We meet in the Seventh Day Adventist church."

27. Traded doctrinal conviction for a room to meet in.

28. Cannot sustain his own church building — the mass exodus depleted the congregation.

29. The financial irony — monthly rent checks from a "discernment" ministry now flow into SDA coffers.

30. "You who abhor idols, do you rob temples?" — Romans 2:22 applied with surgical precision.

31. "Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers" — yoked via the most tangible bond: a lease agreement.

32. The man who demanded accountability from every other Christian leader now sits in a pew rented from an institution he spent decades warning Christians to reject.

33. "If the salt loses its saltiness, what is it good for?" — the SDA rental is the public proof that institutional survival now trumps every doctrinal line he ever drew.

The question these thirty-three concerns raise is not subtle: If Joe Schimmel could not govern his own household, could not address his daughter's documented boundary violations, could not ensure the safety of youth at his own ministry events, could not bring himself to authorize an independent investigation when the structural conflict of interest was obvious to everyone — on what basis does he continue to hold the office of Senior Pastor under 1 Timothy 3:4–5?

Section 5
The Men Joe Schimmel Empowered


A pastor's judgment is measured not only by how he handles his own conduct, but by whom he chooses to place in positions of spiritual authority. Joe Schimmel's pattern of elevating compromised men to leadership — while never disclosing their documented failures to the congregations affected — constitutes a separate and compounding failure of pastoral stewardship.

Jonathan Ball

Overseer — Ensenada Church / BHC NetworkCriminal Record

2002: Convicted under California Penal Code 148.9 for making a false report of a criminal offense — a crime of intentional dishonesty to law enforcement.

~2021: Allegedly attempted to recruit a church member into a straw firearm purchase — citing his own criminal record and wanting to "test the system."

Joe Schimmel reportedly knew and took no action, subsequently elevating Ball to oversee the Ensenada church without ever disclosing his criminal record.

The irony: Ball's May 13, 2025 letter became the single most important internal corroboration of the allegations. That the truth came from a convicted liar is its own commentary on the institution.

Chad Davidson

Elder / Youth Pastor — Blessed Hope Chapel Disqualified Under 1 Tim 3

Failed household governance — children chronically unruly, hygiene observed as filthy; a couple confronted him with 1 Timothy 3:4–5, he was indifferent.

Permitted his wife's publicly observable boundary violations across multiple settings without correction.

Alleged abusive conduct on international outreach trips and neglected oversight at Big Bear resulting in a near-incident and lasting harm.

Jonathan Ball's letter confirmed Chad "asked for forgiveness" — yet the official church position shifted to claiming he had done nothing wrong. Chad remains in youth ministry.

The pattern is unmistakable: Joe Schimmel surrounded himself with people who could not — or would not — hold him accountable. A convicted liar was made an overseer. His son-in-law, biblically disqualified, was installed as elder. His wife controlled the finances with no oversight. A man who coerced a female evangelist was endorsed from the pulpit. This was not poor judgment. This was governance designed to resist accountability.

Section 6
The SDA Rental: Selling Your Theological Birthright for a Room to Meet In


On April 12, 2026, Blessed Hope Chapel held its first service at the Simi Valley Seventh-day Adventist Church. The man who built a ministry warning Christians about false teaching now writes monthly rent checks to a denomination whose core doctrines — soul sleep, mandatory Sabbath-keeping, investigative judgment, the prophetic authority of Ellen G. White — Good Fight Ministries has historically identified as serious theological error.

SDA Doctrine

Soul sleep, investigative judgment (1844), Saturday Sabbath binding on Christians, Ellen G. White's writings as prophetic authority — doctrines the vast majority of evangelical Christianity has historically identified as serious theological error.

Good Fight Ministries' Public Position

GFM has built its brand on exposing what it identifies as false teaching. Its documentary films have explicitly warned about Seventh-day Adventism's distinctive doctrines, categorizing them as incompatible with orthodox Christian belief.

This is not a case of a church renting from a generic community center. This is a doctrinal discernment ministry financially sustaining the very denomination it was built to refute. The money that once funded exposés of false teachers now subsidizes them. Romans 2:21–22 applies with surgical precision: "You who abhor idols, do you rob temples?"

Livestream Questions Shut Down

During the April 12, 2026 service, as viewers in the livestream chat reportedly began asking why the church was meeting in an SDA facility, those questions were allegedly shut down quickly — the same pattern observed throughout the cover-up of the Holly Davidson allegations.

"You then who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples?" — Romans 2:21–22

Ongoing Investigation
What We're Still Investigating

Has Joe Schimmel or any member of the BHC elder board ever formally responded to the charges in this letter?

What happened to the proceeds of the Blessed Hope Chapel land sale?

Were any formal disciplinary proceedings ever initiated regarding Holly Davidson?

Was the elder board aware of Pastor Jonathan Ball's internal inquiry findings — and if so, when did they become aware and what action did they take?

What role did Lisa Schimmel and Josiah play in how information about Holly's conduct was communicated — or withheld?

How many families have left Blessed Hope Chapel since September 2025, and what have they been told?

Is the financial picture at Good Fight Ministries — $237,823 in undisclosed salaries and an 85% asset drop — connected to the leadership crisis?

If you have direct knowledge of any of these questions, we want to hear from you. All tips are confidential.Submit a Tip

1. Ten Formal Charges — Presented to the Elder Board

2. Selective discipline — one elder punished, another protected

Pastor Joe's daughter. Pastor Chad's wife. Holly Davidson allegedly engaged in sexual misconduct that would have — and did — remove others from this church. Under 1 Timothy 3, an elder must manage his own household well. Chad Davidson did not. His continued role as elder is itself a charge.

3. Schimmel (Pastor Joe's wife) & Josiah Schimmel (Pastor Joe's son) concealed Holly's conduct from Chad

4. Joe endorsed public deception from the pulpit — Larry Legend publicly exalted despite coercing a female evangelist

5. Congregants misled about proceeds of a church land sale — funds' destination never accounted for

6. Men's retreat weaponized — a whole message delivered against an absent family, turning a spiritual gathering into a character assassination

7. The discernment minister who missed everything in his own house — Joe's public gift of discernment not applied within his own congregation

8. No accountability structure above Joe — the accused held sole authority to decide whether the accusations received a hearing

9. Zeal as trump card — enthusiasm and family connection repeatedly overrode normal disciplinary processes

10. Lisa Schimmel exercised de facto co-pastoral authority with no formal office, no accountability structure, and no congregational consent

People Named in This Investigation


Pastor Joe Schimmel

Senior Pastor, Blessed Hope Chapel; founder and director of Good Fight MinistriesView Case File

Lisa Schimmel

Wife of Pastor Joe Schimmel. De facto financial controller with zero oversight.

Josiah Schimmel

Son of Pastor Joe Schimmel. Alleged to have concealed Holly's conduct from Chad.

Holly Davidson

Daughter of Joe Schimmel; wife of Chad Davidson. Subject of the misconduct allegations.

Pastor Chad Davidson

Elder, Blessed Hope Chapel; husband of Holly Davidson. Remains in youth ministry.View Case File

Joe Bokaie

BHC satellite group member. Collaborated with Joe Schimmel at the men's retreat to cement a false narrative against an absent family.

Brian Stegall

BHC satellite group member. Allegedly fabricated additional false accusations against the family at the men's retreat.

Tony Palacio

Longtime associate of Good Fight Ministries. Distributed the men's retreat recording to a wide circle of men.

