If we get to four degrees, it won't be because of what our grandparents did, it will be because of what you and I and our children do. And we can choose to do things differently, and not get there, which makes it a sort of affirmative choice to get all the way to three or four degrees. Everything about the climate system Well, I shouldn't say everything. There are things that are outside of our control. But the most important input at this stage is how much carbon we put into the atmosphere. And that is a choice that we're collectively making.
We're making it haphazardly, with institutions that aren't focused enough on the important questions, but it's a human choice. It's not beyond our control, and we can avert it. I think we will make some of those choices so that we will avert the worst-case scenarios, and I think that we will continue to live even in many ways that people consider as prosperous and happy in the generations ahead. One of the things I'm trying to do in my book is to square these two facts.
So if we live in a world that's three degrees warmer, and that means 50 times as much flooding in India and Bangladesh, 50 times as much flooding in the U. It means a major impact on our economic growth. It means significantly more warfare. All these things. If those things come to pass. And yet people still find themselves living relatively satisfied and fulfilling lives. How does that happen? How is it the case that we can continue going forward with this much suffering, and I think this tragic answer is well, we live with a lot of suffering now.
You know, one of the facts in the book that grabs people most vividly is: So a study by this guy named Drew Shindell about the effects of air pollution , just between the threshold at 1. And he found, just in that half-degree of difference, just through the impact of air pollution, million more people would die. Now that's 25 Holocausts. And since I don't think we're gonna get south of two degrees, that's basically our best case scenario, is 25 Holocausts worth of dying from air pollution.
People are horrified by that, and they should be. But nine million people are dying annually already from air pollution. So that's only take 16 more years. And we're not animated about that. We're turning a blind eye to that. And I don't mean to sound too holier-than-thou. I do that too. But it's important where we are now to look forward and say, We really, really don't wanna get to three degrees. We really, really don't wanna get to four degrees. And we need to look at what that would mean to motivate us now, because if we wait until we're at 2. I'm not one of those people who thinks that global warming's gonna bring about the total collapse of civilization.
I think that we will endure. But I think there will be an enormous amount of suffering that we will dealing with in some ways, trying to process through resettlement and that kind of thing. But we will also just ignore it. And that is the outcome I wanna avoid, if we can. I think sometimes when I read — I read a lot of American history, and it's really interesting when you go back and you read stuff, you know, , 20, 30, There's this sort of sense in which you're like, They talk about slavery all the time, but any time they're not talking about slavery, you're kinda like: Guys.
This is obviously You know, well, we gotta do this about the Is that your conception of how history will understand this moment in years? I don't think there's really any arguing with that. You know, we forged a global international order after World War II that was built on principles of human rights, and peace and prosperity.
The Crazy Life of James Wallace McDonald [James Wallace McDonald] on bybowenuromi.ga *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. My story begin in a city park. My story begin in a city park where I was talking to a lady in the city park and the lady talk to me as I looked like a grown man. But she didn?t know I am a ten.
I think the 21st Century global political order will be built around carbon and climate change. When you see MBS saying that he doesn't think that, he doesn't think that the Saudi economy could be oil-dependent by , he has to get it off oil by then. I mean, he's a grotesque figure, but that's wisdom. He understands that, at that point, it won't be possible to be continuing to produce and burn oil in the way that Saudi Arabia does, and still expect a seat at the Table of Nations. That'll be out of the question. And I think, similarly, our national politics will be transformed.
The way that we buy food and eat. You know, I mention in the book, I think it won't be at all surprising if in the supermarket you start to see, Oh, this food is carbon-free , in the same way that you're now seeing it as organic. And people will orient their lifestyle choices along those axes. I also have a bit of a rant that lifestyle choices are a distraction from politics, which is the real solution, but there's no aspect of life going forward that will be unaffected by this. And, to me, more important than the alarming science that I present in the book is the humanistic inquiry, which is: What will this do to how we organize our lives and our societies?
