Dave’s 9/19/25 Monologue — Annotated with Our Responses
Note on the transcript and audio from Jim:
The audio appears here in its original form, except for light denoising and volume adjustments to improve audibility, and blanked audio for redacted names. The transcript remains unchanged apart from time codes for navigation and cross-reference with the audio. Also, a small number of name redactions with headings added for ease of use.
Original Transcript: Black
Quinn: Green
Jim: Red
Rebecca: Purple
Jessica: Blue
Pseudonyms: Kurt, William, Mitch, Marvin
Intro and Prayer
00:00:00,080--> 00:02:18,430 [Congregant(s)]
Father,
... and now. Holy Spirit, fill us again. And let your fruit be evident in all we do, in love, in kindness, in patience, in self-control. Caring more for others than about ourselves. Please give us good ears to hear you, and to hear one another. Amen.
All right, guys, so today is going to be a special day. Um, as some of you are aware, and some of you are ... may not be aware, um, in recent weeks, Dave has received accusations of misconduct from some members of the church body. Tonight, he will be addressing some of those concerns. My role is mediator to inform you of the expectations, as well as to keep the peace. So let's take this forward. Can I ask you just one question? Sorry to interrupt. But would you speak loudly for the people online in the back? Yeah. And the people back here.
[laughs]
Do I need to start over? And ... No, no, no, just going forward, I think. Yeah. Thank you.
Dave has met with five brothers of the faith this week to approach this, and for their ... per their guidance, he has prepared tonight's response. He will be giving his response in full without interruption. Sunday morning rules. Afterwards, we will adjourn in prayer, and break for the night. As you will hear him say, all are invited to discuss with him after the statement in person-to-person conversation. As we are all here to learn, heal, and grow, I encourage everyone to act respectfully, and represent yourselves as individual followers of Christ, as well as the church body. Could we move the Zoom laptop closer to you so that people on Zoom can hear you better? I'll say. I'm not IT.
[laughs]
Deferring to Matt. But you do have to whistle. I don't whistle. Hopefully more than whistles.
[door slams]
Thank you. Thanks,
Dave Monologue
00:02:18,430 --> 00:04:21,720 [Dave]
On August 28th, a website was published containing allegations of misconduct by me and my wife.
This has caused great confusion and division that has been separating brothers, and destroying the community of Christian love we fostered here for 20 years. Last Saturday, Kathy and I met with five brothers to discuss the charges presented against us on the website. This was not casual, or sweep it under the rug, but a four and a quarter hour meeting, asking direct questions and providing direct answers. I submitted to their feedback and guidance. The men identified four major accusations to confront, and told me to ignore the rest. The committee that created the website had spent months crafting their words without giving us sufficient time to respond. We asked for time to be able to produce a thoughtful answer, but they set a quick deadline. When I told them that I couldn't answer in time, they published the website, I believe for the purpose of our personal destruction and the destruction of our Friday Night House Church. Our counseling team told us to address the following issues: lack of oversight and accountability, question of financial impropriety, prophecies given, and sexual allegations. And if there's any other issue that concerns you, you are welcome to meet with us to discuss it. We will be happy to meet with whoever wants to talk to us.
Quinn:
“On August 28th, a website was published containing allegations of misconduct by me and my wife.”
I invite the reader to pay attention to how many times in this monologue Dave mentions him and Kathy, or uses terms like “us” or “we”. Then compare that with the messaging of the website itself.
“When I told them that I couldn't answer in time, they published the website”
Well, no. We extended the deadline twice. After the second extension, Dave said nothing and simply allowed the deadline to pass.
Lack of Oversight and Accountability.
00:04:21,720 --> 00:08:27,728 [Dave]
1.
So area one, concerning lack of oversight and accountability.
One of the things the website called out was the peerless Papa Dave,
saying Dave had no peers or leaders who were his equal.
Well, that's true. How many 68-year-old men do you know who have served God all their lives? No, there has not been anybody with the same life experience, but that doesn't mean that there's not accountability. You don't have to be me, or older, or have more studies or anything else in order to hold one another accountable. They documented, "I've been praying for years for elders, but God hasn't sent anyone." So you might logically conclude, he must approve of the way we've been doing things. And true. I said that. And truly, I have prayed for additional elders, and I have worked to produce elders-in-training. Dave also asked for a specific list of our concerns and what we wanted changed. Yeah, we have listened to concerns, and we've made changes over the years. I asked Jessica what she wanted me to do, but she didn't give me any answers. She told me that people had been hurt at Friday night. Her example was a man who touched a woman inappropriately on a date.That's not about Friday Night or me. We don't preach that that's okay. Some things can happen as we have interactions with one another, and it's not all right.Jessica wrote a letter and complained to Scottsdale Bible Church about us. We met with the pastor of Small Groups, and he said, "I really couldn't understand what she wanted."
Rebecca:
“And true. I said that. And truly, I have prayed for additional elders, and I have worked to produce elders-in-training”
I, along with many others, heard Dave state that he was grateful to have Kurt as another elder when Saturday Night—Friday Night’s “sister church”—was founded, not as an elder-in-training. Because of this, I believe I was rightly prompted to speak with him about our situation in order to hold Dave accountable.
While the structure and function of eldership were never formally taught or clearly articulated, that does not mean a particular understanding was not implicitly communicated. If a house group is regarded as a church, it should adhere to the biblical pattern outlined in Acts 14:23 and Titus 1:5 regarding the official appointment of elders; otherwise, confusion is inevitable.
After the website dropped, that Saturday Night Kurt clearly stated that he was never an elder at Friday Night. However, those who attend only Friday Night would not have heard this clarification. That distinction was important, especially given that Dave had indicated Kurt was an elder, Saturday Night was regularly promoted at Friday Night (and vice versa), and Kurt frequently came to lead when Dave and Kathy were away.
Additionally, Scripture consistently teaches that when leaders or ministries publicly affirm, endorse, or platform others, they bear responsibility to respond if sin or false teaching becomes evident. Paul warns leaders not to “share in the sins of others” through premature or continued affirmation (1 Timothy 5:22). This principle is reinforced elsewhere, where believers are instructed not to participate in the works of darkness but instead expose them (Ephesians 5:11), and where John warns that continued support of false teachers constitutes participation in their wicked works (2 John 10–11).
Taken together, these passages establish a biblical responsibility for church-wide accountability when church-wide endorsement has occurred. Mike Winger articulates this well in the recent Bethel scandal (link).
Jessica:
·Dave agrees that there is no one like him in the group. But he claims that there is still accountability. Notice that he doesn’t mention a single person by name that holds him accountable. Nor does he describe the method for actually holding him accountable. The process that he references a few sentences later, involves people going directly to him and then him getting to decide what to do.
·Dave refers to one issue I raised in our conversions, while only sharing selective details from the story. He failed to mention that the man I raised concerns about was a man Dave said held him accountable. Dave also failed to mention the other two specific stories that were shared during the meeting by myself and the other person who went with me.
·It is my understanding that SBC met with Dave multiple times in 2022. I do not know what was said in those meetings.
·Dave did ask me what I wanted during the September 2022 meeting. Because of that I sent an email to SBC and CRU in September 2022, specifically asking for increased accountability. Later in September I met with a SBC pastor. He told me that groups like Dave’s were common, where they start out as a small group, and then cipher off members from a church. The pastor said that once the group is removed from the website it often dies. The pastor said that Dave’s group was going to be removed from SBC’s website. He also said that besides that he had no other authority he could exercise over Dave. He did give me advice on how to protect myself from men who claim to hear from God on your behalf. At no time during this conversation did I get the impression that the Pastor did not understand what I wanted.
2.
So we are in agreement. But clearly, we are open to criticism and suggestions. But I confess that there have been times that I haven't listened well.I quickly thought of a defense instead of laying it aside and just listening to a person's hurt. And for that, I'm sorry. And I resolved to change that behavior. If I have hurt you in that way, please come and tell me and allow me to ask for your forgiveness. I want you all to join me in asking God to send us additional elders. That would be great. Do any of you have godly parents who qualify biblically as elders? Invite them. Bring them here. We will make a point as a Friday Night community of praying together for more elders.
3.
And our third point under accountability here is that we are forming a board to be able to address complaints and to help me grow. And hopefully, you will all feel able to address anything you believe is wrong, with assistance, even something you see in this older man.
Quinn:
Jim later asked Dave for the names and emails of the people on his board. He never responded. See Jim’s update, 10/7/25 email.
Area two.
Financial Impropriety
Back story and Jim’s article
00:08:27,728 --> 00:12:32,156 [Dave]
Concerning the question of financial impropriety. The website page is titled, The Unbought Word: A Biblical Case Against Transactional Prophecy. It says, "The moment money becomes the condition for revelation, when a gift or payment secures a word, the office collapses under a divided allegiance. Whenever revelation is sold, it is profaned. At the same time, Scripture draws a distinction. God does provide for those who labor in the Gospel. The faithful are called to sustain ministers of the word, but not to purchase the word itself. The difference is crucial. Legitimate support is relational and communal, designed to free the prophet or preacher for service. A prophet who accepts money to deliver a blessing subverts the whole system."
The entire article is excellent. It's well-written. It's full of scripture to be studied and followed. Two great articles. There were lots of references to, you know, articles at the end, and I didn't get to read them all, but I read a couple. They were great. Uh, number 22, what does it mean that those who preach the gospel should live by it? Number 28, does your pastor love God or money?
But this page's inclusion in this accusatory website is intended to imply that I am a prophet for hire and that I stand with those, who by their greed and misdeeds, are indicted by the word of God. I agree wholeheartedly with the teaching presented. I repudiate the implication and accusation against us. Now, I ask you to be the judge of what you have experienced from Dave and Kathy on Friday night. Have you ever been charged a fee for attending Friday Night or eating our food or drinking our drinks? How many times has an offering been taken as in most Sunday churches, passing a plate or shoe box around for people to give? Have you ever been charged a fee for obtaining a word from the Lord from Dave? Have you ever been charged a fee for obtaining advice from Dave or Kathy? Have you ever been charged a fee for receiving teaching or dozens of hours of counseling from Dave or Kathy? Have you ever heard that Dave charged anyone for performing a wedding, even though this is common among pastors?