Pastor Jonathan Ball

BHC network pastor. Conducted internal inquiry concluding Holly and Chad sinned. Has a 2002 criminal conviction for making a false report to law enforcement.

Primary Source Evidence

An Open Letter Demanding Independent Accountability

In September 2025, a group of longtime Blessed Hope Chapel members put their concerns in writing and formally delivered them to the elders. The letter was widely circulated among the congregation. Many who were aware of its contents did not sign. Those who did were precise, measured, and direct. They asked for a closed-door meeting with the elder board to formally address what they had documented.

A redacted version of the original document — preserved here as a primary source exhibit — captures not only what the congregation knew, but what they formally told leadership they knew. These are their own words, their own voice, and their own prediction. It was ignored.
September 2025

Multiple Longtime Members

Blessed Hope Chapel, Simi Valley, CA

Addressed to: Joe Schimmel, Steve Aguilar, Chad Davidson, John Heeber
Redacted — Names Protected


Primary Source — Documentary Exhibit: September 2025 Open Letter (Redacted)
Exhibit A — Page 1 of 2


Exhibit B — Page 2 of 2



Original document on file with The Berean Examiner. Certain names and identifying details have been redacted. Authenticity verified independently. Click either exhibit to view full size.

Ten Explosive Elements — Annotated

1. Selective Discipline: One Elder Punished, Another Protected Governance Failure

“The seeming hypocrisy of disciplining one elder but not another for unscriptural choices and actions, John Heeber but not Chad Davidson: John Heeber for going over the heads of Pastor Joe and the other elders in installing [redacted] pastor of the Blessed Hope Chapel satellite church of Texas without their knowledge. Chad Davidson for not confronting and dealing with blatant ongoing sin under his own roof — emotional adultery which was observed and grieved over by many of the undersigned over a long period of time.”

— September 2025 Open Letter to BHC Elders

Editorial note: This is not a private complaint — it is a formal written charge, made by the congregation to the elders, naming a specific double standard: a procedural violation earned swift discipline; a sustained moral failure under an elder's own roof earned none. Chad Davidson is Joe Schimmel's son-in-law; Holly Davidson is Joe Schimmel's own daughter — and Chad's wife. The fact that conduct described as ‘blatant ongoing sin’ was observed ‘over a long period of time’ by multiple witnesses, and still went unaddressed, goes directly to Joe Schimmel's fitness for pastoral oversight. He was either unaware of what was happening in his own daughter's household — or he was aware and chose to protect her.

1 Timothy 3:4–5

“He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full respect. (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?)” The household disorder was not subtle. Former staff members and congregants went directly to the elders to plead that Chad and Holly Davidson's children were chronically unruly, disruptive, and out of control in church gatherings and on numerous trips — church members also observed their hygiene as filthy on repeated occasions, with some even contemplating calling authorities due to what appeared to be gross negligence. Under the very passage cited above, a pastor must “manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive.” The children running wild and visibly neglected through the church were a visible indictment — not a private family matter, but a biblical disqualification playing out in front of the entire congregation. The elders heard the pleas and did nothing.

The congregation was not applying an external standard. They were applying the one their own pastor had preached from that very pulpit.

2. The Santa Barbara Parallel: 'Why Did Holly Get a Pass?'Double Standard

“[Redacted] was caught in Santa Barbara with what was observed to be emotional adultery — holding the hand of a woman who was not his wife — and left the church or was asked to leave. Why did Holly get a pass and not [redacted]?”

— September 2025 Open Letter to BHC Elders

Editorial note: The congregation itself drew this parallel — in writing, formally, and delivered it to leadership. Someone was removed from the church for holding a woman's hand who was not his wife. Holly Davidson — Pastor Joe Schimmel's daughter and Pastor Chad Davidson's wife — was not removed, and is documented in this investigation to have engaged in conduct described (in a document not previously made public) by Pastor Jonathan Ball himself as ‘boundary failures’ toward a younger male congregant under her care. According to documents on file with this publication, that relationship was allegedly inappropriate in nature. The congregants are not merely venting frustration. They are presenting leadership with a direct logical contradiction and demanding an answer.

James 2:1

“My brothers and sisters, believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ must not show favoritism.”The congregation was not asking for anything extraordinary. They were asking for the same standard to apply to the pastor's daughter that had already been applied to everyone else. Favoritism in discipline is not a pastoral judgment call — Scripture names it as sin.

3. Lisa and Josiah Concealed Information From Chad — New Cover-Up LayerCover-Up Allegation

“Joe seems to be in complete denial regarding his daughter's sin. Many wonder why Lisa and Josiah kept knowledge of it from Chad!”

— September 2025 Open Letter to BHC Elders

Editorial note: This is the most significant new revelation in the entire letter. Until now, the investigation documented Joe Schimmel's role in managing and shaping the narrative — but this sentence introduces a separate layer: the congregation's belief that Lisa Schimmel (Joe's wife and Holly's mother) and Josiah Schimmel (Joe's son and Holly's brother) had knowledge of Holly's conduct and actively kept it from Holly's own husband, Chad Davidson. If true, the cover-up is not just institutional — it is familial and deliberate. A husband was allegedly kept in the dark about his wife's conduct by her own parents and sibling. The congregation noticed and documented this.

Ephesians 5:11

“Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.” Scripture does not permit the concealment of sin within the body — it commands exposure. If the congregation's account is accurate, the Schimmel family did the precise opposite of what Paul instructs: they actively shielded the darkness from the one person most directly harmed by it.

4. Joe Endorses 'Exaltation' of a Man Who Deceived Hospital Staff Pastoral Endorsement of Deception

“It has been disclosed by one of our female evangelists who accompanied Larry Legend (along with three other men who collaborated with Larry) to his hospital ministry that he coerced her into sitting in a wheelchair in order for them to have access to the patients, knowingly deceiving hospital staff and breaking hospital rules. Joe heartily endorses Larry Legend's behavior from the pulpit. 'Exalt' is a strong endorsement. Joe's apparent only rationale is his seeming unwillingness to dampen Larry Legend's zeal.”


— September 2025 Open Letter to BHC Elders

Editorial note: This thread is entirely absent from any prior coverage of BHC. It reveals a pattern that runs throughout this investigation: Joe Schimmel's tendency to protect and promote people demonstrating zeal, regardless of their conduct. A man named Larry Legend — who coerced a woman into a wheelchair to deceive medical staff — was given not quiet tolerance but public exaltation from the pulpit. The congregation named this explicitly. ‘Exalt’ is their word, not ours — they are quoting Joe's own endorsement back to him as evidence of failed discernment.

Romans 16:17–18

“Watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned… by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people.” Paul's warning is not about obvious wolves — it is about those who appear zealous and persuasive. A pastor who publicly exalts a man who coerces women and deceives hospital staff is not protecting the flock. He is modeling the very behavior Paul commands the church to mark and avoid.

5. The Financial Opacity: Land Sold, Promises Unkept, No AccountabilityFinancial Transparency

“We understood that we would diligently seek out a much smaller property with a church building in place, buy it and bank the rest of the cash. That search however was short-lived. We completely trusted Joe and Lisa which was not healthy for them nor us, them having and having had no accountability.”

— September 2025 Open Letter to BHC Elders

Editorial note: The congregation is not raising a general transparency complaint — they are describing a specific commitment made to them about the proceeds of a land sale, and documenting that it was not honored. The search for a replacement property was ‘short-lived.’ The funds' ultimate destination is unaddressed. And the congregation assigns direct responsibility: ‘We completely trusted Joe and Lisa.’ This letter, combined with this investigation's prior findings on Good Fight Ministries' 85% asset drop and the rent-free facility arrangement, establishes that financial opacity was not a perception problem. It was a congregation-documented pattern, formally put in writing.