And what will it mean to be living under the shadow of climate change, and seeing the world degrade? What will it mean for our sense of our place in nature and in history, our obligation to one another? If we're living in England, relatively well-off, what do we do owe the people in India and Bangladesh, who are suffering so much? Former colonies of an empire that was built on fossil fuel. What is the relationship of an American to the Saudis, who can't go to Mecca because it's too hot, when we made that country extract that oil as a kind of client state of ours and, as a result, completely destroyed its environment.
Those changes are coming for us too. I don't think that we'll be able to escape them in the U. For instance, but the question of climate reparations, I think, will be a major subject in the coming century. Who's gonna build the sea walls? And where do we decide where the sea walls will be built, and where they won't be built? I was talking to a really prominent climate scientist a few months ago, who was one of the lead authors of the IPCC last report , and has been doing a lot of consulting work in New York City where he lives.
So I said, "Are we gonna build a sea wall in New York? Manhattan real estate's way too expensive to lose. You look at the subway, it takes 30 years. If we started now, he said, we couldn't build it fast enough to save parts of Howard Beach, South Brooklyn, Queens. He said, "The city knows this, and you're gonna start seeing them stopping infrastructure repair, not doing work on the subway lines and even telling those residents explicitly, 'You might be able to live here for another 20 years, but you're not gonna be able to leave this house for your kids.
And this is a conversation that the climate He said You know, if you look at the map of Long Island, the cemeteries that are in Brooklyn and Queens, they basically trace a particular geological line all the way out to the middle of the forks at the end of Long Island. That's the highest point on the island. And he was like, "Basically everything south of there, it's gonna be gone. And maybe that'll take centuries, maybe it'll take decades. But the ice melt is inevitable, at that scale. And that means that Long Island will be a shell of its former self.
And this is not a freaky guy. This is not a guy on the fringe. He was one of the lead authors of the last IPCC assessment. And when you talk to climate scientists privately, these are the terms that they talk in. That it will completely reshape the map of the world, by which I mean the literal physical map, but also the psychological map, how we organize our politics, all that stuff. And then you meet some people who are even crazier than that, who say, Well, we'll be extinct in 10 years.
But this is not that. You know, I'm certainly not one of those people, and this guys is not one of those people. There were factions in the country that were pulling for both. People were mad at Roosevelt for essentially pulling the U. And I kinda wonder if there's an analogy there, to climate level. You know, again, debate's moving in the right direction, but too slowly, and it's still kind of ossified.
Is that ultimately what does it? But I think that the phenomenon that's been most powerful is the wildfires. There's been a huge movement against plastic pollution, which is, I also think, basically a distraction from the climate issue, which is much more important. But it's so vivid when you see pictures of the ocean filled with plastic. This is, like, just the aesthetics of this is so gross. We need to do something. And I say that Something about fire is even more immediate than, say, hurricanes. I don't live in California, but I feel the terror of those fires. And it's estimated that for every degree of warming, fires in the western U.
Sixty-four times worse. I think the imagery of that is really powerful, and I think that extreme weather has moved public opinion. You know, the sort of gold standard polling on this is the Yale Climate Communications Survey. They have us at, I think, 73 percent of Americans think global warming is real, and is happening now.
Seventy percent are concerned about it. Those are actually big numbers considering how much we process everything we know about the world as Americans through partisan prisms. So if we get 70 percent of Americans who are concerned about it, that's really significant. Those numbers are up 15 percent since , and the numbers, it's an apples-to-oranges polling comparison, but it's up eight percent since March.
That's really significant movement. The problem is, if we really only have 12 years to halve emissions to avert the worst-case scenarios, we need to get started right now. And we can't wait for those numbers to even creep up any further. There's also the question of just how committed the people who say they're concerned are to the issue of climate change. So they're concerned, but they're not concerned.
But there's actually good news on that. It used to be the case that the economic conventional wisdom was that action on climate was really expensive, and not just in the sense of investment up front, but in the sense of foregoing economic growth. And I think one of the main reasons we've seen so little climate action globally, is because that wisdom has held. I mean, you see people in domestic U. I don't think he's a real denier. I think he just thinks there's a kind of advantage for him in slow walking action on climate.
