Subscribe by Email

Brent Detwiler's Tweets

An Appeal for Ted Kober to Expose Dave Harvey

Two days ago, I sent the correspondence that follows to Ted Kober, President of Ambassadors of Reconciliation.  I asked him to provide answers to three questions by noon today.  In so doing, I hoped for a private response but I’ve heard nothing.  It is now 2:00 pm.  I must share my appeal in public.  It is also relevant to every leader and person in SGM.  

Over the past 7 years, I asked C.J., the SGM Board, and others, hundreds of vital questions.  Normally those inquiries were totally ignored.  Over the past two years, I made scores of specific charges backed up by evidence and asked for a defense.  No defense was given 98% of time except for vague denials.  Over the last 7 months, I requested that any errors in my writings be corrected.  More silence.  C.J., Dave, the SGM Board and others remain unaccountable.    

The SGM Board also put a muzzle on justice by forbidding her to speak openly and freely before neutral judges.  The three panel approach was their crowning achievement.  It gave the appearance of justice to the naïve; while securing a miscarriage of justice apparent to the discerning.  No judge in American would allow such a bogus proceeding in their courtroom.  Moreover a host of people would have gone to jail for criminal activity including perjury, jury tampering, the suppression of evidence, and the denial of due process.  Every statutory standard for the hearing of evidence in a court proceeding was done violence.       

This is due in large part to the craft and cunning of Dave Harvey.  In the piece below, I ask Ted to boldly expose Dave for his ongoing lying, deceit and manipulation.  Corruption has only increased over time.  Thousands of people in SGM churches have been deceived.  They’ve been told to trust their leaders, believe the best of C.J. and Dave, not read my materials and refrain from “divisive” discussions with others.  All the while storm clouds keep gathering.      



From: Brent Detwiler  
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2012 4:03 PM
To: Ted Kober
Cc: Melissa Richholt
Subject: Response to Ted Kober
Importance: High

I don’t know Ted’s travel schedule or if you screen his email but would you please bring this to his immediate attention if necessary.  I’d like his response by noon on Tuesday.

Thank you Melissa.



February 26, 2012

Dear Ted,

I need to share honestly with you.  The hour is late.  Your report is due soon.  Please let me be direct without it being misinterpreted as a lack of love or gentleness.

First, I believe you have been taken advantage of and manipulated by the SGM Board.  Second, I think you have been timid in addressing evil, ignored evidence, been unwise in what you’ve proposed and failed to oppose the three panel approach as unjust.  I hope you acknowledge all of these in your March report.   

I need to continue my appeal for boldness and share more of my concerns with you based upon our conversation and interactions the past month.  In particular, I want to warn you again regarding Dave Harvey.  He cannot and should not be trusted.  He is a master manipulator and consistent liar.  Tragically, the SGM Board has followed his corrupt example and been duped by him.  Just like C.J., he has not been held accountable by the SGM Board or his local elders.

Proverbs 27:5-6 says, “Better is open rebuke than love that is concealed.  Faithful are the wounds of a friend, but deceitful are the kisses of an enemy.”  C.J. and Dave have been kissed many times by men who benefit from their favor.  To date, none of their “friends” have been willing to rebuke them in the open.  A true test of love is the willingness to reprove.  They are surrounded by man pleasers who are afraid of the consequences that come with offending them.

Lady Wisdom is correct.  Proverbs 9:7-8, “He who corrects a scoffer gets dishonor for himself, and he who reproves a wicked man gets insults for himself.  Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you, reprove a wise man and he will love you.”

Recently I sent you and others “Mush-Minded Invertebrates” with the following note.  It is the need of the moment.

From: Brent Detwiler  
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 10:17 PM
To: Aron Osborne; C. J. Mahaney; Craig Cabaniss; Dave Harvey; Jeff Purswell; John Loftness; Mark Prater; Mickey Connolly; Pete Greasley; Rick Gamache; Steve Shank; Andrew Mahr; Bob Kauflin; Gary Ricucci; Tommy Hill; Tony Reinke
Cc: Adam Malcolm; Ben Wikner; Bob Schickler; Braden Greer; Corby Megorden; Dave Brewer; Don DeVries; Eric Sheffer; Eric Simmons; Grant Layman; Issac Hydoski; Jamie Leach; Joe Lee; Jon Smith; Joshua Harris; Kenneth Maresco; Mark Mitchell; Matt Maka; Robin Boisvert; Bryce Thomas; Edgar Keinath; Ken Sande; Ted Kober; Brian Brookins; Ken Mellinger; Mark Alderton; Ron Boomsma; Steve Teter; Warren Boettcher
Subject: Mush-Minded Invertebrates

Will you ever stop your deceitful scheming and cover up of sin? 