Jim:
Dave’s defense focuses on whether anyone was ever charged a fee for ministry. That is not the issue. The issue is a specific, documented word he delivered to me. It explicitly quotes Malachi’s language: “Will a man rob God? … You are cursed with a curse … in tithes and offerings,” and then links financial giving to devotion. [link to testimony]
Whether others were charged nothing on Friday nights does not answer what was said to me in a targeted interaction, nor does it erase the foreseeable implication of that message. Dave wants readers to consider “implication” when it concerns him; yet he denies implication when his own message tied my giving or lack thereof to robbery and a curse.
The honest rebuttal is simple: address the message itself, what he meant, whether it was responsibly applied, and whether he will publicly clarify or retract it. Thus far, he has not.
Have you been pressured or coerced to contribute to Dave and Kathy or Friday Night? Have other missionaries been prohibited to speak to Friday Night and asked for financial support?
Because we still have folders up there from a few weeks ago when Aaron brought his friend, a missionary that we invited to share the whole evening. And I made the pitch for you to support them.How often has Dave told you how important it is for you to give him money?... if your answer to all of these questions is, "Never," then you need to repudiate this charge personally. But what about Jim's story?
00:12:32,156 --> 00:12:32,776 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
00:12:32,776 --> 00:14:06,446 [Dave]
If you have never, ever encountered anything like it, or never experienced any pressure to give to Dave and Kathy's ministries, why do you believe that we've treated Jim and Rebecca differently? Because we have not. But let me share some history with you.
Quinn:
Because of first-hand witness testimony and documented evidence to back it up?
My first career was in the computer business, even before IBM invented the first PC. In 1986, God pushed me to start my own business, which became wildly successful. In the first nine months, we went from a two-bedroom apartment where we had lived for four years, to a 2,700 square foot house on the greenbelt in McCormick Ranch, which became a ministry center and home for missionaries and college students. I loved that house. [laughs]
Steve's over there, nodding vigorously.
That's why I moved into that house. He was there at that time. I love this house so much, this two-bedroom apartment, right?
[laughs] God blessed us greatly financially through the business. In 1997, we were invited to join the staff of Campus Crusade for Christ in a ministry training pastors and ministry leaders worldwide. This would require leaving the business and its financial security, to go to our friends and family and ask them to support us. It took two years to gather our team of supporters. We closed the business, we did not sell it, and left the career that I had-
00:14:06,446 --> 00:14:06,446 [Congregant(s)]
Wow
00:14:06,446 --> 00:14:42,656 [Dave]
... studied for and become respected in. Like Cortez, we burned our ships in the harbor, no turning back. We took a substantial cut in pay, and Kathy was required to join me in full-time work. Over the years,there have been many times that we got short paychecks. This is what our friend and fellow minister, Terry Lavender, says, "There's good money to be made in ministry. Not much, but whatever you get is good."
Quinn: If the money Dave received from Jim is legitimate, he should explain why the Biblical critique of his prophecy based on 2 Cor 9 is not valid. This critique was made in two different places on the website (Kidney Donor’s Story, halfway down, and Thirty Pieces of Silver, in my statement at the bottom).
Dave openly admits below (see timestamp 19:25) that he gave Jim this prophecy. I cannot think of anything more important for Dave to have addressed in this meeting than a direct Scriptural challenge to a prophecy he admits he gave. Yet no response occurs in this monologue, or in Jim’s correspondence with Dave (see Jim’s update), or anywhere else that we know of.
Rather, as you will read below, Dave appeals to the timing of his word coinciding with God giving Jim dreams about giving – but that was simply false – Jim’s dreams were not about giving. Not only that, but we have the email documentation of when Jim told Dave about the dreams, and there was nothing stated about giving.
00:14:42,656 --> 00:14:46,696 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
00:14:46,696 --> 00:19:22,338 [Dave]
We have trusted the Lord to supply our needs for the last almost 27 years. All by his moving and the hearts of our brothers and sisters who work hard and give a portion of their earnings to God by sending money to CRU. We are not permitted to work other jobs to earn money when our paychecks are short. Opening our home for Friday night and carrying the expenses of it, and all of our teaching preparation and counseling for individuals and couples, and performing weddings and making hospital visits is not part of our job description. We do not get paid to do any of that. It is entirely voluntary.
We have borne the expenses of increased utility bills and replacing flooring, and replacing furniture that endures weekly traffic. We need to again replace the dining room chairs that have been worn out, as some of you can attest right now that you're sitting in.
Friday night has never been a moneymaker. It costs us. But we have not shared these things with you for the last 20 years, so that all may come and receive the word of God freely. We are grateful for those who give to God to help meet our needs.
Quinn: None of this has anything to do with whether the facts presented in Jim’s story are true, or if the Scriptural correction applied to Dave’s prophecy is valid.
Rebecca: Agreed. He is clearly trying to use the appeal to character fallacy which leverages one’s perceived virtue or reputation to discredit our testimony instead of directly addressing the substance of the claim. This unfairly attempts to shift the burden of proof and pre-emptively discredit the victim.
Jessica: Dave’s characterization that he didn’t make money from Friday Night is not true. I donated money to Dave through CRU, because I believed that I should tithe to Dave as the leader of the church I attended. Other Friday Nights attenders also donated via CRU. Dave wrote about his Friday Night ministry in his CRU updates where he also requested donations through his CRU page.
Jim and Rebecca
Jim's well-written article presents the strong biblical case for the support of God's workers. It is the foundation for the policies of Campus Crusade, CRU, the largest missions organization in the world, which requires all its staff to receive donations to support their families. We have donated thousands of hours of service to Jim and Rebecca over the last 19 years, starting even before Rebecca decided to follow Jesus. We have provided abundant spiritual counseling, relationship counseling, counseling for Jim's business, driving to their home in Gilbert always without charge. In 2018, Kathy needed a kidney transplant.
Rebecca was one of 20 who volunteered without being asked to donate her kidney, and Rebecca's was the right match. And she gladly donated her precious gift of life for which we shall always be grateful. Jim used his studio and masterful skills to produce a recording of my song, You Are, without charge. In 2023, the Lintons were making efforts to sell their house. They had already obtained money from other church members and now were asking us for money, always referencing fixing up the house, not for medical bills. We gave them the money they requested.When they asked for more money, I followed the financial policy I had learned at Scottsdale Bible Church. Have a financial counselor talk with them about their situation. But we also gave them the money they requested, every time. Two more times, we gave, now totaling almost $10,000. Our text thread shows us asking them if they needed more. July 6th, I asked, "How much do you need to stay afloat this month?" 11 days later, "If you need more cash to fix the air conditioning, let me know. No guilt, just getting the job done." The website seems to imply that we have been reluctant and not willing to share. But that's not what our texts show, and that's not our recollection at all.
Rebecca:
“Rebecca was one of 20 who volunteered without being asked to donate her kidney,”
The 1 of 20 comment is stated to undermine the significance of what I and my husband gave up by donating Kathy my kidney. This statement is further evidence to back up a claim he made to Suli who confronted Dave privately about our situation- this was his paraphrased response, according to Suli:
‘They had been dealing with a lot of financial difficulties, and while I was praying for them, I felt the Lord telling me to share something with them. In everything they were doing—their business and their efforts—they hadn’t given anything to the Lord.’
This statement was deeply hurtful, especially since I’ve consistently said God gave me the faith to do this for him and Kathy. Whether Dave knew or not, we gave to starving children in Africa for over a decade, and God knew. If Dave did know, it suggests he believed giving to the Lord meant giving to the priest.
“-They had already obtained money from other church members and now were asking us for money, always referencing fixing up the house, not for medical bills. We gave them the money they requested.”
Another believer offered to help with loaning money to fix our house. Additionally, this should say “loaned us the money we requested.” He knew from the start it was always a loan. Our medical bills were piling up, but could wait until after we sold the house.
“But we also gave them the money they requested, every time. Two more times, we gave, now totaling almost $10,000. Our text thread shows us asking them if they needed more. July 6th, I asked, "How much do you need to stay afloat this month?" 11 days later, "If you need more cash to fix the air conditioning, let me know. No guilt, just getting the job done."
Dave did not give (loan) us the money the second time we asked and said he needed to pray about it. The believer Rachelle who lent us money even had to rebuke him for not loaning it, and he told her the reason he did not want to give it is because we had ‘mismanaged our money’. He did not loan it until I asked if playing a song to Friday night that Jim had previously written describing us worshipping God amidst our suffering would release the money; seeming to be needed as evidence we had the right heart about the situation. Dave indicated that could be it. After we did this, he confirmed the Lord said this was the release of the money.
This is clear manipulation, as it turns aid into leverage and worship into transaction.
This incident does not stand alone but, when viewed alongside the earlier word Dave gave, reveals a consistent pattern in which suffering and lack were interpreted as evidence of spiritual or moral deficiency related to heart posture or conduct. Scripture makes clear that only God discerns the heart (1 Samuel 16:7) and that suffering is not to be assumed as the result of sin or mismanagement (John 9:3). Although no church or leader is obligated to loan money, the context matters: Dave was acting in a representative pastoral capacity during a severe medical crisis, and the request was for a short-term loan tied to an imminent house sale with clear repayment. In that setting, attributing the crisis to alleged financial mismanagement, sharing that judgment with others (Proverbs 11:13), and ultimately conditioning provision on a public demonstration of perceived righteousness departed from prudent stewardship. Scripture explicitly forbids giving under compulsion or using provision as leverage for spiritual approval (2 Corinthians 9:7), and warns shepherds not to exercise authority in a domineering or coercive manner (1 Peter 5:2–3). The cumulative effect of these actions functioned as spiritual coercion rather than biblical pastoral care, which calls leaders to bear burdens with those who suffer rather than moralize their distress (Galatians 6:2).