But all of the new economic research suggests that that logic is totally backward. That it's sort of ugly in the sense that it's mostly a reflection of the fact that we now are estimating the costs of climate change much, much higher than we used to. But relatively speaking, we would be saving a ton of money, in fact, adding a lot of wealth to the economy very shortly if we took action. CHRIS HAYES: And that's because the cost of what you're describing, which you laid out in the book when you talk about everything from the habitability of Asian cities in the summer, to parts of the outer boroughs being under water, to fires 64 times as bad as they are now.
All of that is economic costs. All of it, all of it, all of it. You add it up together, enormous economic costs, enormous economic drag, and as we put more carbon into the atmosphere and the warming gets worse and what we've already stuffed into the system coming for us gets worse, the costs of all of that gets up higher so that the cost of preventing it looks better as an investment.
You can build your solar empire now in a way that you wouldn't have 20 years ago. But I often talk about the economic costs because I think it is — if you have to have a single metric — it's sort of the best summation. But it's also deeply misleading in the sense that real estate in Bangladesh is not valued in the same way as real estate in Miami Beach is. And so there are Especially the cost of the Global South, which just makes it all the more remarkable that like India is scheduled to have more than a quarter of all climate impacts in the 21st century, that's gonna hit India.
So, India is gonna be really, really devastated. Let's start with the technical question.
David Wallace-Wells is made unilateral dictator of the Earth with an entirely enthusiastic coordinated group of planetary administrators. Can you, using the technology we have, get us on track with IPCC? Can we cut emissions by 45 percent in 12 years? This is a little bit of a misleading anecdote but I think it's helpful to illustrate it.
There is now technology to take carbon out of the atmosphere called carbon capture. So, if we just redirected those subsidies to those solutions, we could in some theoretical way have solved the problem already without even disturbing our economy at all. Now, the question you raised is a really important one.
In order to store this carbon, it would require, they say, an infrastructure two to three times the size of the existing oil and gas industry, and then we would have to build it. And where it would be stored and by whom and next to whose houses? Complicated problems. But, the first thing I would do as global dictator would just be to end fossil fuel subsidies.
There's no reason why we should be propping up these businesses. There are massive investments to be made in green energy with the same money. And in fact in many parts of the world, green energy is already cheaper than dirty energy. It's just that those companies are more powerful than-.
The energy problem is actually the simplest one to solve because green energy is doing so well, and that is in part because of the investments that the Obama Administration made during the stimulus package that was really consequential, so that the gains we made in green energy are much faster than even its advocates would have predicted 25 years ago.
But the bad news on that is that we have not changed the proportion of clean energy to dirty energy over the last 40 years, so we've made this unbelievable progress where green energy is way cheaper than it ever thought was possible, and yet we've just responded to that news by growing our capacity with it rather than retiring the dirty energy sources.
I think there needs to be a much stronger national or international push to aggressively retire dirty energy, not just subsidize and invest in green energy, and I think probably that will mean things in relatively short order like banning new internal combustion engines. I think we need to I think this is just like one step down that path and I think that we will see in this way the kind of liberal It happens to be the day that Michael Cohen is testifying before the House Government Oversight Committee, so fresh in my mind is the performance of various members of that committee.
I'm running all this through the Mark Meadows test, Mark Meadows being a North Carolina Republican congressman who was particularly outspoken today in his defense of the president, just like "Mark Meadows on banning the internal combustion engine. I'm getting ahead of ourselves by just keep There's the technical question and then I think like, Mark Meadows? What's Mark Meadows gonna do with banning the internal combustion engine, not to mention Donald Trump and James Inhofe. But there are also reasons for despair on the technical side of things, so If cement were a country it would be the world's third biggest emitter, and China is now pouring more cement every three years than the US poured in the entire 20th century.