Luke 16:10–11

“Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much. So if you have not been trustworthy in handling worldly wealth, who will trust you with true riches?” Jesus draws a direct line between financial integrity and spiritual fitness for leadership. The congregation's documented concern about the land-sale proceeds is not a secondary matter — by this standard, it is a direct test of whether the men entrusted with the church's spiritual welfare can be trusted at all.

6. The Retreat Was a Courtroom: Slander Against an Absent Family, Deliberate Cover-Up for Holly Pastoral Manipulation

“Joe is accused of speaking behind peoples' backs. At the mens' retreat, he delivered a whole message against [redacted family] without either of them being there to give a defense. And of course the message was completely inappropriate for a mens' retreat.”

— September 2025 Open Letter to BHC Elders

Editorial note: According to multiple former Blessed Hope Chapel congregants whose accounts have been independently confirmed, the family referenced in the open letter had already decided to leave the church after learning the full extent of the charges involving Holly Davidson and the elders' refusal to permit any independent, third-party investigation. These former members indicate Joe Schimmel knew the true reason for their departure yet withheld that context from the men at the retreat. Instead, he reportedly framed the family as divisive or rebellious. Two other men in attendance from Texas, reportedly seeking to gain favor with Pastor Joe, allegedly joined in and fabricated additional false accusations against the family. This turned what the open letter describes as “completely inappropriate for a men's retreat” into a broader character assassination that reportedly split even the family's home fellowship group — some members accepted the narrative presented and remained, while others reportedly recognized the manipulation and left the church alongside the family. The relational fallout, according to multiple former members, continues to this day. The Berean Examiner has confirmed the identities of both men through multiple former attendees of that retreat who refused to go along with what they described as a coordinated effort to destroy the family's reputation. Their identities are known to this publication. Given that more than fifty people have since left Blessed Hope Chapel, the circle of those willing to speak has grown considerably — and they are speaking. In a spiritually heightened environment where pastoral authority carried significant weight, these former members describe the event as a calculated effort to inoculate key influencers against the family's perspective before they could share their side.

Recording Obtained — Under Analysis

The Berean Examiner has obtained a recording of this men's retreat session. Our editorial staff is currently analyzing this evidence in full. What that analysis has already established is this: multiple attendees of that retreat have independently confirmed that the statements made by Pastor Joe Schimmel and the two men from Texas about the absent family were false — and that what transpired in that room was not, in their words, a pastoral address. It was, as more than one attendee has described it, blatant slander delivered from a position of spiritual authority, against people who were given no opportunity to defend themselves.

Furthermore, multiple families who have since departed Blessed Hope Chapel have confirmed what the retreat session appears to have been designed to prevent: the truth about why that family left. Their departure had nothing to do with the narrative constructed against them at the retreat. They left because of the allegations against Holly Davidson and because church leadership refused to permit any independent, third-party investigation — the very concerns documented throughout this article. The retreat session, in the assessment of those who witnessed it, was a deliberate and preemptive effort to cement a false narrative before that family could tell their own story.

They were not alone. As of January 2026, more than 30 families have reportedly left Blessed Hope Chapel Simi Valley — many citing the same reasons: the unresolved allegations against Holly Davidson, the elder board's refusal to authorize an independent investigation, and a leadership culture in which raising these concerns was treated not as faithfulness but as disloyalty. The recording was subsequently distributed to a wide circle of men by Tony Palacio, a longtime associate of Good Fight Ministries and Blessed Hope Chapel — ensuring that the false statements reached an audience far beyond those present in the room. The existence of this recording, and the deliberate decision to circulate it, raises questions that will not go unanswered. Those who made these statements, and those who chose to spread them, know who they are. So do we.

Proverbs 18:17

“In a lawsuit the first to speak seems right, until someone comes forward and cross-examines.” This proverb is the precise biblical diagnosis of what allegedly happened at that retreat. The family was not present. They could not cross-examine. The pastor held the floor, the audience, and the spiritual authority — and used all three against people who had no voice in the room. If accurate, this represents one of the most active and deliberate instances of damage control documented in the open letter.

7. The Watchman Couldn't See His Own Watchtower: The Discernment Minister Who Missed Everything in His Own House Discernment Failure

“Because of Pastor Joe's incredible gift of rightly dividing the Word of God… many of us have for years sat under his leading… That being said… we submit the following list of grievances…”

— September 2025 Open Letter to BHC Elders

Editorial note: Joe Schimmel's public ministry has long centered on the claim that he possesses superior spiritual discernment. Yet the open letter, signed by long-time insiders, lists multiple areas where the congregation documented that the pastor failed to apply that same discernment inside his own church. They point to documented ongoing sin under an elder's roof, alleged familial concealment involving his wife and son-in-law, the reported coercion of a female evangelist, double standards in discipline, financial opacity concerns, and continued endorsement of controversial street-evangelism practices despite repeated warnings. Details across each of these areas have been confirmed through multiple former congregants with direct knowledge of the events described.

Matthew 7:3–5

“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?… You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly.” The signers were not critics from outside but committed attendees who once trusted Joe's teaching. The man who built a ministry on exposing spiritual blindness in others was, by his own congregation's account, unable — or unwilling — to see what was happening inside his own walls.

8. The Accused Decides His Own Case: No Accountability Structure Above JoeUnaccountable Leadership

“There are no checks and balances in place to initiate and maintain accountability of Pastor Joe Schimmel to the church body. That includes financial transparency… them having and having had no accountability.”

— September 2025 Open Letter to BHC Elders

Editorial note: Pastor Joe Schimmel is named directly in several of the grievances outlined in the open letter, yet he remained the sole senior authority with the power to decide whether those very accusations would receive a formal hearing. Multiple former members confirm that the letter writers pleaded for a closed-door meeting because the congregation understood there was no higher elder board, appeals process, or external accountability structure above him. The man accused of protecting his daughter, endorsing deception, and mismanaging land-sale proceeds was simultaneously the man who would determine whether any of those charges were ever formally examined.

Proverbs 11:14

“Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety.”

Proverbs 15:22

“Without counsel plans fail, but with many advisers they succeed.”The open letter's explicit statement — “there are no checks and balances”
— is not rhetorical. It is a structural description of how the church operated, offered by people who had lived inside that structure for years. The absence of accountability was not an oversight. It was the architecture.

9. Zeal as Trump Card: Enthusiasm Over IntegrityLeadership Philosophy

“Joe heartily endorses Larry's behavior from the pulpit. 'Exalt' is a strong endorsement. Joe's apparent only rationale is his seeming unwillingness to dampen Larry's zeal.”

— September 2025 Open Letter to BHC Elders

Editorial note: This line in the open letter reveals what multiple former congregants describe as the underlying operating principle at Blessed Hope Chapel. The letter documents multiple instances where enthusiasm or family connection appeared to override normal disciplinary processes: Chad Davidson allegedly faced no consequences for “ongoing sin… observed… over a long period of time” under his roof, Holly Davidson reportedly received different treatment than a man removed from a satellite church for far less, and Larry Legend was publicly exalted despite allegations of coercion and deception. The congregation's diagnosis — that Joe's “seeming unwillingness to dampen Larry's zeal” was the operative rationale — points to a leadership culture where visible enthusiasm functioned as a shield against accountability. These accounts have been confirmed across multiple independent former members with no connection to one another.