00:19:22,338 --> 00:19:25,987 [Congregant(s)]
Hmm.
00:19:25,987 --> 00:25:49,620 [Dave]
On July 26th, Jim gets two dreams from God about giving. God told him, "I'm going to give you dreams tonight. Write them down." He woke up to find that God gave me a word to give to Jim about giving. We were in Orlando. We were there with our ministry, serving, and the Lord put this message [whistles] on my heart and wouldn't let me go to sleep until I had sent it to Jim. I had no idea that God had been talking to Jim at the identical time.
Jim texted, "Hey, buddy. Thank you. I just woke up from two dreams, but if God is trying to talk to you about my view on tithes, then thank you. I have often wondered about our situation." The 27th, my text, "It's almost 3:00 AM here in Orlando and I can't go back to sleep. God keeps giving me a message for you that I'm reluctant to give.
He loves you completely. He wants you to love Him completely.
Store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." I then pasted Malachi 3:7-11 onto the text. The top part says that Israel has been robbing God and is under a curse, but the bottom part of the scripture says, "Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, so that there may be food in my house.' And test me now in this," says the Lord of hosts, 'If I will not open for you the windows of heaven and pour out for you a blessing until it overflows, then I will rebuke the devourer for you."
Following that, Jim texts some more questions, but the Lord doesn't let me answer.
Three days later, Jim texts, "Hey, buddy. Don't answer those questions. The Lord answered them for me last night. I will share details the next time we can get together. Thank you for your obedience and service. Can't wait to share."
When the Lintons sold their house, they excitedly wanted to get together with us. They had elaborately prepared two scrolls with calligraphy. They presented the first along with a check that completely repaid all that we had given them. Then they presented the second scroll and explained that God had told them to give us a tithe of the house sale, $30,000.
A check was made out to me. We rejoiced at God's provision, but didn't deposit the check.
Two weeks later, Jim asked why we hadn't deposited the check, and I asked him to redirect it to the Church of Phoenix account so that he could get the tax deduction for giving to a church that he couldn't take for giving to an individual.
We were completely dismayed to learn recently that their view of the events had changed, and they were telling people that we had demanded the money. They didn't contact us to talk about it. We had reached out twice before we learned that there was a problem. They wouldn't get together to talk. We're perplexed and very sad.
Quinn: “they were telling people that we had demanded the money.” Not true. No one has ever claimed the money was demanded, but rather that it was taken through spiritual manipulation.
Also, Dave is again using the “we” pronoun, but no one has ever accused Kathy of being involved in this prophecy.
So, this is Jim's vision 100%. Now I was wondering. Okay. Guess so. Also... Number three, concerning prophecies given.
Quinn: Wait… vision? Who said anything about vision? This was a prophetic word from Dave. Subsequent to Dave speaking it, Jim offered an interpretation. Jim also had some unrelated dreams. None of that makes this Jim’s prophecy.
Even if Jim had received dreams about giving the same night as Dave’s prophecy (he didn’t), that still wouldn’t make this “Jim’s vision 100%.” Dave would remain responsible for his words which he explicitly stated were from God.
Dave wants to wield the power of a prophet and then simply shed any semblance of personal responsibility if it goes badly. This is exactly what he tried to do to me (see 27:31 and my response to Dave). But we hold him responsible, and God will hold him responsible.
Jim:
This is not my “vision.” Dave sent it. He quoted Malachi’s language of robbery and curse to me and presented it as God’s message. Quinn and Rebecca have also commented on it here.
Rebecca:
“On July 26th, Jim gets two dreams from God about giving.”
This is a blatant lie, and collapses the foundation for the rest of Dave’s argument. This one claim is the only reason why people held us in suspicion after that night, and Dave never sent any proof or the text messages he agreed to send despite being asked by multiple people including Jim. We can prove it is false with many different evidential claims.
1. On October 23rd Jim sent Dave an email with all 6 dreams God gave him. Not even one was about giving.
2. In Jim’s email he sent a request to have all the elders present to help discern the dreams and Dave’s ‘ word from the Lord.’ Despite being recent regular attendees and the extremity of our need, Dave never discussed the importance of this need with William or Quinn.
3. Mitch, however, did attend and was witness to the dream interpretation, of which none was about giving.
4. Mitch was also a witness to Jim asking to discuss Dave’s word, and Dave shutting him down to not discuss it. Since then, Mitch has evaded questions regarding these facts.
Three days later, Jim texts, "Hey, buddy. Don't answer those questions. The Lord answered them for me last night. I will share details the next time we can get together. Thank you for your obedience and service. Can't wait to share.”
-We still haven’t received evidence of these texts despite asking Dave to share (Jim had a lot of texts erased from his phone). However, Jim admitted he did “feel,” like the Lord answered them. Interesting that Dave never explained the interpretation that Jim “ felt like” he received. Jim will explain this below.
Additionally, when he did have questions and want to talk about the word with Mitch present, Dave clearly told him not to. Why would he do this if the word exonerated him?
“They didn't contact us to talk about it.”
It’s true that Dave reached out to Jim and asked for us to get together to celebrate the kidney donation in June (as we annually do). However, I did not want to see them. I felt so manipulated, as I never had much of a negative word to say about them before this discovery, but then realized how much of a distrust they orchestrated between Jim and I based on Dave’s handling of our situation, putting all the financial pressure on Jim. It put me in a weird place where I didn’t know how to react when Jim couldn’t take care of provision in our situation. It created resentment toward my husband despite his medical disabilities, and was the root of massive problems in our marriage. I do not wish to imply that all problems were due to Dave- part was due to my own fear and not having experience of God’s provision in dire situations since “the rain falls on the just and the unjust.” However, it did influence how I viewed my husband in the situation. When we hadn’t heard from Kurt about his efforts to contact Dave or willingness to talk to Jim privately, we did not trust them to meet to celebrate a kidney.
Also, the appropriate scripture used here is not Matthew 18. It is 1 Timothy 5:20. We now had many witnesses to the pattern and intended to confront it with a letter which was private and protected us from manipulative behavior and likewise, an angry and ungodly trauma response on our behalf. ( this is why multiple elders are needed to act as advocates in a church).
Further reflection raised legitimate questions about the implications of the word. Because prior attempts at clarification had been difficult, and because the word carried spiritual and pastoral weight, Jim requested a meeting for shared discernment with the other leaders. While he could have approached Dave privately again, Scripture does not require that step, particularly when clarification had already been delayed and the issue affected more than private understanding.
Coin of the Realm
There are two prophecies highlighted in the website, the Coin of the Realm and the Belarus Prophecy.
One of them happened 10 years ago, the other happened 20 years ago.... 2013. The coin of the realm word was, "The coin of this realm will be damaged."
Many prophets around the world had received the same message.
I checked with the most reliable prophet I know, and she said that the Lord had been waking her up to pray, that she had felt an extreme urgency from the Lord. So, I sent out the word in our newsletter. I had never given such a public prophecy before. My action point: pray, listen, and do whatever the Lord tells you to do. In our next newsletter, in bold type appeared the heading, "How I, Dave, Erred." I confessed my error in the timing of the prophecy, confusing the urgency of the message with the timing of events. And I apologized.
Quinn: This response does not address the core critique I wrote in The Coin of this Realm. The main issue is not him adding this sense of urgency to the prophecy and then subsequently retracting it. It’s that the words of the prophecy (“the coin of this realm will be damaged”), which Dave doubled down on in his follow-up newsletter, did not come to pass.
The Belarus Prophecy
00:25:49,620 --> 00:27:31,760 [Dave]
The Belarus prophecy was a deeply personal experience, private, not public. As with the Coin of the Realm Prophecy, I erred in my interpretation. And amidst the situation, a brother brought me correction, and I received it. This is a common pitfall for those receiving prophecy. A prophet may feel strong feelings about the word he's received and attach them to the word. I have made this mistake more than once. If you hear a prophecy given, remember that the speaker is a fallible human being.
Quinn: I don’t doubt that this prophecy was a deeply personal experience, but it also had real-world consequences for this woman and her fiance, whose engagement ended as a result of Dave’s actions. And it was not something Dave did on his own time in his personal life, but rather during a CRU trip.
I questioned Dave extensively about Belarus on 3/17/25, and it was discussed multiple times in Monday Night meetings prior to that. He never mentioned anyone bringing him correction or him receiving it, so I don’t know what he’s talking about.
I will provide some additional background detail that Dave shared with me across multiple conversations in 2024-2025. Some of the details are quite precise, not because I have a great memory, but because I wrote them down.
The exact word was “I’m taking Kathy, I’m giving you [Anastasia]” (pseudonym)
Four days later or so Dave received the word, “propose.” The idea was to ask Anastasia to marry him after Kathy’s death.
Dave shared the word with Anastasia, who in Dave’s estimation had been involved with a bad guy. Anastasia prayed and heard the same thing as Dave.
They start to “go down this path” (what exactly that means is unspecified but Dave insists nothing inappropriate happened).
A second Belarusian man who was a friend of Anastasia is incited to jealousy over the idea of her marrying an American.
That friend and Anastasia get together and end up married.
So the end result, in Dave’s mind, is good. Of course, this requires us to take his word for it that the original fiance was in fact a bad guy, and the new one was better.
Dave claimed God’s purpose was for Dave to misinterpret the message as “Kathy is going to die and Anastasia is going to be your wife.”
I asked Dave: if that was your misinterpretation, then what was the correction interpretation? He said that the message was technically true because Kathy will eventually die someday and Dave did get some brief time with Anastasia.
Under Dave’s interpretation, the prophecy boils down to a message that’s only “true” because of technicalities, and is purposely designed by God with deceptive and manipulative intent. Is it a coincidence that deception, manipulation, and using empty technicalities to dodge accountability are common themes that run through the testimonies against Dave? Dave seems to have re-created God in his own image.