They're building all the new infrastructure of Asia and Africa with that cement. That's not even counted in their carbon footprint, so China's carbon footprint is actually significantly larger. I felt growing up I was like, Oh, okay. China, maybe they'll surpass the U. Agriculture is really problematic. On the other hand there are also some technical solutions there, so we hear a lot about beef-eating and how bad that is for the planet, but there are small studies that show that if you feed cattle seaweed their methane emissions could fall by 95 or 99 percent.
If we fed all of our beef seaweed, conceivably we could completely eliminate the carbon problem of eating beef. That to me illustrates Well, that's I think the world that we're entering into. The contours of our existence will be so transformed by this that any time we contemplate it seems eerie and funny and strange, but that's the world that we're entering into.
Believe me, I'm very pro-feeding seaweed to cows so that they fart less, obviously. I think it's unfortunate, but in a really profound way, the future climate of the planet will be determined by China. Slightly lesser extent by India and sub-Saharan Africa, but China is really the main driver here. The U. I think that trend will continue.
Not fast enough, but I think it will continue regardless of policy.
But China is on a very different trajectory and to the extent that we're considering warming of three or four degrees this century it will be the result of Chinese action. CHRIS HAYES: What's your response to people that make the argument, because it's amazing to watch the ways in which the arguments against climate action have just hopped all over the place. For a very, very long time it was like, No, the science is wrong. We're actually in an Ice Age. The scientists in the UK at East Anglia were faking their research. The hockey stick doesn't exist. Carbon isn't a real substance.
All sorts of nonsense. That basically has essentially all gone by the wayside. There's still some of it but in sort of mainstream political — particularly conservative Republican — circles. It is now the sort of fatalism about the fact that we're only 15 percent of emissions. China's gonna do what China's gonna do, so why should we take What is your argument, given the fact that it is true that China sort of does control the fate and destiny of the world in terms of two and a half degrees, three degrees, four degrees?
What's the argument against people saying You guys are just sort of futzin' around when you talk about the U. DAVID WALLACE-WELLS: Well, I think that there's a sort of moral obligation because of the historical debt that we have imposed on the rest of the world, and I do think we remain maybe the world's most powerful country, maybe the world's second most powerful country, but we're still a major leader there, and to the extent that we are trying to organize a solution to a collective action problem, which is that every nation in the world, not just the U.
My point about this is that U. It's very hard to imagine the world in which China is very aggressive and does what it needs to do to keep us at say three degrees or two and a half, in which the U. We don't believe in any of this stuff. That's impossible to conceive of. Well, I would say if you look at the last couple of years, Xi Jinping has actually been much more aggressive rhetorically on climate since Trump came onto the scene, because he saw the evacuation of American moral leadership on this issue and he thought, Oh, here's an opportunity for Chinese imperial strength , and they're still behaving badly in lots of ways, but they're also investing much more aggressively in green energy and renewables than they were a few years ago.
They're not opening coal plants like they were just two or three years ago. That's great. I think it's a little bit weird to put faith an authoritarian who has thrown a couple of million Muslims in jail and is surveilling every citizen, etc, but if we're gonna have an authoritarian dictator I'd rather he be woke on climate than not woke on climate.
I can already see it's gonna be like one second it's like There is no climate change , and then it's gonna be like, Oh yeah. There's climate change and we We need to bomb China and India, we need to build sea walls and physical walls to keep the climate refugees out, and I have now declared myself president with emergency powers so that I can keep people where they need to be and not move internally around the United States from the areas that we have to abandon to the areas that are temperate enough to inhabit , and you can just see all the ways in which the pull towards authoritarianism in the environment that you describe is gonna be powerful.
They've done a ton of strategizing, game planning and, when you look at the map from a military perspective, that makes sense. The Arctic is gonna open up. Who's gonna control those shipping routes? The islands of the Pacific on which we've built our entire Pacific military empire will be underwater, including by the way all of the fallout from the nuclear tests that we did in the '50s and '60s. That's gonna be underwater and distributed throughout the Pacific because those islands are gonna sink. What does that mean for the map of the future world? Who knows exactly? But China's playing the same game.