Proverbs 10:9 “He who walks in integrity walks securely, but he who perverts his ways will be found out.” 

More of your crookedness will be found out in the days to come though you’ve worked hard to conceal it.  You have repeatedly mocked God but He is not fooled and He is not indifferent.  Corruption and destruction are the result (Gal 6:8).  Both will increase unless all of you quickly repent and those around you speak up with force and conviction!   

My Central Concern

Ted, over the last two years, no one has addressed what has been my central concern for C.J., Dave, the Board and other agents of SGM.  The three panel approach in December came about as a result of Dave’s cunning.  Here is what you recommended in your initial Consultation Report on August 24, 2011. 

“We noted that these lengthy documents with numerous allegations provide Brent Detwiler’s perspective on the issues. These allegations have not been heard in a fair hearing where both accused and accuser have faced one another, where accused and accuser can provided oral testimony and other evidence, where accused and accuser can present witnesses as part of their testimony, and where both accused and accuser have reasonable opportunity for cross examination….We view the documents written by Brent Detwiler, while extensive in nature, as allegations that have not yet been tried or tested in a fair hearing….That is not to say that we believe that these matters should be ignored or covered up.  Rather, we believe that they should be taken seriously and handled by those properly authorized….Matters as serious as charges against the chief leader of an association of churches ought to be handled in a way that honors our God and promotes justice for all involved.” (AoR Consultation Report, August 20, 2011,p. 9)

The SGM Board agreed to all of these stipulations.  Here is what they posted on August 25, 2011.

 “Today we received the consultation report from Ambassadors of Reconciliation. It includes three areas where they and others will be involved in helping us: 1) Adjudication of allegations against C.J. Mahaney; 2) Group reconciliation with others who have offenses; 3) Follow-up consultation and recommendations.  We plan on following their recommendations in full.” (Dave Harvey, “The Consultation Report from Ambassadors of Reconciliation,” August 25, 2011)

Every recommendation was violated in the three panel approach that Dave Harvey said you fully endorsed and helped launch.  

Here are the facts.


  1. I was not allowed to face C.J. and make my case.
  2. I was given no time for oral testimony before two of the three panels.
  3. I was given very little time before one of the panels.
  4. I was forbidden from knowing who the witnesses were against me.
  5. I was not told what testimony they provided.
  6. I was forbidden from calling witnesses in my support.
  7. I was forbidden any kind of cross examination of C.J.
  8. I was forbidden any kind of cross examination of witness against me; many of which were false witnesses.
  9. The panel before whom I appeared believed these false witnesses.


Here are the consequences.


  1. My allegations have not been heard, tried or tested in a fair hearing.
  2. The vast majority of my allegations have been ignored and covered up.
  3. I continue to be slandered as in the panel report created by Warren Boettcher, Ron Boomsma and Mark Prater.
  4. Nothing I’ve said or written has been taken seriously by the SGM Board.
  5. The three panel approach dishonored God and promoted injustice. 
  6. C.J. was treated with extraordinary favoritism.
  7. The panelists showed extraordinary bias.
  8. The three panel reports did not deal with the evidence or deal with it justly.


As a point of fact, the most critical component in securing due process is the selection of neutral judges.  You should never have proposed the use of Board Members or SGM pastors in your Consultation Report especially after our lengthy conversation on July 14, 2011 when I outlined the corruption, partiality, and favoritism that has characterized the Board and other SGM pastors.  That was grave mistake.  It enabled Dave and the SGM Board to break 12 months of promises regarding the use of outside evaluators.  They should have rejected your recommendation in no uncertain terms.  Instead they used your proposal to their advantage which ultimately led to the three panel approach.      

In your favor, however, you at least recommended a “blind draw” in selecting panelists for the original adjudication hearing.  You proposed the following in the Consultation Report on page 18.

“ To select the non-board members of the panel:


  • Twelve names should be selected by blind draw from the non-board member pool. 
  • Each party shall be given an opportunity to strike a total of four names from the twelve non-board member names drawn. Four people should be chosen by blind draw from the remaining names to serve on the panel.


“To select the board member of the panel:


  • Only those members most recently appointed to the Board should be considered for the board member pool. Anyone who has served on the SGM Board of Directors prior to May 1, 2011 should not be considered.
  • Three names should be selected by blind draw from the board-member pool.
  • Each party shall be given an opportunity to strike a total of one name from the three board member names drawn. One person should be chosen by blind draw from the remaining names to serve on the panel.”