There is an interpretation that doesn’t malign God’s character, appeal to technicalities, or raise questions about Anastasia’s agency and the potential for spiritual manipulation. It’s simply that Dave heard a “prophecy” of his own imagination, in line with Ezekiel 13 and Jeremiah 23.
A final note: during one of our conversations about this prophecy (Ryan was also present), I asked Dave: if you were single, would Anastasia have been the kind of woman you would have been interested in? He said no. It was very interesting to hear from Cara that Dave described her as “young and beautiful” — I do not remember him ever mentioning her age or appearance to us.
It is your responsibility to seek the Lord in prayer and in His Word to validate or invalidate the message, and to determine what the Lord wants you to do. 1 Corinthians 14:29. Remember that just because a person is a prophet does not mean that everything he says is a word from God! Sometimes, the prophecy is given to you directly, not to the prophet. This is the case with Jim in the previous section, and Quinn.
Quinn: The responsibility of someone who claims to speak on behalf of God is far greater than that of the hearers, even though Scripture does call for discernment. Hearers are exhorted to test prophetic words in 1 Cor 14:29 and 1 Thess 5:21, but the consistent emphasis of Scripture is severe judgment on those who falsely claim divine authority (Deut 18; Jer 23; Ezek 13; 2 Pet 2).
There is an odd case in 1 Kings 13, where a man is punished for being misled — but he himself is a prophet acting against a direct command from God, and thus held to a higher standard.
It is disturbing that at a moment when Dave’s prophecies are under scrutiny, he chooses to call attention to the hearers’ responsibility of discernment, without mentioning his greater responsibility as a self-proclaimed prophet. This omission invites the audience into an unbiblical framework: if a prophet’s words bear bad fruit, don’t blame the prophet (as Jesus does in Matthew 7:15-20). Blame the hearers.
Also, in the very next breath Dave says these prophecies were given to Jim and me directly, not to Dave. If that’s true, then Dave’s defense should simply be “they weren’t my prophecies.” Yet he sees fit to point out the responsibility of the hearer to discern the prophet’s words.
Quinn and [Redacted]
00:27:31,760 --> 00:30:42,252 [Dave]
In Quinn's testimony, he says,
"On May 15th, 2023, Dave didn't come out and say the words, 'God is telling me you are supposed to marry [Redacted].'" No, I didn't [laughs]. At the end of the meeting that night, I gave Quinn a word from the Lord. I said,
"Quinn, the Lord really loves you, and that's not from me."
That was a word I was hearing from the Lord to give to Quinn, to encourage him about God's love. Later that night, Miles texted, "By the way, my confirmation is that you should pray and ask the Lord.
And whatever He says, lean not on your own understanding, feelings. Trust and obey." We had encouraged Quinn to pray and ask God. The next week at our leadership meeting, Quinn reported that he had prayed and heard from the Lord that he was supposed to marry [Redacted]. On their website, Quinn writes,
"When I told [Redacted]..." He uses an, a pseudonym, but everybody knows, he's, he's talking about [Redacted]. I'm just talking straight. "When I told [Redacted] everything several days later, she was completely shocked, but she also thought she heard a confirmation." June 16th, that Friday night, when we were studying Hebrews 11 and discussing faith, Quinn and [Redacted] told the whole group, "God told me to marry [Redacted], and God told me to marry Quinn." On October 27th, Quinn writes on the website, "I contacted another prophet.
At the end of the night, we prayed, and he believed he received a confirmation." In both the November meetings we had with him, Quinn was strongly encouraged to postpone the wedding if he had the slightest doubt about it. Multiple people encouraged him to postpone the wedding, and he said that he wanted to go ahead with it. Lots of other stuff he wrote, but essentially, if you read what he himself wrote on the website, he says repeatedly, "God told him."It was not that I told him. We encouraged him to pray. We encouraged him to consider pursuing [Redacted] if he wanted to get married. That's what our first conversation was about.... but we never told him, "God's telling you to marry [Redacted]."
00:30:42,252 --> 00:31:24,792 [Kathy]
I want to underline that one, the last premarital counseling session. We were so awkward and pushy about it. [laughs] When are you sure? Do you want to? Should we cancel? Should we postpone? Are you positive? Not, "Are you positive?" He's positive.
It was to the point that I was squirming, it was so awkward. And he was adamant. So we are just heartbroken for them, and we have been praying for them ever since. But we just feel like this retaliation is so inappropriate.
Quinn: I respond in detail to these comments in my follow-up testimony.
Sexual Allegations
00:31:24,792 --> 00:31:44,352 [Dave]
Section four, concern- concerning sexual allegations. On the summary page of the website, it says that Dave made an inappropriate sexually charged comment to Cara.
00:31:44,352 --> 00:31:45,992 [Kathy]
[coughs, laughs]
00:31:45,992 --> 00:36:18,292 [Dave]
This is detailed in Cara's testimony. She said, "Dave said, 'Your legs look good in shorts.'" True. I said that. I did not in any way consider that a sexually charged comment. I like complimenting people, male and female. And it was a characteristic of the times I grew up in, and still see it as a positive thing to give people compliments.
But we won't do it anymore. [laughs] Cara and I had a special relationship.
She had prayed that God would give her a father. She actually was sitting in the counseling office at Scottsdale Bible Church, and I had an appointment. I never ran through that building, but here was this thing. And on that day, I came by and she had been saying, "What I want..." I mean, I know the church will say, "Oh, I can give you a mentor woman," or something else. She says, "God, what I really need is a dad." So she approached me
to be able to take on that role. I became a surrogate father for her.
She didn't call me Papa. She called me Dad. So on that occasion, that night, it was the first time I saw her wearing shorts. I gave her a compliment, but she reacted strongly. So you may judge whether my words were sexually charged. The website says, "He said to her that he wished the church allowed polygamy], so that he could have both her and Kathy as his wives." Absolutely false. Somehow, over time, this is what came, thoughts combined in her mind or whatever. I have taught... Well, yeah, I have taught, the Bible does not say that polygamy is a sin. That is true.
Many fathers of the faith had multiple wives and concubines. The nation of Israel was birthed by Jacob and four women at the same time. But the New Testament says that each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband. That was radical teaching at that time. Women were so often considered as possessions. And Christianity elevated their position and said she was entitled to have her own husband, not to share him with other women. In 1 Timothy 3, one of the qualifications, one of the first qualifications for an elder in the church is that he be a one-woman man. That's the literal Greek. But this statement that was placed on the website about a desire to have her and Kathy as wives is absolutely false. I've never had the desire to have multiple wives. I was not attracted to her, nor was she to me. We operated as father and daughter. So I don't know where this accusation came from after all these years, but I unequivocally deny it.
I have been a faithfully committed husband to Kathy for 44 years next month. Our marriage has been an example to a multitude of others. And this attack seeks to destroy the influence of our marriage.
Quinn:
We let Cara know that Dave had addressed her story in this monologue. Cara essentially said Dave can say what he wants and people can decide who they want to believe. She wants to close the door to this chapter in her life, which is painful for her to revisit. This is why you will not see any responses from her in this section.
Quinn:
“I became a surrogate father for her” ← this makes it worse, not better.
This section doesn’t address Dave’s deflection when Cara called him on it – I’m sorry your father never complimented his daughter.
00:36:18,292 --> 00:36:24,132 [Kathy]
Yes.
00:36:24,132 --> 00:37:25,584 [Dave]
I have never had any sexual misconduct with anyone. No one can say otherwise.... however,
I have been told that sometimes my hugs make people feel uncomfortable, even those who are just looking on from across the room. And this makes me sad.
Physical touch is my love
[camcorder rattles]
language. It is recognized throughout Christianity as a legitimate love language. And I have been told so many times over the last 50 years that I have the spiritual gift of hugs.
00:37:25,584 --> 00:37:25,764 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
00:37:25,764 --> 00:37:57,944 [Dave]
[mic rattles] But in light [sighs] of the possible appearance of impropriety,
I have adopted a new policy. I will only hug a woman if she herself requests it.
I will not initiate.
00:37:57,944 --> 00:38:08,444 [Kathy]
I- I want to speak up on this one. I want to defend, Dave loves and hugs men and women. My son said to me, "Mom, I want real hugs from you like dad gives you."
00:38:08,444 --> 00:38:10,183 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
00:38:10,183 --> 00:38:11,554 [Kathy]
None of this side crap.
00:38:11,554 --> 00:38:12,973 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
00:38:12,973 --> 00:38:44,104 [Kathy]
And that to me is just showing it, that's Dave's heart to men and women for 50 years. But we've talked about it, and on the chance that one out of a 100 is being healed in some way or misinterprets or Dave goes over our line, we're just not going to do it. So, um, that's a heartbreak because we think that has been a ministry to some, but apparently not to all. So...
Help us [unintelligible]
00:38:44,584 --> 00:38:54,734 [Dave]
So I invite my sisters, if you want a hug, please come. I do not love you any less today-
00:38:54,734 --> 00:38:54,734 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
00:38:54,734 --> 00:38:56,984 [Dave]
... than I did yesterday.
00:38:56,984 --> 00:38:59,243 [Kathy]
Oh.
00:38:59,304 --> 00:39:09,584 [Dave]
And as always, I will seek to be extremely conscious of how you [camcorder squeaks] hug me. If you want to give me an A-frame, that's where I'm staying.
00:39:13,504 --> 00:39:14,584 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
00:39:14,584 --> 00:39:20,084 [Dave]
If you want to give me a side, I'll give you a side. To whatever extent you desire, a holy hug, that's what I want to give you. But yes, I forget, but it's been a habit for 50 years.
So if I forget, please remind me.
But I also am going to make this a policy for all men at Friday night. That for all the brothers, if a sister approaches you and wants a hug, be sensitive and give her the proper godly hug.
But you are not to initiate hugging his sister. [hand swishes] One other thing I often do,
sometimes do, with hugs, is I have given what I believe the Bible refers to as a holy kiss.
It may be on the cheek or on the forehead or on the top of the head. I will choose to refrain from giving a kiss unless a sister asks for it, which I don't expect.