Proverbs 19:2

“Desire without knowledge is not good — how much more will hasty feet miss the way!” Scripture does not treat zeal as a virtue in isolation. Zeal without integrity, without correction, without accountability, is explicitly warned against. If accurate, it suggests the same dynamic that protected Holly Davidson also protected Larry Legend: proximity to Joe, and the appearance of spiritual fervor, were sufficient to place a person beyond the reach of normal correction.

10. Lisa as De Facto Co-Pastor: Power Without Title or Accountability Unofficial Power Structure

“We completely trusted Joe and Lisa which was not healthy for them nor us, them having and having had no accountability… Many wonder why Lisa and Josiah kept knowledge of it from Chad!”


— September 2025 Open Letter to BHC Elders

Editorial note: The open letter repeatedly refers to “Joe and Lisa” as a leadership unit — particularly regarding the land-sale proceeds, the alleged concealment of information about Holly, and the broader claim of “them having and having had no accountability.” Multiple former congregants with direct knowledge of BHC's internal operations confirm that Lisa Schimmel held no formal office, was never installed as an elder or staff member, and was never placed under any defined accountability structure. Yet the congregation's letter treats her as a co-principal in the decisions they are challenging — including the financial ones. The phrase “Joe and Lisa” appears not as a social reference but as a governance description: two people who exercised authority together, without the accountability structures that formal office would have required.

1 Timothy 5:17

“The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching.” Scripture is precise about who holds governing authority in the church, how they are to be appointed, and what accountability they bear. Lisa Schimmel was appointed to nothing, accountable to no one, and yet — by the congregation's own account — functioned as a co-decision-maker in matters of finance, family, and church governance. The congregation noticed this arrangement and named it explicitly — not as a complaint about Lisa personally, but as a structural observation about how power actually operated at Blessed Hope Chapel.

Editorial AnalysisUpdated Apr 6, 2026
The Warning Was Given. In Writing. It Was Ignored. And Now One of Their Own Has Confirmed It.

What this letter establishes is not merely what the congregation was feeling — it is what they formally communicated, in measured and theologically careful language, to the men responsible for the church. Read the tone again: “This appeal comes without a hint of malice.” “We dearly love Joe and Lisa.” “We, the undersigned, are in no way holier than thou.” This is not a revolt. This is a last appeal. These are longtime members — people who had sat under this teaching for years, who believed in the ministry, who were trying to save it. And notably, what they did was biblical. Matthew 18:15–17 prescribes exactly this process: bring the concern to the offending party, then to witnesses, then — if unresolved — to the church. This letter represents that final, formal step. They followed the process their own pastor had taught them. Leadership did not respond.

They predicted the outcome precisely. “We fear the result to be a split in the church, or worse, the complete dissolution of the Simi Valley church fellowship.” They demanded a closed-door meeting with the elders to address the allegations. They stated that without it, they would be forced to witness the demise of Blessed Hope Chapel and its “formerly sterling reputation.”

And then there is this: the letter itself notes, without elaboration, that “many who were aware of its contents did not sign.” That single sentence may be the most revealing line in the entire document. The ten elements annotated above represent the formal record of those who were willing to put their names to paper. But multiple former members with direct knowledge of the letter's circulation confirm that a larger group inside the church knew the contents, reportedly agreed with many of the concerns, and still chose not to sign — out of fear of repercussions. The culture of fear the letter implies was not a byproduct of the crisis. It was the precondition that allowed the crisis to develop unchecked for as long as it did. People who agreed with formal written charges against their pastor were nonetheless too afraid to attach their names to them.
April 6, 2026 — New Evidence Changes the Picture

Since this article was first published, the evidentiary record has grown substantially — and it has grown from inside the church itself. The Berean Examiner has now obtained three additional pieces of evidence that did not exist in the public record when the congregation wrote this letter: a recording from the BHC men's retreat, independent confirmation from multiple former members that the retreat was used to construct a false narrative against a departing family, and — most significantly — written correspondence from Pastor Jonathan Ball, a pastor within the Blessed Hope Chapel network, documenting the findings of his own internal inquiry.

Pastor Ball's conclusion, stated in his own words: “Holly has … stated her failures.” And: “She did fail in having good boundaries.” These are not the words of an outside critic. They are not the words of a disgruntled former member. They are the documented findings of a pastor who conducted his own inquiry — inside the Blessed Hope Chapel structure, using BHC's own process — and reached a verdict that the elder board has never publicly acknowledged.

Pastor Jonathan Ball — Written Correspondence (On File with The Berean Examiner)

“Holly has … stated her failures.”

“She did fail in having good boundaries.”

Ellipses indicate redacted identifying detail; substance is unaltered. Original document on file with The Berean Examiner.

But the weight of Pastor Ball's words is not only in what he wrote — it is in when he wrote it. The Berean Examiner has confirmed that Ball's correspondence is dated to mid-May 2025. On that same day, according to records reviewed for this report, Pastor Joe Schimmel sent a message to others characterizing the alleged victim as the predator — the aggressor in the very situation Ball was simultaneously documenting as Holly Davidson's boundary failure. Two men inside the same network, one calendar date, opposite conclusions. The senior pastor was publicly constructing a narrative of victim-as-aggressor while one of his own network pastors was privately writing the truth that would ultimately expose that narrative as false.

Whether Pastor Joe did not know what Jonathan was writing that day — or knew and could not stop it — the result is the same: the official narrative collapsed from within, on a single day, in real time. The elder board has never acknowledged this contradiction. It is now part of the record.

This matters enormously in the context of the open letter. The congregation's central charge — that Holly Davidson engaged in conduct that would have, and did, remove others from this church, and that the elder board applied a different standard to the pastor's own daughter — is now corroborated not by outside reporting, but by an internal pastoral inquiry. The congregation was right. They documented it. They delivered it formally to leadership. And one of BHC's own pastors, conducting his own process, reached the same conclusion they had already put in writing.

The elder board's public posture — that the matter was handled, that no wrongdoing was established, that the concerns raised were the product of disloyalty rather than faithfulness — is now in direct conflict with the documented findings of one of their own. That is not a perception problem. That is a contradiction that demands an answer.

The Question That Remains Unanswered

If one of Blessed Hope Chapel's own pastors conducted an internal inquiry and concluded that Holly Davidson and Chad Davidson sinned — why has the elder board taken no corrective action, issued no public acknowledgment, and allowed Chad Davidson to continue serving as an elder?

Under 1 Timothy 3:4–5, an elder must manage his own household well. That is not our standard — it is the standard the elder board of Blessed Hope Chapel claims to hold. If their own internal process produced a finding of sin, the question is not whether Chad Davidson should step down. The question is: why hasn't he already? And if the elder board was aware of Pastor Ball's findings and chose to suppress them — that is not a pastoral failure. That is a cover-up.

The congregation's September 2025 letter was not the beginning of this story. It was the moment the congregation formally documented what they already knew — and formally asked leadership to account for it. The elder board's silence in response to that letter is now compounded by a second silence: their failure to act on the findings of their own pastor's inquiry. Two separate processes — one by the congregation, one by a pastor inside the network — reached the same conclusion. Both were ignored.

The result the congregation feared has arrived. As of January 2026, more than 30 families — upwards of 50 individuals — have reportedly left Blessed Hope Chapel Simi Valley. The men's retreat recording, now in our possession, documents the leadership's response to that exodus: not accountability, not transparency, but a preemptive effort to control the narrative before those who left could tell their own story. The congregation wrote it down. A pastor inside the network confirmed it. And the church is emptying.