They're building artificial islands in the South China Sea to make up for the loss of real islands. And I think about this mostly in terms of refugees, and we're seeing already the turn towards nativism and xenophobia, and that's terrible and dispiriting, especially because if you had to imagine a threat that was big enough and all-encompassing enough to call into being real cooperative global government, climate change would be it, and yet we're responding to the crisis in the opposite way by retreating from all those institutions.
That's terrible. But there is also this social science that says that the immediate negative response to newcomers in a community is strongest when the numbers are small, and that when those numbers get bigger the community is more welcoming. I think there's a reason to think that it's possible we would get there globally. We'll be more welcoming towards climate refugees 20 years from now than we are now because we're more comfortable with accepting refugees generally. Exactly where we end up on the spectrum of political disaster to political utopianism I don't know, but I do know that the politics of the next century are going to be forged by the force of climate change in some way, and I don't think we've really thought about that.
For years, they had been made to feel like the outcasts, but finally vindication in its godly form was working its way out. And still some came because their loved ones and spouses have abandoned the faith completely and now refuse to go to church — and they long to understand why. God is purifying His Church. Hidden things have come to light. Christ followers are saying enough. This cancer must be excised and as often as is the case in cancer treatment, months of treatment must be involved for health to take place.
While I have no say in the future of Harvest, it is ridiculous to think that any healthy future can take place until the cancer is removed. I pray that moving forward, His love will control me no matter the consequences. I am surprised by your editorial on Harvest. The surprise is not Harvest, but that you publicly hung them. Lina, you are strong and your faith in the Lord is inspiring.
Goodthat you let a toxic place. I love you and our Lird. You are completely right on! Lina is right on. I was so dissappointed to hear that she left.
I was too afraid to ask her why. I saw the horrible video of the three Elders that were fired, It was autrocious! I am so glad Lina has spoken up. I hope to become braver. Amen to that. This woman sounds sincere. The church is to be a living organism for the cause of Christ and no other.
I pray to our Father who loves us all that His truth and reconciliation and peace, healing abounds in this circumstance. They all need to be excised fired , along with number one enabler extraordinaire of James, Rick Donald, along with the MacDonald boys, along with every single campus pastor and the other pastors, and throw in the worship leaders they are all complicit , then the cancer would have been completely removed and the body the good people of Harvest that are being fleeced would have a chance to heal and become part of a true biblical church.
Thank you for your story Dr. Lina, and thank you for shedding light on your fears, and your full confidence in the Lord at the end of the day. Unreal as I went to Harvest for over 7 yrs and this whole situation has hurt so many people. Wow Nancy K, after all that has been said and done, seemingly over many years, it is startling to me that you would make such a commemt…Wow.
It IS her truth… And the truth of many at Harvest. The environment is as ahw stated, fear James, make James happy… I left Harvest CL 3 yrs ago after being forced out of a ministry and other things…part of the membership indoctrination…you are not allowed to say anything disparaging against church leadership or the church. All that leads to ia where we are…. I led worship in a church for 5 years. The Pastor started teaching on obeying your authority and not questioning authority etc.
I questioned a particular sermon that clearly was unbiblical but no one else did. Long story short he kicked my husband and I out of the church. He told me that I would be cursed for questioning his authority and God would punish me. It was so hard not to be bitter, and it took a long time to want to be part of another church and not be so cautious. God bless. I believe you are mistaken. It is a biblical teaching that unrepentant public sin in a public representative of God ie, pastors and elders must be publicly rebuked for the sake of the church as a whole. Ezekiel Her princes within her are like wolves tearing the prey, by shedding blood and destroying lives in order to get dishonest gain.
I never attended HBC except for the one time when we visited several years ago and had to sit out in the foyer as the music was blasted out too loud. It is a shame to Christianity what is happening here. My coworker who was Catholic and going through a painful divorce, was led to Christ by me.
Then God led him to Harvest Bible Chapel. Now he is disillusioned and wants to go back to Catholicism. He stopped going to any church and says he has lost faith in everything. He is angry that they keep on sending texts and emails asking for money. He clearly told me that they send out reminders to give. He unsubscribed from the emails but they were still sent him texts asking him to give. Lina, given your vast experience, It is ironic that the experience at Harvest should be seen as a culture of fear.
I do believe you. I think that this message has relevance to many situations today, including the present political situation.
Specifically, I do mean the Machiavellian rule by fear and division that we are seeing. You have every right to speak up; and I respect you for doing so. Are you referring to the Democratic Party? Not everything needs to be about Polititcs. Nicole, I am sorry if you are offended. I will not address any party affiliation.
I will only say that if it is right and important to address a culture of fear within the church, it is equally important to address the same for our country. Politics and religion have a great affect on society, and both must be monitored to protect the people. Fear is never a godly way of governing. Pastor James made it political when he compared the era of President Trump to the era of Stalin the era of Hitler.
Walked out of that service. Everyone sat still as if he mentioned chocolate milk. This post reminds me of something that happened at my former church. I should have walked out but, I too, was afraid. These things happen in small churches too. Others, too, could see the attitude. Most continue to stay there, as their numbers dwindle. Others wised up and slowly left. There were other things that caused us to leave also. It took months to get over the hurt he caused my husband and I.
We did not want to cause a split or damage the cause of Christ, so we quietly left. We talked with two deacons and the assistant pastor. The message we received was they were sorry we felt that way and they were sure it was not his intention. They made excuses for him. After leaving, others came to us, with similar stories of why they left or quit being involved. It is so sad when the devil works to cause problems in a church. We never gave up on God because He never gives up on us. Thank you for all you do. I will pray for healing in the hearts and lives of those affected by this tragedy.
The devil may win some battles, but we know God ultimately wins the war. I totally agree with you Patti. The small church that I and my family left was a textbook case in spiritual abuse. A book called the Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse really helped me and my wife to recover from our experience of confronting the pastor and then leaving the church.
We confronted him basically because of the way he had attacked a youth at the time and his mother for bringing up how the pastor was making this youth to feel. Constantly made to feel stupid, the youth had had enough so the mom called a meeting with the pastor. The pastor took the opportunity to lay into them and basically tell him that he was the one in the wrong. Attempts to reconcile the situation failed due to the pastor believing he had done nothing wrong. What are you authorized to do? Yell and bully and make people feel like second class Christians?
In any case, we had a final meeting with the pastor and his assistant pastor who was his son-in-law to tell them that I was leaving their church. Pastor was not happy and tried to convince us that we were wrong. They never acknowledged that they had done anything wrong. Gosh, so many similarities with the HBC action. In fact, he is the one who is no longer pastoring. I loved his book Vertical Church. Just goes to show, pride goeth before a fall. God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.
I pray that God will heal those hurt by him and his abuse of authority. The fallout has only just begun. I speak as one who has gone thru it, like you. But if they submit to the Healer, they will come out stronger.
May the God of all comfort minister his comfort to them. He bullied his way into being paid multiple times for the work he was hired to so as the pastor, sermons and bible teaching. Proverbs This comment to Harvest and James is your opinion and you have every right to it. However why now? Why kick him and the church while their down Lina?
Life goes on people repent and grace is for everyone. Be kind not hurtful. And your part of the problem. The kindest thing one can do is to cut out and expose the cancer to death. She did a awesome job as the judgment of God has come to his house. Jesus calls us to be GOOD. Sometimes being good will also mean being nice, but sometimes it will not. Sometimes being good will require us to say harsh things. Because ultimately what God wants is not a huge army of women who are nice. He wants a huge army of women indwelled with the Holy Spirit to point people to Christ.
Different situations require different things. Sometimes they will require being nice. But often they require speaking up when injustice is done. Read the Old Testament. It is those who live in fear. That is who God truly cares about. When we try to protect those in power instead of those who are hurting, we are not doing the work of God.