00:41:11,004 --> 00:41:13,703 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
00:41:13,703 --> 00:41:21,604 [Dave]
On the first page of the website...
[clears throat] Actually, before I go there, Gary reminded me of something at dinner... We have been ministering to young adults for 35 years. And most of those came to us as singles.
And many have asked questions, that are uncomfortable. And in particular, questions about masturbation. I have said, just like the polygamy issue, I look in the Bible, and while the Bible speaks about a lot of matters of sexual sin-There is no word at all about masturbation.
00:42:53,228 --> 00:42:53,828 [Congregant(s)]
[clattering]
00:42:53,828 --> 00:43:01,808 [Dave]
And I believe that silence shouts. I believe that Satan has brought great guilt and condemnation on men and women, first tempting them to do it, and then condemning them after they do it. I have desired to take away Satan's tool of guilt and condemnation... by simply teaching that, no, the Bible does not say that masturbation is a sin.
However, there are lots of other sins that can be committed in minds and hearts, which may happen at the same time. I do not have a teaching from the word of God, so I choose to remain silent. But to encourage you all, as in Romans 14, for you to come before the Lord and whatever is not from faith is sin. Exercise your conscience.
The Lord speaks to you and wants you to change some habits in your life, listen to Him. It is for your freedom. It is for your joy.
Quinn: There are different views in the church on masturbation. That’s not the issue. I pointed out in Inside the Inner Circle that Dave floated the idea of whether looking at a “naked girl” was acceptable if done in moderation.
As such, his words here simply aren’t relevant.
Spiritual Abuse
00:44:53,388 --> 00:52:02,188 [Dave]
On the first page of the website, the word "abuse" appears 10 times. This is a very serious charge. The essays page includes an article titled, "What is Spiritual Abuse?" So using the website's own standard, I ask you to test whether spiritual abuse is occurring at Friday night. The What is Spiritual Abuse page opens, "In its simplest definition, spiritual abuse occurs when one person attempts to control another person in a spiritual context, causing them harm." The article contains a spiritual abuse assessment, listing six characteristics of control identifying spiritual abuse. So as I read them right from the website, please ask yourself, "Is this an accurate description of me or of Friday Night?"
Abuse Characteristics
Number one:
I was not permitted to make my own decisions without approval.
Two:
My behavior was constantly being monitored.
Three:
I was not free to decline participation in an activity without fear of negative consequences.
Four:
Obedience to the individual or group was required to avoid negative consequences.
Five: I was not permitted
to question the teachings of the individual or group without fear of retaliation.
Six: I was isolated from others outside the spiritual community or relationship.
This is the criteria the website provides for evaluation of spiritual abuse.
Is this what you have experienced at Friday Night?
Has official approval ever been required for any activity? To organize socials, to start your own Bible study, to do discipleship, to do anything, have you ever been required to get approval?
Two: Is your behavior constantly being monitored?Three.
When were you not free to decline participation in an activity?
Have we ever had mandatory activities?
Four. Has obedience to Dave been demanded?
Five. Has Dave threatened you because you believe something different than Dave
has?
Six.
Threatened by what? How many of you attend a church besides Friday Night? Has that ever been criticized? Have you ever been told not to go to any other church or group? She quotes Michael Kruger, author of Bully Pulpit. "Spiritual abuse is when a spiritual leader such as a pastor, elder, or head of a Christian organization wields his position of spiritual authority in such a way that he manipulates, domineers, bullies, and intimidates those under him as a means of maintaining his own power and control."
So, according to the website, is spiritual abuse a legitimate charge against Dave ...
There are numerous other charges on the website, including the use of big dead rock as a pride item, as if I am the only person who is supposed to be a big dead rock reflecting God's glory. Instead of the teaching which you have clearly heard multiple times that that is how we all are to be glorifying God. Teaching about edification appointments. That is said in the website to be, oh, a language of a cult, because we have our own terminology, rather than simply teaching that says, "Hey, when you go out on a date, build the other person up. Don't go out hunting for your partner."
Quinn:
Dave is responding to a section of Jessica’s What is Spiritual Abuse? that speaks in general terms and does not attempt to draw connections to Friday Night dynamics. The power and control dynamics at Friday Night were mostly covert, which is partly why I wrote Is Friday Night a Cult? That essay takes tangible observations I made over a 10-year period at Friday Night and connects them to themes of Power and Control, Isolation, Finances, Charismatic Leadership, Exclusivity / Superiority, and Secrecy.
Many of the serious concerns I raised in that brief essay are completely unaddressed in this monologue.
Jessica:
Dave selected an inventory of spiritual abuse screening questions to read from the article I wrote. He stated them as rhetorical questions. He framed it as, if those listening had not been spiritually abused by Dave then Dave must not be a spiritual abuser. This is a logical fallacy. It’s like saying, if I haven’t stolen from you then I cannot have stolen from anyone else.
Dave says he has not criticized people going to other churches or asking them to stop attending. I don’t disagree with Dave on this. I do have two observations. First I have plenty of evidence of Dave criticizing SBC, telling people not to read commentaries, telling people not to attend seminary, telling Friday Night that they are special and that Friday Night is what real church looks like. Second, when I attended SBC’s you adult group on campus, I and other Friday Night attenders would invite (or recruit) people to attend Friday Night. It is possible that Dave supports people attending other churches, because it is how Dave gets other young adults into the group
Uh, Z, Z, uh, as-
00:52:02,188 --> 00:52:02,228 [Congregant(s)]
Please- please don't.
[laughs]
00:52:02,228 --> 00:52:02,248 [Dave]
Many times-
00:52:02,248 --> 00:52:03,778 [Congregant(s)]
Whatever you're going to say, please don't
00:52:03,778 --> 00:52:09,368 [Dave]
... called Friday Night a spiritual dojo.
00:52:09,368 --> 00:52:18,628 [Congregant(s)]
He doesn't even listen to me. If I say, "Please don't," he just goes right ahead. Okay. Go ahead.
00:52:18,628 --> 00:52:20,788 [Dave]
I thought you would think that I was going to say something else?
00:52:20,788 --> 00:52:24,268 [Congregant(s)]
No. I was just wanting this to be about... Yeah. Just the-
00:52:24,268 --> 00:54:04,388 [Dave]
I am saying there are so many things that go on here
that have all been brought out as accusations that we are a cult, or that we are practicing spiritual abuse, or that there is sexual impropriety or financial impropriety. Well, ladies and gentlemen, I hope I've laid out a clear enough case. The authors of the web have piled on to create the illusion of abuse simply by the sheer volume of the website.
But you get to choose whether the charges are valid or not. If you are concerned about your safety at Friday Night, please leave and go to another church where you feel safe. There are no recriminations for those who leave. For 20 years, people have come and left Friday Night freely. If you are not concerned for your safety, and you are willing to help us rebuild the community of love and trust we have enjoyed, thank you for staying and for being a minister to all.
00:54:04,388 --> 00:54:07,408 [Dave]
Uh,
00:54:07,408 --> 00:54:12,528 [Congregant(s)]
Dave, uh, would you be willing to publish the various, uh, message chains that you were reading from in your response?
00:54:18,148 --> 00:54:19,418 [Dave]
Oh, yeah.
00:54:19,418 --> 00:54:19,628 [Congregant(s)]
Okay.
00:54:19,688 --> 00:56:10,872 [Dave]
Part of the question I have had... All of these charges were just published without me being able to speak to any of them. They have been spread around the world. We have gotten all sorts of calls and emails from people across the country, who no longer even live in Arizona, saying that they were contacted, seeking to get-... whatever kinds of negative comments could be gathered. I got an email last week from a pastor in Zimbabwe, who said Quinn had contacted him, seeking malicious damage. When we talk about publishing an answer, or this, I honestly do not know what I can publish that shows the answers to the website. I have not been invited to be able to answer the website. Do we create another one? I- I honestly don't know. I can send out something on the Friday night email, but this has gone so far beyond our current email list. Uh, so-
Quinn:
The last time Dave expressed any interest in responding to us was August 14, the day he received the original letter. One time after the website was released, I heard through a third party that Dave was working on a written response and he just needed time. He didn’t communicate that to us, and he didn’t deliver.
Two days after the website launched, we reiterated to Dave that he still had the option of providing a written response, and that doing so could lead to the website being taken down. He did not respond.
In January 2026, we reached out again, letting Dave know we intended to publicize his September 2025 comments, but offering him the opportunity to provide a more robust, detailed response. He did not respond.
Q&A
00:56:10,872 --> 00:56:23,752 [Congregant(s)]
Well, I would request and encourage, i- if you would send me, personally, uh, screenshots or logs of things you quoted and referenced, and then I can facilitate that. Um-
00:56:23,752 --> 00:56:25,172 [Dave]
Facilitate it how?
00:56:25,172 --> 00:56:31,712 [Congregant(s)]
Facilitate it being, you know, dispersed or rel- released in a manner that could be accessible to anyone that viewed it or-
00:56:31,712 --> 00:56:31,902 [Kathy]
I'm seeing-
00:56:31,902 --> 00:56:32,672 [Congregant(s)]
... requests to see it.
00:56:32,672 --> 00:56:35,562 [Kathy]
I'm seeing shaking heads over here. So maybe-
00:56:35,562 --> 00:56:46,432 [Congregant(s)]
I think part of the problem is you, you get people in the room that have known you for a very long time, Dave, a very, very long time, and then we don't, we don't understand like where
00:56:46,432 --> 00:56:46,592 [Congregant(s)]
or why or-
00:56:46,592 --> 00:56:49,622 [Congregant(s)]
Yeah, so the reason I'm saying this is because-
00:56:49,622 --> 00:56:49,702 [Congregant(s)]
... like, you've done that
00:56:49,702 --> 00:57:03,991 [Congregant(s)]
... in your response, you did cite other people's wording as well. Uh, I understand that these were also previously cited things from the website, things, whatever. But considering you did cite them with times and dates providing that-
00:57:03,991 --> 00:57:13,991 [Dave]
Yes, so the only citations that I provided that were not off of the website itself were from text threads that I had with Jim Linton.