Written Prediction — September 2025

From the letter

“We fear the result to be a split in the church, or worse, the complete dissolution of the Simi Valley church fellowship.”

As of January 2026: More than 30 families — upwards of 50 individuals — have reportedly left. The prediction was not pessimism. It was a diagnosis. And it was accurate.

What the congregation put in writing — formally, carefully, and at personal risk — has never, to our knowledge, been publicly addressed by leadership. What Pastor Ball documented in his own correspondence has never, to our knowledge, been publicly acknowledged by the elder board. The charges stand in the record. The internal findings stand in the record. The silence that answered both is part of the record too. Ezekiel 33:6 speaks of a watchman who sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet: “His blood I will require at the watchman's hand.” Joe Schimmel has built a public ministry on the identity of the watchman. The congregation handed him the trumpet. One of his own pastors handed it to him again. He has not blown it.

Shepherd's Watch — Active Case Files

The allegations documented in this article are now tracked in two active Shepherd's Watch case files — each with a comprehensive timeline, evidence tables, and ongoing status updates.
SW-2026-004: Joe Schimmel Case FileSW-2026-005: Chad Davidson Case File
Continue Reading
Related InvestigationsAll Investigations

Shepherd's WatchActive Case
SW-2026-004: Joe Schimmel / Blessed Hope Chapel — Sexual Misconduct Cover-Up, Defamation & Church Exodus
Read Investigation

Shepherd's WatchActive Case
SW-2026-005: Chad Davidson / Blessed Hope Chapel — Pastoral Disqualification & Household Disorder
Read Investigation

Financial TransparencyMar 3, 2026
$237,823 in Undisclosed Salaries and an 85% Asset Drop Raise Serious Questions for Good Fight Ministries
Read Investigation


Share This Article:
Share on XShare on Facebook Copy Link

Have Information About This Case?

If you have additional information or documentation related to Blessed Hope Chapel or Good Fight Ministries, we want to hear from you. All tips are handled confidentially.

Monday, 15 June 2026

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

Thursday, 4 June 2026

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).

Thursday, 28 May 2026

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. 

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.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

Wednesday, 20 May 2026

NEPHILIM NONSENSE? JUSTIN PETERS, JIM OSMAN, DANIEL LONG

Airbnb “Prophets” Compare the Virgin Birth to Alien Encounters: With Justin Peters and Jim Osman

"Charismatic "prophets" Mike Signorelli, Joseph Z, Alan DiDio, and others claim they were called to a secret meeting in the middle of nowhere — phones on airplane mode, assumed identities, the works — to be briefed on coming "alien disclosure" and save the church from deception. But what came out of that meeting may be some of the most blasphemous teachings we've ever covered on this channel, including a direct comparison between the Virgin Birth of Christ and fallen angels having relations with women. Justin Peters and Jim Osman join me to expose the secret meeting, dismantle the bad theology behind the Nephilim/alien hybrid claims, address Joseph Z's failed "prophecy" over Joni Lamb, and explain why none of this — biblically, theologically, or even scientifically — holds up. If you're a former Charismatic trying to think clearly about all the alien talk flooding social media right now, this episode is for you."

Above is the response from Justin Peters, Jim Osman, and Daniel Long to the recent claim that a “secret meeting” occurred in an Airbnb in Tennessee involving Mike Signorelli, Joseph Z, Alan DiDio, and others. In my assessment, their claim was an attempt at self-aggrandisement and clickbait that happened to gain traction. I agree with Justin Peters that, in their foolishness, charismatic NAR “pastors” often attempt to present themselves as possessing superior spiritual knowledge, in this case, insider knowledge on alleged “alien disclosure”. The accumulated failure of charismatic NAR prophets is sufficient to demonstrate that they are neither credible nor reliable sources of spiritual authority. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive. (Romans 16:17-18).

Even so, I found several of the remarks made by Justin Peters, Jim Osman, and Daniel Long disappointing. Both Calvinist and Lutheran traditions hold amillennial beliefs that diverge sharply from the scriptural witness and from the eschatology of the early church. Amillennialism remains confined within an Augustinian Roman‑Catholic inheritance rather than engaging in the whole counsel of God, resulting in an eschatology that is scripturally and historically deficient. (Acts 20:27).

Although I reject DiDio and his associates ' claim of a “secret meeting" it is not impossible that government agencies might share information with certain church leaders. Osman’s categorical assertion that such cooperation would never occur is therefore not especially convincing. One could just as easily ask why Donald Trump includes NAR‑charismatics within his inner circle—an arrangement that many Christians find difficult to make sense of. And if any weight is given to Andy Woods’ testimony, who claims that a government agent approached him in 2024 regarding UFO disclosure.1 

While Peters, Osman, and Long dismiss the prospect of alien disclosure, it is noteworthy that the U.S. Department of War treats the subject with sufficient seriousness to release a growing body of declassified UFO (UAP) documentation.

U.S. Department of War: "In response to President Donald J. Trump’s directive for transparency on U.S. government information regarding Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP), the Department of War (DOW), with support from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), is overseeing government wide efforts to expeditiously find, review, identify, declassify and publicly release unresolved UAP-related records and historical documents in the federal government’s possession. This is an unprecedented, historic undertaking that requires coordination between dozens of agencies and the review of tens of millions of records, many existing only on paper, spanning many decades. Given the scope of this task, the Department of War will be releasing new materials on a rolling basis as they are discovered and declassified, with tranches posted every few weeks.."2 

The Gerasene Demoniac discussion

Matthew 8:28–34; Mark 5:1–20; Luke 8:26–39 cf. Matthew 12:43

Osman’s treatment of the Gerasene (Gadarene) narrative is methodologically weak. His question—why the demons did not simply relocate to another host elsewhere in Judea to avoid Jesus—is hypothetical. The popular “demon‑slayer” assertion that demons seek human bodies to gratify their own lusts has no textual foundation. Scripture does not provide a behavioural psychology of demons, and responsible exegesis does not fill those silences with speculative constructions. However, Osman’s corrective claim that demons “do not like to be in an embodied form" is inaccurate according to reliable commentaries on Matthew 12:43. The New Testament’s actual data is limited but consistent: demons harm, degrade, and afflict. Their activity is destructive rather than expressive. (Matthew 9:32–34; Mark 3:20–27; 5:9,14–29). Nothing in these passages indicates that demons pursue embodiment to satisfy their own lustful appetites; rather, the pattern is impairment, torment, and attempted destruction.

If Osman intends to correct doctrinal error, the task requires him to remain within the boundaries of what scripture records rather than constructing hypothetical demon behaviour to fill the explanatory gap. This was a weak and poorly reasoned response from someone presenting himself as a pastor, and it reflects a limited grasp of demonology. His inaccuracies and unfounded assertions place him much closer to those he critiques than he seems to realise. The task is to present what is true in order to correct what is false, not to substitute one set of personal opinions for another.     

Bengel's Gnomon: "Matthew 12:43. Ὅταν, κ.τ.λ., when, etc.) Having rebuked and dismissed the interruption of the Pharisees, Jesus pursues those matters which depend upon Matthew 12:30; cf. Luke 11:23-24.—ἐξέλθῃ, has gone out) as had been said in Matthew 12:29.—διέρχεται, he goeth through) one after another.—ἀνύδρων, without water) Where there is no water, men do not dwell; see Psalm 107:35-36.—ἀναπαύσιν, rest) Rest is wished for by every created being. The devils think that man is their proper resting-place.—οὐχ εὑρίσκει, findeth none) sc. except in man. It is miserable always to seek and never to find it."3

Study Bible: "The unclean spirit's search for rest indicates its desire for a place to inhabit and exert influence. In the cultural context of the time, spirits were believed to seek embodiment to fulfill their purposes."4

Barnes: "Art thou come hither to torment us? ... - By 'the time' here mentioned is meant the day of judgment. The Bible reveals the doctrine that evil spirits are not now bound as they will be after that day; that they are permitted to tempt and afflict people, but that in the day of judgment they also will be condemned to everlasting punishment with all the wicked, 2 Peter 2:4; Jude 1:6. These spirits seemed to be apprised of that, and were alarmed lest the day that they feared had come. They besought him, therefore, not to send them out of that country, not to consign them then to hell, but to put off the day of their final punishment."5 

Barnes: "Seeking rest, and findeth none - These desolate and dry regions are represented as uncomfortable habitations; so much so, that the dissatisfied spirit, better pleased with a dwelling in the bosoms of people, as affording an opportunity of doing evil, seeks a return there."6  

The Nephilim question

Genesis 6:4 presents the contested identification of the “sons of God”, whether as the Sethite line or as angelic beings whose union with human women produced the Nephilim. The evidence is sparse but adequate to justify inquiry into the involvement of fallen angels. The designation Nephilim—“fallen ones”—identifies them as obscure figures tied to the pre‑flood narrative. 

The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown. (Genesis 6:4).

And there we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak, who come from the Nephilim), and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seemed to them.” (Numbers 13:33).

The Anakim are identified in Deuteronomy 9:2 and Joshua 11:21–22 as a race of giants, noted for their exceptional size and strength, whose presence in Canaan seriously intimidated the Israelite spies. Their association with the Nephilim suggests a formidable lineage. Archaeological and textual indications place the Anakim in the hill country of Hebron, a strategically significant and fertile region. I am not dogmatic on the matter, but I see no difficulty in understanding the Anakim as literal hybrids rather than merely human“men of renown”. The Old Testament contains sufficient references to the physical disimilarities between the giants and other populations to render this interpretation credible—for example, Goliath (1 Samuel 17:4; 2 Samuel 21:19), his brothers Lahmi, Ishbi‑Benob, Saph, and the six‑fingered giant (1 Chronicles 20:5; 2 Samuel 21:16, 18, 20), as well as Og king of Bashan (Deuteronomy 3:11). Viewed this way, the Old Testament's depiction of Canaan's inhabitants makes the severity of the genocidal conquest commands more intelligible. (Deuteronomy 20:16-17). It also makes sense of Jude 1:6 and the connection with Sodom and Gomorrah and the pre-flood narrative, which is replicated in the days leading up to the Parousia. (Luke 17:26). 

Regarding the argument that when God created everything "after its kind" in Genesis 1:25. This is a descriptive narrative of creation, not a violation of it. The existence of a divine design does not preclude transgression of that design.

The appeal to Matthew 22:30 ("angels do not marry nor are given in marriage”) does not resolve the question of Genesis 6, because the two passages address different categories and different contexts.

Contextual Scope of Matthew 22:30 > Jesus’ statement concerns the marital status of resurrected humans and uses angels as a comparative model. The passage is not intended as an ontological description of angelic capacities but as a functional description of their heavenly mode of existence.

Heavenly Angels vs Fallen Angels > Matthew 22:30 refers specifically to angels “in heaven”. Genesis 6 and Jude 6 describe angels who “did not keep their own domain”. The texts therefore concern different angelic states, and conclusions drawn from one cannot be automatically transferred to the other.

Marriage vs Procreation > The argument assumes that the inability to marry entails the inability to procreate. This is a category error. The text states that angels do not marry; it does not state that they lack the capacity to assume physical form capable of biological interaction.

Embodiment in the Old Testament > Multiple Old Testament narratives depict angels taking embodied form indistinguishable from human males. (Genesis 18–19). These accounts demonstrate that angels can assume physicality with functional human characteristics.

Second Temple Interpretation > Jewish literature of the Second Temple period—including 1 Enoch, Jubilees, Philo, and Josephus—consistently interpreted Genesis 6 as referring to angelic beings. This indicates that Matthew 22:30 was not understood as contradicting that reading.

Jude 6–7 and Boundary Violation > Jude links the sin of the angels to Sodom’s pursuit of “strange flesh”, suggesting a transgression involving sexual boundaries. This intertextual connection supports the reading that Genesis 6 involves an illicit crossing of created categories

Justin Peters and his colleagues' abrupt dismissal of the substantial body of material concerning Nephilim hybrids simply exposes their predisposition to reject anything that even marginally challenges their established worldview. I do, of course, agree that none of this is vaguely relevant to the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

In conclusion, scripture indicates that the closing phase of this age will involve spiritual deception on a scale without precedent. The exact form this deception will take is not disclosed, but it would be unwarranted to dismiss unusual claims outright. The Antichrist will present a counterfeit resurrection, and God Himself will send a strong delusion. Because biblical prophecy is interpreted literally throughout scripture, Revelation should not be treated as an exception. Within that eschatological framework, the range of possible end‑time manifestations should not be reduced or denied through allegorisation. Jesus issued a specific warning so that believers would not be caught off guard: “See, I have told you beforehand.” (Matthew 24:25).

The coming of the lawless one will be accompanied by the working of Satan, with every kind of power, sign, and false wonder, and with every wicked deception directed against those who are perishing, because they refused the love of the truth that would have saved them. For this reason God will send them a powerful delusion so that they believe the lie, in order that judgment may come upon all who have disbelieved the truth and delighted in wickedness. (2 Thessalonians 2:9-12).

Then I saw another beast rising out of the earth. It had two horns like a lamb and it spoke like a dragon. It exercises all the authority of the first beast in its presence, and makes the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose mortal wound was healed. It performs great signs, even making fire come down from heaven to earth in front of people, and by the signs that it is allowed to work in the presence of the beast it deceives those who dwell on earth, telling them to make an image for the beast that was wounded by the sword and yet lived. And it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast might even speak and might cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain. Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name. This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666. (Revelation 13:11-18).  

1. Worried About UFOs And Aliens? Watch This!

Tuesday, 12 May 2026

JOEL RICHARDSON: GOG IS NOT THE ANTICHRIST

Gog and Magog: Gospel of the Skull Crusher Bible Study 34

Joel Richardson presents himself as a prophecy expert, yet his material raises significant concerns. This post isolates his handling of Gog and Magog in Ezekiel 38–39. As noted previously, Richardson’s effort to identify Gog with the Antichrist is exegetically untenable.

In this video, Richardson's attempt to merge Agag and Gog in Numbers 24:7 is not serious exegesis; it is a contrivance. 

How lovely are your tents, O Jacob, your dwellings, O Israel! They spread out like palm groves, like gardens beside a stream, like aloes the LORD has planted, like cedars beside the waters.Water will flow from his buckets, and his seed will have abundant water. His king will be greater than Agag, and his kingdom will be exalted. God brought him out of Egypt with strength like a wild ox, to devour hostile nations and crush their bones, to pierce them with arrows. He crouches, he lies down like a lion, like a lioness—who dares to rouse him? Blessed are those who bless you and cursed are those who curse you.” (Numbers 24:5-9).

Brenton Septuagint translation: There shall come a man out of his seed, and he shall rule over many nations; and the kingdom of Gog shall be exalted, and his kingdom shall be increased. (Numbers 24:7).

The Septuagint (LXX) is a Jewish translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek (3rd–2nd century BC). Its purpose was accessibility, not strict one‑to‑one lexical reproduction. The LXX sometimes reflects different Hebrew source traditions or uses interpretive renderings rather than literal ones. The Agag > Gog shift in Numbers 24:7 is linguistic speculation and a translation variant, not a theological identification. The divergence does not establish a theological identity between Agag and Gog. 

Agag is not another name for Gog in the Hebrew Bible. The two names are etymologically distinct, refer to different figures, and belong to different historical–theological contexts. Agag (אגג) and Gog (גוג) are different roots. The similarity in consonants is insufficient to claim identity. A few later interpreters conflate them, but the biblical text itself does not. The Hebrew text still reads Agag.
 
“Agag” was the title carried by Amalekite kings (1 Samuel 15:8). Amalek stood for opposition to God’s people (Exodus 17:16). Predicting a king “greater than Agag” means Israel’s future ruler will decisively outclass every hostile monarch.

Pulpit Commentary: "The name Agag (אַגַג, the fiery one) does not occur again except as the name of the king of Amalek whom Saul conquered and Samuel slew (1 Samuel 15.); yet it may safely be assumed that it was the official title of all the kings of Amalek, resembling in this 'Abimelech' and 'Pharaoh'."1 

Below, in brief, are three additional defects in Richardson’s Islamic‑Antichrist thesis. A full rebuttal has already been set out in detail in my earlier analyses.*

* And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. (Daniel 9:26)

Daniel 9:26 refers to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish Temple in 70 AD. As such, "the prince who is to come” is widely viewed as being the Antichrist. Since it was the Romans who destroyed the city and the Temple, it is commonly believed that the Antichrist will, in some sense, be of Roman derivation and will come from a revived Roman Empire.

* “Thus says the Lord God: On that day, thoughts will come into your mind, and you will devise an evil scheme and say, ‘I will go up against the land of unwalled villages. I will fall upon the quiet people who dwell securely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having no bars or gates,’ (Ezekiel 38:10-11).

Gog will come against the land of unwalled villages etc. This description certainly does not describe Israel or Jerusalem, either now or at any time before the end of the age, no matter how Richardson tries to spin it. 

* You shall fall on the mountains of Israel, you and all your hordes and the peoples who are with you. I will give you to birds of prey of every sort and to the beasts of the field to be devoured. You shall fall in the open field, for I have spoken, declares the Lord God..  On that day I will give to Gog a place for burial in Israel, the Valley of the Travelers, east of the sea. It will block the travelers, for there Gog and all his multitude will be buried. (Ezekiel 39:4-5,11).

And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who in its presence had done the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped its image. These two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulfur. (Revelation 19:20).

A clear inconsistency emerges in Richardson’s construction. Ezekiel identifies Gog as a figure who is killed and buried in the Valley of the Travelers within Israel (Ezekiel 39:4–11), whereas Revelation states that the beast—the Antichrist—is seized and thrown alive into the lake of fire (Revelation 19:20). The two destinies are irreconcilable.

Joel Richardson reports receiving a “prophetic endorsement” in 1992 from Paul Cain—a central figure in the Latter Rain movement whose so‑called personal prophecies once operated as a fast‑track to platform visibility within charismatic networks. In light of the documented exposure of Cain’s fraud by John Collins (Leaving the Message) and others, that boast now functions as a liability rather than a credential. Richardson’s subsequent associations have likewise involved a long list of demonstrably unreliable teachers and platforms, including Glenn Beck, Jim Bakker, Sid Roth, Mike Bickle, Walid Shoebat, Paul Wilbur, TBN, the 700 Club, CBN News, Joel Rosenberg (listed 2009), IHOP, Jonathan Cahn, Mark Biltz, Chuck Missler, Daystar TV, Vlad Savchuk, Chris Reed, and Dalton Thomas. Richardson's further doctrinal errors include Identificational Repentance and the Metatron heresy.

Thursday, 7 May 2026

ADAM FANNIN: BLATANT MISREPRESENTATION OF "ALL ISRAEL"

Romans 11 Debunks Zionism - All 𝐈𝐒𝐑𝐀𝐄𝐋 Saved not the JEWS

Supersessionist Adam Fannin is on a fanatical mission to discredit the future of ethnic Israel. In this video, he advances a series of fallacious arguments, claiming that Romans 11 is one of the most misquoted passages of scripture, insisting that it does not refer to ethnic Israel. 

Error 1: Romans 11:1 "his people" does not refer to ethnic Israel.

I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. (Romans 11:1).

Commentaries uniformly identify “his people” in Romans 11:1 as ethnic Israel. The surrounding context from Romans 10:18-11:36 consistently addresses ethnic Israel. Fannin’s view is isolated, incoherent and exegetically non-viable.

Berean Study Bible: "Paul raises a rhetorical question to address concerns about God's faithfulness to Israel. This question reflects the tension between the Jewish and Gentile believers in the early church. Historically, Israel was chosen as God's covenant people (Deuteronomy 7:6-8). The question implies a deep theological inquiry into God's promises and their fulfillment. The context of Romans 9-11 deals with the mystery of Israel's partial hardening and the inclusion of the Gentiles."1

Meyer: "Romans 11:1. Λέγω οὖν] corresponds to the twofold ἀλλὰ λέγω, Romans 10:18-19, but so, that now this third interrogative λέγω is introduced in an inferential form. In consequence, namely, of what had just been clearly laid down in Romans 10:18 ff., as to the guilt of resistant Israel in its exclusion from salvation in Christ—over-against the Gentiles’ acceptance of it—the difficult question might arise: Surely God has not cast off His people? Surely it is not so tragic a fate, that we must infer it from that conduct of the people? Paul states this question, earnestly negatives it, and then sets forth the real state of the matter. The opinion of Hofmann, that the apostle starts this question because the scriptural passages Romans 10:18 ff. show that it is to be negatived, is the consequence of his incorrect interpretation of those scriptural sayings, and is confuted by the fact that the negation is first given and supported in what follows, not drawn from what precedes, but made good by a quite different scriptural proof, Romans 11:2."2 

Error 2: Dispensationalism teaches salvation for ethnic Israel apart from Jesus Christ, a crossless gospel without repentance, and works‑based salvation across eras. 

Fannin’s depiction of dispensationalism is not an interpretation but a mischaracterisation of the actual view. A fundamental feature of dispensationalism is its emphasis on the distinction between Israel and the church: Israel receives the earthly covenants and promises, while the church receives New Testament spiritual blessings. Dispensationalists do not claim that ethnic Israel can be saved apart from Christ, repentance, or regeneration, nor do they teach that regeneration is imposed without consent. Well-known dispensational theologian Peter Goeman articulates the standard view and explicitly teaches a future national repentance of ethnic Israel, grounded in Romans 11, Zechariah 12, and Matthew 23:39.3

Scripture presents a clear pattern of end‑time repentance for ethnic Israel: Zechariah 12:10–13:1 depicts a national mourning over the One they pierced and a subsequent cleansing; Jesus ties His return to Israel’s future confession in Matthew 23:39; Paul affirms in Romans 11:11–15 and 25–27 that Israel’s present hardening will be removed, leading to their “fullness” and salvation when the Deliverer comes from Zion; Hosea 3:4–5 and 5:15 describe Israel’s latter‑day return to the Lord after a prolonged period of estrangement; and Ezekiel 36–37, Joel 2:28–32, and Daniel 12:1 frame this repentance within Israel’s eschatological restoration, spiritual renewal, and deliverance. Together, these passages form a consistent biblical expectation of a future, corporate turning of ethnic Israel to Christ in the last days.