All of these agreements were violated in the three panel approach by the SGM Board.  They were not interested in “blind jurors” who heard testimony in an open court.  No, instead they rigged the jury, suppressed evidence, stacked witnesses, and denied due process.  As another example of their deceit and unwillingness to walk in the light, the SGM Board has repeatedly refused to answer any questions about how they handpicked the panelists. 

Here’s the point. I’ve had no opportunity to present 1,200 pages of evidence documenting the lying, deceit, hypocrisy, intimidation, cover up, manipulation, and spin of C.J., Dave, SGM Board and others.  The three panel approach was an act of treachery intended to kill a fair, honest, open, and thorough hearing of evidence.  Please read, Report on Brent Detwiler’s Dismissal from Grace Community Church.


Moreover, Dave and the entire SGM Board used you as a “character witness” for their deceit by stating in no uncertain terms your endorsement of the three panel approach.  This you flatly and unambiguously denied on January 25 during our phone conversation.  That means one of three things.  1) You lied to me.  2) Dave and the Board lied to everyone.  3) All of you lied.  I have no reason to believe you have been untruthful.  I have every reason to believe Dave and the Board have been untruthful.

Here is what needs to be done.  If you lied or misrepresented the truth in any way, please get back to me by noon on Tuesday.  You are welcome to call and ask forgiveness. 

If you have been truthful, you must immediately confront the SGM Board for their deceit and ask them to publicly repent and confess their duplicity. 

If they are unwilling, you must inform the public that the SGM Board lied about your endorsement, etc.  People must know you did not support the three panel approach, nor were you involved in creating the approach contrary to what the SGM Board has told everyone.  

My Appeal for Boldness

After our two hour phone call last month, I sent you the following email appealing for boldness and underscoring again my central concern.

From: Brent Detwiler 
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 5:42 PM
To: Ted Kober
Cc: Edgar Keinath; Ken Sande
Subject: My Central Concern and Appeal for Boldness
Yesterday during our phone call you asked me to articulate my central concern for C.J., Dave and SGM.  Here it is in a nutshell.  It is an excerpt from a recent blog post.

Another Illustration of Dave Harvey’s Deceit (Tuesday, January 24, 2012 at 5:09 PM)

Is anyone addressing Dave Harvey’s deceit?  C.J.’s deceit?  Mickey’s deceit?  The SGM Board’s deceit?  I don’t know but I sure hope so!  If not, Sovereign Grace Ministries will continue to meet with God’s opposition.     

This must be priority number one for Ambassadors of Reconciliation, Peacemakers, the CLC pastors, the SGM pastors, the SGM administrative staff, and the nine men who served on the three panels back in December.  Dave needs to be held accountable for his blatant and repeated lying, deceit, manipulation and spin.  His actions can’t be ignored.  Those who really care about the future of SGM will address him head on and call for a thorough investigation.

I am concerned for the SGM Board with respect to many issues.  For example, their heavy handed leadership, self-appointment as Board Members (i.e., picked by C.J. and Dave), secretive control of the present process, hypocrisy, excessive devotion to C.J. and absence of accountability beyond themselves.  But my greatest concern is for the fundamental lack of integrity they have demonstrated time and again.  Especially, under Dave’s interim leadership.  Anyone who allows him to continue in this role shows himself to be a fool…

In your report to the SGM Board, I hope you will address ethical concerns and not just polity concerns.  I‘ve asked Ken Sande to do the same in the past.  I hope he joins you.  This is the greatest service you can provide Sovereign Grace Ministries.  You are well qualified to do this having observed us for nine months, interviewed approximately 150 people, provided mediation for alienated parties, had countless conversations, and read a couple thousand pages of documented concerns.  People throughout the nation and world anticipate you will define and address patterns of sin and not limited your report to morally neutral topics.  For instance, I think you must comment on the extensive deceit, heavy handed leadership, and idolatrous devotion to C.J. by the Board and others to mention a few.  Feel free to reject my findings as fallacious if that is your reasoned perspective but please don’t avoid these topics regarding godliness and qualifications for ministry.

As I said yesterday, the SGM Board needs to be redemptively exposed in public by those with influence.  No one with influence has been willing to do this in public and few have been willing to do it in private.  Christian celebrities have made light of C.J.’s sins.  As a result, C.J. and the SGM Board have gotten away with murder to use a metaphor.  Nothing has changed.  Two out of the three panel reports were horrendous.  One was decent dealing with Larry Tomczak but it did not address the long standing patterns of anger and resentment in C.J.’s life that lead to abuse.  Now C.J. has returned as President and the SGM Board has acknowledged no wrong doing of any kind to anyone.  A grand cover-up continues.  Humanly speaking you are the last hope.  Otherwise, all these injustices will go unaddressed, corruption will continue and grow, and SGM will increasingly come under the judgment of God.  That is not what anyone desires but it is happening before our very eyes.   