00:57:13,991 --> 00:57:15,672 [Congregant(s)]
Okay.
00:57:15,672 --> 00:57:19,891 [Dave]
The text thread I have with Jim is about a mile long.
00:57:19,892 --> 00:57:20,732 [Congregant(s)]
Right.
00:57:20,732 --> 00:57:36,051 [Dave]
Um, to even go back to the comments that we had had with, that night when God was telling me to tell him something at the same time God was telling him, um, goes it, it took me a good 12 minutes to find it, to have to scroll back in the things. We have had, I said, truly thousands of hours of involvement and investment in the Lintons, and we love them. And it's real hurtful that there has been this break. We don't understand it.
Jim:
“Um, to even go back to the comments that we had had with, that night when God was telling me to tell him something at the same time God was telling him, um, goes it, it took me a good 12 minutes to find it, to have to scroll back in the things.”
In my opinion– the truth is worth spending far more than 12 minutes.
“We have had, I said, truly thousands of hours of involvement and investment in the Lintons”
And yet Dave seems unable to grasp what all those hours of involvement, mostly with Rebecca, actually meant. That kind of access creates influence: psychological, emotional, and spiritual.
So when he delivered that “word” to me, knowing my condition and knowing I had nowhere else to turn, how could he not foresee the impact? For him to act baffled that it could be harmful, or that I could receive it the way I did, feels disingenuous at best.
00:58:01,152 --> 00:58:02,112 [Kathy]
[unintelligible]
00:58:02,112 --> 00:58:16,872 [Dave]
Um, so if you want to take a look and see those things that I quoted, they're all right there, and I will be happy to show that to you if you wanna stand as the witness to anybody else who asks, "Oh, yes, that's what I saw."
Jim and Rebecca:
Yet our request for those text messages have gone unanswered and/or denied.
00:58:16,872 --> 00:58:24,132 [Congregant(s)]
Okay. I'm willing to do so. And not for my, my personal sake, but just as a verification, if you will.
00:58:24,132 --> 00:58:30,112 [Congregant(s)]
But not publishing them means that everybody has to individually come ask you for everything.
00:58:30,112 --> 00:58:31,612 [Congregant(s)]
I would also recommend that.
00:58:31,612 --> 00:58:34,732 [Congregant(s)]
Well, we're not publishing it. It's pretty straightforward. It's a- it's a private conversation. Yeah, but it's gonna be-
00:58:34,732 --> 00:58:36,412 [Congregant(s)]
Yeah, well, it's not really private anymore.
Jim:
Correct, it isn’t private anymore. That doesn’t change the core issue: Dave has not produced the text messages he claims would exonerate him. He will not publish them, and he has not shared them privately, even though I and others in the congregation have asked. So he is not only denying me access; he is denying it to the very people he wants to convince.
00:58:36,412 --> 00:58:39,011[Congregant(s)]
Yeah. If it's, if it's very cut and dry, it shouldn't
00:58:39,011 --> 00:58:41,192[Congregant(s)]
... he's answered the accusation.
00:58:41,192 --> 00:58:43,312 [Congregant(s)]
The accusation made it public.
00:58:43,312 --> 00:58:43,332 [Kathy]
Mm-hmm.
00:58:43,332 --> 00:58:44,812 [Congregant(s)]
He's answered it.
Jim:
Yes, he answered it, but falsely. He keeps evading the substance by telling half-truths and curating what he will share, while refusing to let anyone cross-examine his claims.
This is the same pattern I saw in October 2023. I met with him and Marvin to discuss the July 2023 word. Dave told me to skip the part about his word and “just stick to the dreams.” Even so, I read all six dreams. So when Dave now claims I had “two dreams about giving,” that is demonstrably false. One of my direct requests to him was that he correct that publicly.
Also, the “interpretation” I referenced in the texts was not vague or hidden. I told Dave what I thought at the time: that the Lord was requiring me to give to the priest first, meaning Dave, the way Abram gave to Melchizedek. I even told him I thought that might explain why God allowed the fallout we were living through. Later, I realized that interpretation is not supported by Scripture, and I told Dave that as well.
But when I first shared it, Dave affirmed it. He told me the Lord had spoken to me that day, and he endorsed the interpretation. So for him to now act as if he knows little or nothing about it, or had no role in validating it, is deceptive.
00:58:44,812 --> 00:58:58,671 [Congregant(s)]
I, I think that if you're... don't want to make a open, public publishing of it, I would recommend that any individual that does want it, you should provide it to the individual, if that's more comfortable.
00:58:58,672 --> 00:58:59,732 [Dave]
Happy to. I'll show it to you.
Jim:
Again, when I requested this of him he ignored the request and then eventually said he didn't want to talk to me anymore unless I took my story down from the website.
00:58:59,732 --> 00:58:59,882 [Congregant(s)]
But-
00:58:59,882 --> 00:59:07,412 [Dave]
But here's the thing, folks.
00:59:07,412 --> 00:59:15,832 [Dave]
This has been excruciatingly painful for us.
00:59:15,832 --> 01:00:03,852 [Kathy]
50 years of what we have built, 44 years of the good marriage, the good family that we have developed... I, I have grieved for my sons and my grandchildren this week, to have the 50-year reputation of their patriarch trashed, you know? Charge upon charge upon charge upon charge. What is... He, he has influenced hundreds of pastors in Zimbabwe, and there is good fruit upon good fruit. And the pastors haven't even contact him. He hasn't been in contact with them in nine years. And he says, "What is this malicious piece of libel that has been sent to me?" So, you know, this is heartbreaking.
Quinn:
Kathy’s language of “Charge upon charge upon charge…” attempts to reframe the volume of material on the website as a problem with those coming forward rather than a problem with Dave. It’s DARVO.
Years ago, Dave solicited support for this Zimbabwean pastor during a Friday Night meeting. I felt called to support his ministry, and I made financial contributions from 2017 to 2022.
Based on Dave’s own testimony to me, I knew that Dave had engaged in (at the minimum) highly questionable behavior in Belarus. I believed it was plausible if not likely Dave had caused harm in Zimbabwe. Many people who have suffered under Dave’s leadership find it healing to hear stories from other people, as they often do not even understand what happened to them until they see the broader patterns. This is just the nature of gaslighting and manipulative abuse. As such, I make no apologies for contacting the Zimbabwean pastor.
Kathy’s representation of the pastor’s response ("What is this malicious piece of libel that has been sent to me?") is inconsistent with the pastor’s email response to me, which is as follows (dated 9/10/25):
Hi Quinn, I was saddened to read and see what you and others had to go through. Dave, like all of us, is a work of God in progress. I am convinced he has a lot of areas to both grow and allow Jesus to transform him. I grieve over the decision you had to take on the premise of erroneous and misleading information. Personally, I have learned to esteem the written word of God over anything any men would claim to have heard, seen or felt. [sentence redacted for personal information about the pastor]
So how are you and your spouse doing in your healing as you recover and refocus on the Lord!
[Redacted] and I will be praying for you. Our family is well, and the kids continue to grow and thrive in their walk with Jesus. I have also attached our current newsletter.
On the other hand, the language of “malicious piece of libel” is very consistent with Dave’s language in his 8/28/25 email to me (“You have publicly published a libelous collection of lies and innuendos intended to destroy me and my wife…”) as well as Dave’s language in his 9/2/25 Cottrell Chronicles (“we have been under spiritual attack, culminating last week with public slander full of misinformation and innuendo…”).
I strongly suspect this is what happened:
Dave communicated with the Zimbabwean pastor alone; Kathy had no contact.
Dave relayed a twisted version of the pastor’s response to Kathy.
Kathy believed Dave and relayed his version to Friday Night.
01:00:03,852 --> 01:01:43,259 [Dave]
I have not... Let me put it a different way. I have desired not to engage in a back and forth salvo. You say, we say, do all this. It's, it's unproductive. One of the things that has been a great sorrow on my heart for the last few weeks is that this has robbed praise from Jesus Christ. That taking time to be talking about me is taking away from the time [cries] that we should be growing in the word of God and blessing one another in love, but there has been chaos. There's been confusion. There have been people accusing each other, friendships broken up, chaos not only at Friday night, but it's Saturday night as well.... this is not the work of God. I have come after obtaining the counsel of people that I am going to continue to seek. [laughs] I will have accountability, and I pray God will send more elders. [sighs] I think Kyle wanted to say something about people caught in the middle.
Quinn:
I have desired not to engage in a back and forth salvo. ← Yet according to eyewitness testimony, Dave was willing to privately spread false character attacks against me before the release of the website (see my testimony, specifically Suli’s statement in “Aftermath” toward the bottom).
“this has robbed praise from Jesus Christ.”
Who told Dave he had to address the allegations during the actual church service?
01:01:43,259 --> 01:01:46,420 [Congregant(s)]
Okay, yes.
01:01:46,420 --> 01:01:47,450 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
01:01:47,450 --> 01:01:47,640 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
01:01:47,640 --> 01:01:48,080 [Congregant(s)]
Um-
01:01:48,080 --> 01:01:49,230 [Congregant(s)]
Got you.
01:01:49,230 --> 01:01:51,399 [Congregant(s)]
Still caught in the middle.
01:01:51,460 --> 01:01:52,540 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
01:01:52,540 --> 01:02:00,220 [Congregant(s)]
Yes, as my secondary... what you said earlier.
01:02:00,220 --> 01:02:00,240 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
01:02:00,240 --> 01:02:03,339 [Congregant(s)]
Brad and I were joking around about if it gets out of hand-
01:02:03,339 --> 01:02:04,279 [Congregant(s)]
You guys talk louder
01:02:04,279 --> 01:02:04,480 [Congregant(s)]
... it gets like, a little bit-
01:02:04,480 --> 01:02:07,549 [Congregant(s)]
Kyle. He doesn't want everyone to hear that. [laughs]
01:02:07,549 --> 01:02:07,549 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
01:02:07,549 --> 01:02:09,339 [Congregant(s)]
No, I don't remember what I was gonna say. Um-
01:02:09,339 --> 01:02:13,200 [Congregant(s)]
You're all invited to look at the website.
01:02:13,200 --> 01:06:50,439 [Congregant(s)]
Yeah. So this is, um, kind of a sidebar topic, right? [clears throat] Uh, there are a lot of people at Saturday, um, who I met Dave once or six years ago, right? And we talked all about this about three weeks ago. Um, some of you guys may have the recording. Um, don't know like the backstories or whatever. And the only thing they know about Dave is, really, is kind of what they read on the website. And what, where, where my heart is at right now is, okay, that's fine, it's this piece of information, like a news story on Donald Trump, right? And everyone can kind of go figure it all out. But I am seeing, um... I can see a lot of friendships that I've had over the last two years, people I love, just tearing each other apart. Like, I, I, my, my, my joke, so I don't cry about it, is, it's [laughs] it's woke versus MAGA, you know? [laughs] You guys have heard me say this, right? Deep state versus the patriarchy, whatever you want to call it. And again, I'm gonna, I'm gonna sidebar everything here. It's just, I want to encourage all of you. I asked this on Saturday two weeks ago. Is it possible for members in the body of Christ to completely disagree on an issue, woke versus MAGA, right? Those, those evil six day creationists versus the theistic evolutionists or whatever, right, to disagree on even something like this and still love each other and serve each other and be in the body of Christ together, right? I have, um, I, I know a lot of these backstories, like Cam was in diapers when, uh, some of these stories happened, right? [laughs] We've seen it a long time. And Dave and I have been meeting and I have on purpose, um, I kept my mouth shut, and I will continue to do so, um, on, on all the issues, right? W- what... And you guys can talk to me personally. If you want, please give me a call. I know there's been a lot of things happening on like the, the group chats and a bunch of people get together and talk about stuff and I'm like, "Yeah, what did that person say when they called me? Oh, wait, they didn't." Right? And, and just, we just go and go and go. And I think that, um, Satan is having a heyday over division. And I was joking with the Lord, and I'm like, "Okay, is this payback for me?" Because I caused one of these when I was like 26 at Arizona Community Church. You can call Bill Meier, he can tell you the whole story. It was awesome. [laughs] Um, but I just want to... I love you all. I want my friends back. [crying] And I'm so sorry that this is dividing us. I've told everyone last, two Saturdays ago, you know, there's... W- we'll call it the, the, the Dave side and the website side, right? There's some people kind of just entrenched on both, and there's a whole bunch of people that are just going to make their own decisions and, and be stuck in the middle. Like, we okay with that? Can, can we love each other kind of no matter where everybody lands? And I, I, I want to see what the answer is because I don't know. Um, so that's just my, my plea with you. Right? So I, I, I do just want to commit. And if I, if I screw this up somehow because I got home at 2:30 in the morning and, you know, said or done something dumb or whatever, please call me out on it. But I just, I want to commit to everybody here, I'm not going to go after you for your view on this. Right? I'm, I've been Dave's friend for 17 years. I'm gonna continue to be his friend. We're gonna, we're meeting together, right? But I'm also your friend. Um, so I guess my prayer would be can we not get seen as that anyway. So I didn't plan to say all that. I had a sentence, but there you go. So it's just my heart.
01:06:50,439 --> 01:07:02,060 [Congregant(s)]
I have two things really quick. The first one, I feel very awkward that you went ahead and said something about what Zee said when he asked you not to, just a couple minutes ago. Could you apologize for doing that?
01:07:02,060 --> 01:07:02,080 [Dave ]
Yes.
01:07:02,080 --> 01:07:02,399 [Congregant(s)]
Thank you.
01:07:02,399 --> 01:07:11,339 [Dave]
I am sorry. Please forgive me. I thought you were thinking something else. And I thought it was a totally innocent thing, and I was wrong. Please forgive me.
01:07:12,308 --> 01:07:12,528 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
01:07:12,528 --> 01:07:22,048 [Congregant(s)]
Uh, I will say, I love my brother Tyler but, but... and I love you, but I didn't necessarily feel that you needed to apologize. But I know Tyler's heart-
01:07:22,108 --> 01:07:22,268 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
01:07:22,268 --> 01:07:31,608 [Congregant(s)]
I know who this man is. And I know that... You know, I think if everyone can just have the freedom, kind of playing off of Kyle's point-
01:07:31,608 --> 01:07:32,178 [Congregant(s)]
Mm-hmm
01:07:32,178 --> 01:07:36,748 [Congregant(s)]
... if we all can just have the freedom to be who we truly are.
01:07:36,748 --> 01:07:41,288 [Congregant(s)]
Our identity, and to be accepted for who we are, because I think that's also been under attack-
01:07:41,288 --> 01:07:41,428 [Congregant(s)]
Mm-hmm
01:07:41,428 --> 01:08:08,348 [Congregant(s)]
... in a certain way, and it- and it makes it very difficult, uh, to be who you are. And so, um, I just ask that we would show... If you don't really know someone that well, get to know them well, and show them grace and accept them. We're all fallible. Um, I'm not dismissing anything that has happened, but- but don't make this to where someone can't be who they are, because that's happening too.
01:08:08,348 --> 01:08:08,388 [Congregant(s)]
Yes.
01:08:08,388 --> 01:08:42,248 [Congregant(s)]
And, uh, obviously a tenet of Christian faith is acceptance. To be fully known and fully loved. And so [smacks lips] I extend that grace to Tyler, and, uh, I extend that grace to everyone in the room. I- I- I love you as you are, and I hope that you would love me as I am, and that we'd understand that, um... well, we all are fallible and make mistakes. And that's not to say we're going to dismiss those things and that that's okay. But yeah, so thank you, Tyler. Thank you, Dave.
01:08:42,248 --> 01:08:43,508 [Congregant(s)]
Second point. Um-
01:08:43,508 --> 01:08:49,788 [Congregant(s)]
Uh, so they did express in the beginning that he does not want to have open discussion over this.
01:08:49,788 --> 01:08:49,908 [Congregant(s)]
Um,
01:08:49,908 --> 01:08:50,127 [Congregant(s)]
Okay
01:08:50,127 --> 01:08:50,667 [Congregant(s)]
So, if you want to
01:08:50,667 --> 01:08:50,948 [Congregant(s)]
... go ahead and try
01:08:50,948 --> 01:08:52,848 [Congregant(s)]
He's okay though, if Dave just said-
01:08:52,848 --> 01:09:15,667 [Congregant(s)]
If we... if we, um, are trying to silence gossip and hearsay, I still think that the best direct way to do that is to publish the receipts, because that's going to be the primary source. And without the primary source being online, the primary source is physically right here, there are much fewer people who can access the primary source.
01:09:15,667 --> 01:09:15,917 [Congregant(s)]
Yeah.
01:09:15,917 --> 01:09:17,548 [Congregant(s)]
And that's not good for the truth.
01:09:17,548 --> 01:09:21,188 [Congregant(s)]
No.
01:09:21,188 --> 01:09:27,127 [Congregant(s)]
Okay, so help me out. Do we want to... do we want to get together to talk about
01:09:27,127 --> 01:09:29,888 [Congregant(s)]
how to... how to do that? I don't know if we can decide it here.
01:09:29,888 --> 01:09:31,468 [Dave]
Let that be another meeting.
01:09:31,468 --> 01:09:31,667 [Congregant(s)]
But, yes.
01:09:31,667 --> 01:09:33,348 [Dave]
I think that's appropriate.
01:09:33,348 --> 01:09:37,587 [Congregant(s)]
Uh, and I'll say yes, and who else?
01:09:37,587 --> 01:09:39,788 [Congregant(s)]
Yeah. Uh-
01:09:39,788 --> 01:09:43,798 [Congregant(s)]
Is that okay? I don't mean to be... j-... I'm... I'm the one
01:09:43,798 --> 01:09:45,328 [Congregant(s)]
I feel very strongly that should happen.
01:09:45,328 --> 01:09:52,728 [Congregant(s)]
Yeah. Okay. Me too. Yeah, me too.
01:09:52,728 --> 01:10:34,988 [Dave]
Their committee spent several months putting together all their items. They asked me first in a letter that I received, they said, "Over the week, but actually, Kath and I were about to be going out of town, and then I had a family funeral to go to, and essentially what it worked down to was I had four days." And I reply... I responded, I said, "I can't do it in that time, please give more time." And he said, "Well, no, you haven't responded, so now your rebuke will be public."
Quinn: This is misleading on multiple levels. You can see the actual email chain here.
01:10:34,988 --> 01:10:40,428 [Congregant(s)]
Can I ask a clarifying question on that? Did they... they did not give you any extra time at all?
01:10:40,428 --> 01:10:48,048 [Dave]
So there was one week which was right in the middle of our vacation time, and so he said-
01:10:48,048 --> 01:10:48,658 [Congregant(s)]
It's not every week
01:10:48,658 --> 01:10:51,308 [Dave]
... "Oh, I'll give you another week."
01:10:51,308 --> 01:10:53,108 [Congregant(s)]
So they gave you an extra... extra time?
01:10:53,108 --> 01:11:48,638 [Dave] So they gave me extra time, which essentially worked down to four days. So they had their... they had no idea what my calendar looked like. Oh, by the way, I've got a job, I've got other things going on at the same time, and the sense was, "Oh... oh yeah, we'll... we'll be really gracious." I mean, when... when is it valid even to put a deadline on somebody to give a response for something like that? Can I say, "Okay, I'm working on the answer. Please give me more time"? I did give up one of my vacation days working seven hours to start going through this thing, and it's so huge. And I decided because I had neglected my family for that whole day, that I wasn't going to give up any more of our vacation days. But essentially it worked to... I had four days when they had been working... months-
Quinn: Also very misleading:
He didn’t say, “Please give me more time.” He said, “If you wish for me to answer the letter, you need to abandon your deadline.”