And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and pleas for mercy, so that, when they look on me, on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn. On that day the mourning in Jerusalem will be as great as the mourning for Hadad-rimmon in the plain of Megiddo. The land shall mourn, each family by itself: the family of the house of David by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Nathan by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Levi by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the Shimeites by itself, and their wives by themselves; and all the families that are left, each by itself, and their wives by themselves. (Zechariah 12:10-14 cf. Zechariah 13:1; 14:1-11).

"And a Redeemer will come to Zion, to those in Jacob who turn from transgression,” declares the Lord.
“And as for me, this is my covenant with them,” says the Lord: “My Spirit that is upon you, and my words that I have put in your mouth, shall not depart out of your mouth, or out of the mouth of your offspring, or out of the mouth of your children’s offspring,” says the Lord, “from this time forth and forevermore.” (Isaiah 59:20-21 
cf. Romans 11:26-27).

Error 3: Christ is the tree, the root, and the firstfruits.

If the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, so is the whole lump, and if the root is holy, so are the branches. (Romans 11:16).

Romans 11:16 uses two parallel metaphors—firstfruit/lump and root/branches—to express the same point. Both images assert that the patriarchs, as the consecrated origin of Israel, impart a covenantal holiness to the nation that descends from them. The two phrases reinforce one idea, not two.

Throughout the Old Testament, Israel is often metaphorized as an Olive Tree. The Apostle Paul uses this metaphor to illustrate the relationship between Israel and the Gentiles. The root of the tree symbolises the patriarchs—Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—and the covenants made to them by God. The natural branches represent the Israelites, while the wild olive shoots symbolise the Gentiles who have come to faith in Christ.

Pulpit Commentary: "Verse 16. - And if the firstfruit be holy, so also is the lump; and if the root be holy, so also are the branches. By the firstfruit and the root is signified the original stock of Israel, the patriarchs; by the lump and the branches, the subsequent nation through all time. The word ἀπαρχή, being here connected with φύραμα, may be understood as referring to Numbers 15:19-22. The people are there enjoined to take of the first dough (φύραμα) kneaded after harvest a cake for a heave offering, called ἀπαρχή φυράματος (LXX.). This consecrated ἀπαρχή sanctified the whole φύραμα. Romans 11:16".

Ellicott: "The firstfruit . . . the lump.—The allusion here is to the custom, described in Numbers 15:19-21, of dedicating a portion of the dough to God. The portion thus taken was to be a 'heave-offering'—i.e., it was to be 'waved,' or 'heaved,' before the Lord, and was then given to the priest."

Gill: "For if the firstfruit be holy,.... Some by 'the firstfruit' and 'root' understand Christ, who is sometimes called, 'the firstfruits of them that slept', 1 Corinthians 15:20, and 'the root of Jesse and David', Isaiah 11:10, and indeed of all the righteous; and certain it is, that since he is holy, has all the holiness of his people in him, and is sanctification unto them, they shall be holy likewise; have it imparted to them in this life, and perfected in them in another: but this does not seem to agree with the apostle's argument.4  Gill, dismisses both readings—that Christ is the firstfruit and that Abraham’s descendants are the firstfruit—and instead proposes, incorrectly in my assessment, that the "firstfruits" refers merely to the earliest Jewish converts in the Gospel era. He identifies these initial believers in Judea, who received the firstfruit of the Spirit and were the first among the Jews to trust in Christ, as the referent. This interpretation is a departure from the standard Calvinist view, which understands the "firstfruit" as the patriarchs.

Error 4: The mark of the beast is available before the abomination of desolation.

The claim that the mark of the beast becoesmes available before the abomination of desolation lacks any scriptural foundation. Fannin provides no demonstrable proof texts to corroborate this assertion. (1 John 4:1). Scripture consistently places the mark in direct association with the abomination of desolation, which is established at the midpoint of Daniel’s seventieth week (Daniel 9:27). Prior to this midpoint, the Antichrist has confirmed a covenant with many and functions as an ally to Israel. The mark is not introduced until he takes his seat in the temple of God and proclaims himself to be God. (2 Thessalonians 2:4).

The Antichrist appears in Revelation 13 as the beast rising from the sea, possessing ten horns and receiving authority to act for forty‑two months—marking the midpoint of the seventieth week and the beginning of his war against the saints. (Revelation 13:5–7). Only after this does the second beast arise, instigating the image of the beast and enforcing the mark. The sequence is explicit: the abomination, the image, then the mark—not before.

The beast was given a mouth to speak arrogant and blasphemous words, and authority to act for 42 months. And the beast opened its mouth to speak blasphemies against God and to slander His name and His tabernacle—those who dwell in heaven. (Revelation 12:5-6).
Then I saw another beast rising out of the earth. This beast had two horns like a lamb, but spoke like a dragon. And this beast exercised all the authority of the first beast and caused the earth and those who dwell in it to worship the first beast, whose mortal wound had been healed.
And the second beast performed great signs, even causing fire from heaven to come down to earth in the presence of the people. Because of the signs it was given to perform on behalf of the first beast, it deceived those who dwell on the earth, telling them to make an image to the beast that had been wounded by the sword and yet had lived. The second beast was permitted to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship it to be killed.
And the second beast required all people, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark—the name of the beast or the number of its name. (Revelation 12:11-17). 

The third angel’s warning in Revelation 14:9 indicates that the mark of the beast has only recently been introduced.

And a third angel followed them, calling out in a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives its mark on his forehead or on his hand, he too will drink the wine of God’s anger, poured undiluted into the cup of His wrath. And he will be tormented in fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment rises forever and ever. Day and night there is no rest for those who worship the beast and its image, or for anyone who receives the mark of its name.” (Revelation 14:9-11).

Given the explicit warning in Revelation 22, one would expect a high degree of caution in handling the word of God. Yet it is remarkable how many disregard that warning and distort it regardless.

I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book. (Revelation 22:18-19)

Adam Fannin's rejection of the biblical teaching that ethnic Israel retains a defined role in eschatology does not withstand elementary scrutiny. Believers should exercise extreme caution before dismissing the Jewish people or the prophetic promises concerning the land of Israel. The consequences of distorting the word of God at this point are severe. Scripture describes those who repudiate Israel—the apple of God’s eye—and who oppose His explicit word as acting in arrogance. (Romans 11:19-21). This posture invites serious error when eschatological events emerge on the world stage.

Although I reject key elements of dispensationalism—particularly the pretribulation rapture—it is unacceptable to misrepresent any position we dispute. Accuracy is a matter of integrity and is not negotiable. The central distinction between pretrib and prewrath interpreters is that prewrath denies a pretribulation rapture and holds that God works with both Israel and the church concurrently during Daniel’s seventieth week. 

1. Romans 11 Berean Study Bible
2. Romans 11:1 Commentaries: I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
3. Should We Expect a Future Kingdom for National Israel? – PeterGoeman.com
4. Romans 11:16 Commentaries: If the first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and if the root is holy, the branches are too.
5. God Will Work With Israel and the Church at the Same Time in the Future | Bible Prophecy Answers with Alan Kurschner

Further Links