I pray the Lord will fill you with the Holy Spirit enabling you take bold steps in exposing evil.  Thank you for your compassionate listening, kind encouragement and godly prayer yesterday.  Like our last conversation it was an edifying experience.

The Board’s Deceitful Representation of Ted Kober and AoR

Let me go into more detail now.  During our phone call I carefully questioned you about the exact nature of your involvement in designing the three panel approach.  I came back to this subject a second time and walked through it again.  I told you I did not want to misrepresent you.  Then I sent you the following email before I posted Another Example of Dave Harvey’s Deceit.   That is how I search out the facts. 

From: Brent Detwiler 
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 8:50 AM
To: Ted Kober
Subject: Edit Statement 
Importance: High

Is there anything you would change about this statement because it is inaccurate?  I’ll be posting it this morning.

Dave says Ambassadors of Reconciliation “commissioned three panels-each consisting of three SGM pastors.”  Three days ago, I talked to Ted Kober about his role in detail.  I asked him if AOR helped create the three panel approach.  He said no.  I asked if he commended the approach.  He said no.  I asked him if he supported the approach.  He said he didn’t express support or a lack of support.  He remained neutral because he did not feel it was his place to take a position since the SGM Board devised the plan entirely on their own.  Ted did not help to create this plan and he did not in any way “commission” the three panels.  SGM acted independent of AOR but the SGM Board wants you to believe otherwise. 


You responded to my January 26 & 28 emails on February 4.  I’ve excerpted your most relevant comments for brevity and clarity below.  But let me make a several comments. 

First, you may be correct that Dave didn’t claim you “commissioned” the three panels but that is not at all the point.  He did claim you developed and endorsed it.

Second, I asked if you were “neutral” in reference to the three panel approach.  It was my word choice, not your word choice but in response to my question you clearly articulated your neutrality.  You said you did not take a position one way or the other. 

Third, you state, “The Board designed the process before telling AoR what it planned to do.”  I tend to believe you but that is in complete contradiction to what the SGM Board has repeatedly said.  Therein lays their deceit. 

Fourth, the Board also lied about Bryce's involvement.  He did not “establish” the narrow questions.  I verified this in writing with Ted and followed up with him at the panel hearing in the presence of Mark Prater, Warren Boettcher and Ron Boomsma.  I then pointed out this deceit to Mark, who is an SGM Board Member, and asked him to confront Dave and correct the lie.  Like always, nothing happened!  Please read, Trust – The One Thing that Changes Everything.


Fifth, I have always sought out the truth from Dave, C.J., the SGM Board, and others.  Countless times I have contacted them and asked for clarification or correction on many issues including points of disagreement.  They don’t answer!  They hide behind a veil of secrecy.  They refuse to give honest and accountable answers.  In light of this, I find your exhortation offensive since I’ve been faithful to approach them.  Furthermore, I didn’t need to ask Dave what he meant in this case.  He wrote clearly and repeatedly.     

Sixth, you did not deny any of my recollections above regarding the accuracy of your comments about not supporting or endorsing the three panel approach.  Here’s the point. “SGM acted independent of AoR but the SGM Board wants you to believe otherwise.” 

Here is your statement. 

“Thank you [Brent] for asking for my review before posting your comment.  A few thoughts in response to your proposed statement.  As I re-read Dave’s statement, I did not understand Dave to say that AoR commissioned the panels…. Better yet, ask Dave yourself what he meant.  Scripture directs us to first speak directly to the person with whom we disagree (e.g., Matthew 18:15; Galatians 6:1-2)…. From your statement proposed in your email, I don’t remember saying, “He [Ted] remained neutral because he did not feel it was his place to take a position since the SGM Board devised the plan entirely on their own.”  (Of course, I may not recall precisely what I said -- our conversation was about 2 hours long.)…. I don’t know whether the Board designed the process “entirely on their own.”  If I said that, I may not be correct.  The Board designed the process before telling AoR what it planned to do (the board did ask us about the process before they implemented it), but I don’t know if others were involved.  Because AoR was working on the Group Reconciliation Assistance process, we did not want to be involved with the [original] adjudication or [three] panel process.” (Ted Kober, February 4, 2012)


I responded with amazement.  I didn’t understand how you could be so unaware of Dave’s comments and devices.  I still don’t. 