A deadline is absolutely reasonable given Dave’s long history of dodging accountability.
The letter was not huge. He definitely could have come up with a response in seven hours. It sounds like he’s trying to say he had to respond to the whole website. The website didn’t even exist at that point.
Also, a side note: It didn’t take us months to write the letter. The work was in talking to people who had had negative experiences that they wanted to put behind them, and asking them if they could bring themselves to revisit painful memories in enough detail to write an account and then lay it bare on the internet for all to see, in the hopes that someone else might not go through what they did. The reason the letter came five months after I left Friday Night (and not one or two) was that it took people months to process whether they even wanted to share anything, and then it was typically pretty difficult for them to physically sit down and put pen to paper. There are some exceptions to that general rule, but they are few and far between.
01:11:48,638 --> 01:11:49,798 [Congregant(s)]
Months and month
01:11:49,798 --> 01:11:50,528 [Dave]
... and months.
01:11:50,528 --> 01:11:53,888 [Dave]
Yep. Um,
01:11:53,888 --> 01:11:56,568 [Congregant(s)]
did... did you start a response at all?
01:11:56,568 --> 01:11:57,228 [Dave]
Okay.
01:11:57,228 --> 01:12:04,728 [Congregant(s)]
Cam... Cam, he addressed all of this stuff last week and... but tonight, he was just gonna give his response.
01:12:04,728 --> 01:12:05,708 [Congregant(s)]
Okay. I just wanted to know-
01:12:05,708 --> 01:12:06,818 [Congregant(s)]
That was the rule that we wanted to do.
01:12:06,818 --> 01:12:08,868 [Congregant(s)]
If he did... if he did... if he did... He did? Okay, cool. So you
01:12:08,868 --> 01:12:14,068 [Congregant(s)]
In fairness to you, Cam, you came in a little bit later, I don't know if you were listening online or...
01:12:14,068 --> 01:12:14,748 [Congregant(s)]
No, I didn't get it.
01:12:14,748 --> 01:12:16,148 [Congregant(s)]
But when we went over the stuff-
01:12:16,148 --> 01:12:16,158 [Congregant(s)]
Okay
01:12:16,158 --> 01:12:17,148 [Congregant(s)]
... you weren't in the room.
01:12:17,148 --> 01:12:19,688 [Congregant(s)]
Sorry. Thank you for the energy.
01:12:19,688 --> 01:12:20,168 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
01:12:20,168 --> 01:12:21,028 [Kathy]
Thank you, Cam.
01:12:21,028 --> 01:12:21,348 [Congregant(s)]
Love you guys.
01:12:21,348 --> 01:12:37,608 [Dave]
Thanks for being here, Cam. There are those who said, "Oh, well, Dave's gonna dodge, he's gonna deflect, he's not going to receive everything." I hope you've heard something very different. I have received correction multiple times.
01:12:37,608 --> 01:12:59,888 [Kathy]
And we have more to receive because it's worth it. You know, there's one accusation in there about marriage counseling we gave 15 years ago. The guy says we gave something harmful. He doesn't remember what it is. But I told Dave, "We probably gave something wrong for every couple we've ever counseled [laughs] times 50 years."
Quinn: This is simply not true. The closest thing to what Kathy’s describing is in Dave’s Relationship Counseling, which omits details for the sake of confidentiality, not lack of memory.
01:12:59,888 --> 01:13:00,488 [Congregant(s)]
Mm-hmm.
01:13:00,488 --> 01:13:24,172 [Kathy]
Because we're not perfect and we don't claim to be, but we do want to be more able to listen and not have a defense, and have a group of people that you feel like you can go to, to help get our attention.Mm. So, I would say those are two things that have definitely come out of this.
01:13:24,172 --> 01:15:49,812 [Dave]
I will s... The website makes it clear what their desire is, that we would step down from ministry. Oh, not only that, but this is the second time that one of the members of this group has contacted my employer to seek to get us to lose our jobs. We are currently under suspension. We've been told that we cannot do any work for CRU or family life right now because of... because of the accusations that have been brought there. This is an attack we've been subjected to multiple times. This was the most vicious. Pray for us, but pray for them. I know that so much of this came out of hurt. However, things came around, and I've been praying for their healing. And I ask you to join me in that. I close with Ephesians 4:30-32. "Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you." Alex, would you close us in prayer, please?
Quinn: This is obvious manipulation. In the space of 2-3 minutes, Dave:
Casts himself as a victim
Undermines the testimonies by framing them as emotion-driven rather than fact-driven – without actually discussing factual details.
Performs goodwill toward the witnesses (“pray for them…I’ve been praying for their healing…”), despite doing nothing before, during, or after this monologue to make amends.
Jessica: Dave does not name the individual who tried to get Dave to lose his job with CRU. He most likely means me, as I am the only person directly involved in this process who I know was in contact with CRU. I did not try to get Dave fired from CRU in 2022, nor am I aware of an individual who attempted to get Dave fired.. I asked for mediation, accountability and repentance. Below is a verbatim of what I asked CRU for in regards to Dave.
There should be clear communication to all attendees on who they can contact for mediation with Dave.
There should be a disclaimer statement given to all people who Dave and Kathy counsel, stating they are not licensed and that they will tell people God says to stay married in cases of abuse even when one spouse remains unrepentant. This allows people to know in advance what guidance they will receive.
Dave should repent of pride and not providing balanced teaching, and take action to humble himself, develop his shepherding skills, learn about abuse and provide additional teaching with the goal of protecting the vulnerable within Friday Night.
01:15:49,812 --> 01:15:52,192 [Congregant(s)]
Ironically, that was what I was gonna ask for-
01:15:52,192 --> 01:15:52,422 [Dave]
Oh! [laughs]
01:15:52,422 --> 01:15:55,752 [Congregant(s)]
... when I raised my hand.
01:15:55,812 --> 01:15:56,322 [Dave]
[laughs]
01:15:56,322 --> 01:15:58,852 [Congregant(s)]
God will stand by you.
01:15:58,852 --> 01:15:58,882 [Dave]
[laughs]
01:15:58,882 --> 01:17:11,982 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs] God, I thank you that you are good. Um, even in messy [laughs] situations in life, even in painful stuff, Lord, I thank you that you're good and that you love us. I ask you to continue to speak to and move in each and every one of us, Lord. Um, move in each of us and mold us more and more into your likeness. Lord, give us wisdom. Uh, lead us and show us how to- how to love you and love each other well. Um, give us your heavenly wisdom, Lord. I- I just pray for... I pray for this, I pray for healing, uh, all around. I pray for, um, relationships that are stronger on the other side, Lord. You- you have a great track record of taking painful things and turning them around in amazing ways. And Lord, I ask that you'll do that in each of our lives. And I thank you that you are faithful, Lord. So give us wisdom, bless the rest of the night. Help us to love each other with the love that you love us with, and to give each other the- the grace and the... that you give us as well. Thank you. Amen.
01:17:12,062 --> 01:17:15,512 [Dave]
Thank you.
01:17:15,512 --> 01:17:16,732 [Congregant(s)]
Thank you.
01:17:16,732 --> 01:17:53,272 [Dave]
So many of you have been praying for us and sending us notes of encouragement and blessing, and we are so grateful. Thank you, thank you. And I just made a decision. Next week is going to be just a praise fest. We're gonna worship the Lord and bring your voices, your instruments, whatever it may be, but let this house be full of praise to our great God.
01:17:53,272 --> 01:17:56,012 [Congregant(s)]
And it does mean you can't still come to us, but-
01:17:56,012 --> 01:17:56,222 [Dave]
Oh, yeah
01:17:56,222 --> 01:17:57,612 [Congregant(s)]
... prayer won't have to be the main thing.
01:17:57,612 --> 01:18:04,322[Dave]
If you feel there's stuff that still needs to be addressed, come to us personally.
01:18:04,322 --> 01:18:04,352 [Congregant(s)]
Yes, please.
01:18:04,352 --> 01:18:49,432 [Dave]
But I- I appreciate, again, so greatly, the counsel of the men who spoke to us. And we have submitted ourselves to their wisdom. And, what a great blessing they have been and, uh, hopefully shall continue to be. I have asked all of them to be on our board. [sniffs] And, uh, we may have others, but I'm, uh... We are grateful for the love of the body of Christ in its services. Thank you.
Rebecca:
After his one-on-one meeting with Dave post this meeting, Jim’s email to Dave was in response to Dave’s request that we take down the website and email him what we need to make that happen. In that email, Jim asked that this board be included in the reconciliation process and expressed his willingness to submit to their counsel. We have not received a response from Dave despite follow-up messages.
01:18:49,432 --> 01:18:52,532 [Congregant(s)]
And I saw Carmen goodies come in the door.
01:18:52,532 --> 01:18:54,492 [Dave]
Did Carmen bring something?
01:18:54,492 --> 01:18:55,252 [Congregant(s)]
Yeah.
01:18:55,252 --> 01:18:59,172 [Dave]
Oh, what- what did you bring, Carmen?
01:18:59,172 --> 01:19:00,132 [Congregant(s)]
A cake.
01:19:00,132 --> 01:19:03,632 [Dave]
Oh, nice.
01:19:03,692 --> 01:19:04,772 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
01:19:04,772 --> 01:19:06,412 [Dave]
Thank you.
01:19:06,412 --> 01:19:06,422 [Congregant(s)]
[laughs]
01:19:06,422 --> 01:19:16,172 [Dave]
All right. Bless you all, go enjoy the cake, and pray and encourage one another. Thank you, Brandon.
01:19:16,172 --> 01:19:18,112 [Congregant(s)]
Just wanna give... Give me a hug.
What's up, Brandon?
01:19:18,752 --> 01:19:20,682 [Congregant(s)]
I don't want to leave you without hugging you. I just want to call it a night.
01:19:20,682 --> 01:19:22,452 [Congregant(s)]
Nothing new, man.