Lina did try to have a conversation with the Elders before she left Harvest. I believe Lina did do the best she could at the time. The practice of medicine is not an exact science; neither is navigating very tough and painful circumstances such as this. God the Holy Spirit wanted Lina to speak more specifically at this time; and she did. She was obedient to Christ. In addition, what was shared now, may have been heard better now, then it would have been heard before Lina left Harvest.
Maybe people could handle hearing it better now than then. This is an extra difficult time for the members and regular attenders of Harvest Bible Chapel. I have great empathy and sensitivity toward them. I have never attended Harvest. I am aware that there has been some very good ministry done through this church. Jesus is still the great healer and restorer.
I pray that the sincere, Christ honoring followers humbly seek Him and His will for them individually in relation to this circumstance, in addition to His will for the church as a whole. Jesus may be truly calling people to stay, and rebuild Harvest Bible Chapel. Agreed Sheila. Thank you. Also Thank you Lina for having the courage to say something now. I am sorry that you experienced this fear. We are to fear God not man. I am excited for all God is doing in your life to help other women get closer in their relationship with Jesus. Yes, there are a lot of hurting people at Harvest.
May Our Lord guide all of us and May His will be done above all else. In Jesus precious name. Thank you and thank Lina. Those who would shame someone for standing on the side of truth and grace have missed the mark. Many are in or have been in denial. God bless you.
Nellie-What you might not know. Is many people for years have tried to bring things to light privately. Many people went to leaders and spoke up. Many were intimidated, called names, called subversives. Many were kicked out and shown the door. She is not trying to kick him while he is down. You must not feel sorry for James. He is not being bullied. It is finally the truth coming to light from his own actions and the people who protected him for years.
Our family was kicked out of our church plant campus and everyone at the church was told not to talk to us because we were disobedient by speaking out against the things were were seeing. And this was all the way back in The reason why people are coming out now or again is because finally due to being outed on a National Radio program something is finally being done.
It is a cry to the current leadership, to evangelicalism at large that there are some very serious problems that need to be dealt with. Or were you saying they were bullied too. I used to go to a church in AZ pastored by Jon Gaus. He was a very good speaker and teacher of the Bible but was forced to resign from our church a few years back. The whole ordeal was very strange. My experience was decades ago and in another state. One thing that has helped is recognizing seasons. Persecution or hardship drew them close. In eras of prosperity, their hearts drifted. Often it was the leadership that lost track and influenced the group.
Why would we be any different? As a nation, something painful will bring us back. Count on it. Also note how the apostle Paul called out Peter publicly when Peter was indulging in hypocrisy! Galatians And in 1 Corinthians 5, we are told to judge those within the Church…. Thanks Sheila. So great to see your support with your wise comment. I enjoy both of you Christian ladies for the different gifts you both bring.
Leba and Sheila- Keep on being brave- it encourages me to do the same! Nellie, Please anchor in on John Yes Nellie, we are called to bring light on the darkness. Why now does not matter. What matters is truth be told. Romans I agree here. The timing of this article makes you less credible.
Not cool to kick people when they are down. So your opinion is to fire everybody? Do you realize the elders are already choosing to step down? Did you realize the pastors publicly said sorry last weekend? Did you realize elders and pastors are personally apologizing g to people? Do you read the elder updates? Go to the all church meetings? Is this an informed opinion? I am airing on the side of no.
I think God has not lifted the veil on a lot of eyes for some reason. But the truth needs to be out there. Hearing these stories has helped me to realize I left just when I was supposed to. I have nothing bad to say about Harvest. However, James is not the same person he was when he began that church and if he was to continue leading it, he would hurt countless others.
We are to find our faith and hope in the Message, not the messenger. Thank you for having the courage to write what you did and for your ministry Lina. Thank you for your honestly, I personally did not ask why you left, because we left approximately the same time for the same reasons. I still hold fast to the hope he will take all this to Jesus. As were you, we were grieving and had to pray for help finding that new church. You did the right thing and I believe more will step up not to dishonor James, but noticing how much the church has changed.
Praying for you, many blessings for all you do. Another blind believer. When you are in a position where fear dictates the position you cannot speak out while under that. Wake up this tragedy has been in the works a long time. This is the right time as the judgment of God has come to his people. Open your eyes and feel the heat of the refiners fire. The evil at Harvest is a nasty stage four cancer yet has invaded the entire body.
The only hope is to totally exposed and excise it so that all will not be consumed. This young lady has done the work and is doing the work of the great physician. This is the mercy and grace of God. Nellie, be very, very careful! If the church treated Lina this way, they will do it to you and others without a second thought. Thank you for sharing your story, Lina.
It is loving to tell the truth. God loves truth. Truth is healthy. Truth heals. Because it is time for this cult to be exposed and she is telling her story. Because she is helping expose evil and proving that is is deep and wide and on going. If you like harvest and the culture of hidden abuse and The narcissistic system in order there- by all means, stay!
He stood and told me and my husband he was naive to the Paxton Singer situation. Then, not ten minutes later Mike Dunswood told us the Elders were told presumably by the XLT, which included Jeff Donaldson all parents were notified about Paxton Singer and his sexpoitation issue in Jan Mike was genuinely shocked when we told him our son had Paxton as a camp counselor for whole week at Camp Harvest and we never received notice as HBC falsely told Daily Herald. This is why NOW. Others will be hurt…it is a matter of time. If you know anything about abusive relationships…HBC is in the honeymoon phase right now….
Like in Ezekiel, many people are trying to sound the trumpet of warning!! When someone lies with such ease , that is pathological, and they must be removed from their positions!! Nellie, you know what Lina went through in prep for this how? What she shared was the kindest message I have ever seen. There is no timing to sharing pain. If you know anything about abuse it can take years to come forward. To heal enough to communicate and receiving shaming comments like yours. No shame here for Lina. You are courageous and your words bring healing.
She is sharing her heart and personal experience in an open, vulnerable way, in kindness and love. Love for God, relationships, and the church. Lina has every right to speak her truth. Nothing will change at Harvest if the cancer of fear is not exposed. I am sure that was very hard for her to share. I am so proud of Lina and she is speaking out the words that I would never say because I live in fear of that kind of authority. She put words to my feelings and I am truly blessed by them.
Thank you Lina for your honesty and boldness… and ultimately helping me put words to what I have been experiencing through the preaching of James. She approached this with sensitivity, wisdom and grace. She is free to speak of her experience, nothing mean about that. Amen sister!! I am so happy that finally people are standing up and talk about it! God is good, truth always win. He is very likely not a brother in Christ. James has all the characteristics of a false teacher. He has harmed thousands of people. Be very careful Azaelea.
To judge a fellow brother and think you know if he is a believer is dangerous. God used him mightily for many years and brought His salvation to thousands through this brother. Pray for those still there trying to care for the confused and hurting hearts. Lina — you were humble and owned more than most.
I also trust that you did seek wisdom from the Lord on what and how to speak into this. And you will not lose true friends and sisters in Christ. Read the commandment in 1 Timothy on the correction of Elders who sin, so that other Elders will be afraid to continue sinning against the flock. There are dozens if not hundreds of witnesses against many Elders at Harvest all saying the same thing. God has been known to use even a donkey and a false pagan prophet to speak His word. The fruit by which JM is to be judged rather is that of his own true m.
May God have mercy on his soul. You do not know if she fasted or not, nor do you know if the Lord Himself brought her to this revelation. The vast majority of the victims were black. During this same period, the Chicago police shot 12 people. All armed and dangerous. If it does, here is a truth worth pondering: There is no government agency more dedicated to the proposition that black lives matter than the police. The proactive policing revolution that began in the mids has dramatically brought down the inner city murder rate and saved tens of thousands of black lives.
Unfortunately, that crime decline is now in jeopardy When the police refrain from pro-active policing, black lives are lost. Lost because of a myth. Back to Videos. Show comments Hide Comments. Video Archives.