From: Brent Detwiler 
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2012 4:29 PM
To: Ted Kober
Cc: Edgar Keinath
Subject: RE: Edit Statement

Brief for now.  How can you be so unaware?  Dave has emphatically stated you “helped,” “recommended,” “affirmed,” and “endorsed” the entire three panel approach.

From: Brent Detwiler 
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2012 4:40 PM
To: Ted Kober
Cc: Edgar Keinath
Subject: RE: Edit Statement

He also said that the SGM Board worked with you in order “to develop and launch an alternative process” (i.e., the three panel approach).


Here are the proofs regarding Dave’s comments taken from the SGM website.    

First, Dave says the Board worked with you to develop, launch and define the three panel approach.  You told me none of these things were true.

Evaluating Brent Detwiler’s allegations

 Dave Harvey 

“On October 13 we informed readers here that Brent Detwiler had declined participation in a formal adjudication to try his allegations against C.J. Mahaney.  We also said that we would work with Ambassadors of Reconciliation, adjudication facilitator Bryce Thomas, and SGM pastors to develop and launch an alternative [three panel] process.  We’ve done that, and I’ll outline the plan in a moment…. Meanwhile, we had been working with those mentioned above to define an alternative to seriously examine the substance of Brent’s allegations.  In recent weeks we developed a plan together, and in the last few days we discussed it with our pastoral teams…. The board will also commission three panels (1 board member and 2 senior pastors per panel), each guided by Bryce Thomas, for an internal review.” 


Second, Dave says you helped set up the three panel process in advance.  You told me you knew nothing about the process until after it was finished.  Dave also said you actively recommended and approved the use of one SGM Board Member and two SGM pastors as jurors.  Most importantly, Dave says you endorsed the entire process as fair and impartial including the use of extremely narrow questions.  You denied helping, approving or endorsing the process.  All you acknowledged to me was providing a little feedback to a few questions asked by Dave AFTER the entire process was set up without your involvement or help. 

What are we doing about the allegations against C.J.?

 Dave Harvey 

“That’s the big question, isn’t it?  How is Sovereign Grace’s board handling the allegations that Brent Detwiler has brought against C.J. Mahaney?  We know that you care about this a lot.  We also care about this a lot, and we are taking Brent’s allegations seriously.  We don’t want to ignore the many accusations that now sit in the public mind.  We want to get this right.  Brent’s documents require impartial examination and C.J. deserves a fair hearing. 

“So with the help of Ted Kober from Ambassadors of Reconciliation and under the direction of an independent facilitator named Bryce Thomas, we’ve set up the following process…. Three committees have been formed, each one responsible for answering one key question established by the independent facilitator…. Each committee is made up of two pastors from within SGM and one member of the SGM board.  Both AOR and the facilitator recommended a panel of three and affirmed this composition…. Is this a perfect process?  No, of course not.  We never could come up with a perfect process.  But we believe that this is a fair, impartial process.  The fact that it has been endorsed by both the independent facilitator and the team from AOR gives us confidence that the questions before each panel will be answered fairly and judiciously.”


Third, Dave claims the SGM Board sought your counsel but you told me you provided no counsel in helping create the process.  He also says you affirmed the entire three panel process.  You explicitly told me you did not affirm anything such thing.  Furthermore, Dave cites your involvement as evidence the integrity of the process was further protected.  That is pure spin.   

An announcement regarding C.J. Mahaney

 Dave Harvey 

“To put our decision [C.J.’s return to the office of President] in context, shortly before the interim Board began its work, C.J. took a voluntary leave of absence to avoid even the appearance of influencing his evaluation.  To further protect the integrity of the process, the interim Board sought the counsel and affirmation of an outside conciliation ministry, Ambassadors of Reconciliation (AOR).

“With C.J. on leave and AOR involved, the review process took the following form…. We then commissioned three panels—each consisting of three SGM pastors—to evaluate C.J.’s involvement in the three central events of Brent’s allegations…. They did an exceptional job with their unenviable assignment and we’re grateful to them for the many hours they invested in this process.”


I have much more to say in response to the remainder of your February 4 correspondence.  Lord willing I will send that to you tomorrow but this first part is most urgent.   

Therefore, please let me know if you have lied.  Please let me know if you will confront the SGM Board if you have not lied.  Please let me know if you will expose the SGM Board if they do not respond with public repentance and confession. 

I need your answers by noon on Tuesday.   

Thank you,


PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend