Divine Healing or Divine Death: Recent Fatalities in Faith Assembly

Hello and welcome to another episode of the William Branham Historical Research Podcast. I'm your host, John Collins, the author and founder of William Branham Historical Research at William-Branham.org and with me I have my co-host, minister and friend, Chino Ross, pastor and the voice of the understanding scripture and truth by Chino D Ross, YouTube channel. Chino it's good to be back and to talk about things that I guess the best way to put it is it's going to be a little bit sad today. The episode that we're talking about and we briefly discussed it before talking through this

today and it reminds me. I know I keep going back to it but this book that I wrote militant Christian extremism, a critical examination of John Alexander Dauy. So Dauy is the prototype for everything that we're going to talk about today. The prototype for all of the healing revival, latarane movement. In fact, there were key figures in the movement who were strong supporters, promoters, teachers of Dauy's doctrines and I just can't help but think about that as as we get into the subject we're talking about today. Picture the scene. This is back in the 1800s. Northern Indiana actually

had a tie into this. I don't know if you knew that or not but there were a big concentration of the Dauy's sect right there in Northern Indiana. The most of it was in Chicago obviously but it was spread all over the United States and there was a point in time in which before they got Zion City they were in Chicago. They had a very poorly structured facility for the sick people to go into in a regular neighborhood and the neighbors were complaining to the police because people were being escorted out of the building. Some of them sick,

afflicted, invalid, some of them crippled, couldn't walk and booted out into the mud in the cold freezing. There were neighbors that were helping the people out of their condition. Some of them just lying there on the streets. Some of them were dying and they were being taken by the undertaker at night into the morgue and all of this turned into this big fiasco because here is a guy who's claiming that he has the divine power by God through the people's faith to heal themselves and it goes to the court systems and the court is trying to determine

what happened here. What is... this mess and why is this guy doing this? What does he actually believe? And as he faces the court system and the judge, what he preaches on Sunday doesn't really match what he tells in the court of law. He's trying to, you know, avoid any prosecution, et cetera. But the followers see him as a martyr, even though what he's answering and what's being published in the newspapers is not at all what he's teaching. And so the people actually supported him stronger after the criminal trial.

And, you know, he, he ended up getting out of most of it. He ended up, I think he had to pay a few fines. And eventually they moved on to, to Zion City Illinois where the cult came and became a big, big force in the United States. But this was the setup for what became the healing revival. Basically, Pentecostalism is a result of this. Charles Fox Parham went into this camp. He learned what Dowie was doing, how Dowie made his millions of dollar fortune. And he brought this into Pentecostalism, FF Bosworth, who was a leader in Dowie's sect, trained and mentored William

Brannum in the healing revivals. And so as, as the chain of people and progression go through time, it ends up through William Brannum, Brannum, you know, influenced Hobart Freeman. Hobart Freeman, now what we're talking about today is very similar. We have deaths, we have court trials, we have this big mass, and it's a lot to untangle. It's amazing, the parallels that you and Charles Paisley have been able to help everyone draw by, you know, the research that you've done and that Charles has done on his own going back to Dowie. I don't remember Hobart mentioning Dowie, but,

you know, all the other figures that he definitely mentioned. I have good news and I have bad news today, John. The good news is that I'm alive and well and feel pretty good. And I think, well, I know you're alive, but it looks like you're doing well and you're okay. The bad news is we've had more deaths in Northern Indiana. Wow. And you know, we have these defenders of Hobart.

We still have people defending him and it never ceases to amaze me why they're going to continue to do this and have these deaths. So I know this year and I'm just talking about Northern Indiana and I'm just talking about what I've been made aware of. Someone said we had another preventable infant death and the woman said that makes nine. Now I don't know in what time frame these nine deaths have occurred, but I know that this is just a small part of Dr. Freeman's outreach. And Indiana, I mean, his, his, the extent of his outreach

which goes everywhere. And I remind people again, we're 40 years later. I remind people again, you know, we've done 30 or more podcasts documenting this stuff about this man. And we have people to this day who still want to back him or justify him and they will say it in ways like, well, nobody's perfect.

But we're not talking about that. You know, they always have a strong man argument. The very things that we are not talking about. We've not talked about anybody being perfect. We've just talked about people being honest and accountable.

And you know, whenever the deaths were happening during Hobart lifetime, he glossed over them and it was in a very deceptive and disingenious way in order to get the people to take their eyes off of the reality of what was happening around them and see what he wanted them to see.

And he would say things like, well, it's not like people aren't dying in the local Baptist church. It's not like no one has ever died in a Presbyterian or Methodist church. And he would say it's not like the doctors and the hospitals haven't lost a baby or two along the way and trying to deliver them.

But you know, that is just sheer foolishness and deception on his part. Of course, people have died in another church, but it's normally not preventable deaths. They were gonna die regardless. And of course, babies have been lost in the hospital.

But I think we can see that's the way Hobart tried to manipulate the information being fed to the people where they would go, yeah, that's right. You know, the doctors, they've lost people and yeah, the Baptist, they've lost people.

So we're not so bad after all. That was the goal that Hobart was after. But I'm telling you, there was just so much blood on the hands of faith assembly. 40 years later, people are still trying to follow that message.

And so I just speak to the people that are out there, I'm sure that the vast majority of the faith assembly population, if not every single person to a man, is anti-abortion.

And what they say if they're anti-abortion is no, that's not the mother or the father, the parent's rights to decide what happens with that unborn. Who speaks for the child? Well, I think the same argument could be used now.

Who speaks for these infants who don't get to make that choice? And look, Dr. Freeman still has three elderly daughters who are alive. I don't know about Becky, the youngest, what her opinions are.

police are, but I know the older two, Pam and Kathy are still following their father's teaching about faith, about healing, about Kidian's army, about all of this stuff. And they could do so much good for the movement, rather than being in alignment with their father's doctrine, which is to this day, my point, I'm trying to emphasize to this day is still killing people.

They could do so much good if they would stand up. If they would let their voices be heard and say, look, and I understand it's their father, but look, I don't want to speak against my father.

However, we're having people die, you know, we're actually having people die. We've had hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people die. And when their father died, that did not bring it all to an end.

It actually slowed things down because the church broke up. People went in different directions. A lot of people got out of it, had their eyes opened, but there is still this fraction of the remnant out there, not just in Northern Indiana, but spread everywhere, who still to this day feel like that if they go to a doctor, tape medicine, they have definitely sinned against God, and it's even possible that they've sinned in such a way that they can't be forgiven or that they can, that they're not going to enter into heaven.

And you know, John, what's interesting is this is, this was not even Dr. Freeman's position 10 years earlier. You take any message in 1984, this is the year that he died. You compare it to any message in 1974 or 73 or 72 or 71 or in the late 60s and there are tapes that go back, you know, that are available online to the late 60s.

You compare the message that he was preaching in 1984, the message he was preaching in 1974, and here is a huge difference that you see. Back in those days, although he definitely believed in divine healing, and although he definitely believed in healing, no doctors and no medicine, you say, well, what's the difference?

The huge difference is he had friends that he would have speak in the church, that he would talk to, that he would recognize, that he would acknowledge that he would actually boast about and say, I have spirit-filled friends who are doctors, who are dentists, who are pharmacists, who are nurses, who are veterinarians, who are insurance agents, who are loan officers at the bank.

He would say, I've got friends, but they're going to loan you money, but they don't borrow money themselves. That's the Romans 13, 8, no man, no man, anything, but going back to the doctor part.

He'd say, I've got surgeons who are spirit-filled, they'll cut on you, but they won't cut on any of their family members. And so my point is, by the end of his ministry in life, that was a huge sin and evil to have anything to do with medical science.

But back in the early days, I mean, it was no problem at all. So when was he right? When was he wrong? Did he go from air to truth or truth to air? Well, if this is God's anointed man, and whatever it comes out of his mouth is thus saith the Lord, I would think that we should expect that to be consistent throughout his life in ministry, but it most definitely wasn't.

Here is for everyone's benefit. This was a famous track that was on the book Tables of All of the Churches back then. In the church that I was a part of, in Memphis, Tennessee, this track by Dr. Sneed, Dr. Joseph A. Sneed was an orthopedic surgeon.

He was trained at Duke, and we actually have, I've got a current, or not a current, as a couple of year old picture of him. John, if you want to show that, a wonderful man. He was in the medical field for 60 years.

He's the one who wrote this track. May I refer you? It's actually their handwriting where he says up here on the top of my copy. I have one of his copies where he said he had to change some of the writing because they had an additional birth in their family.

He was at this time an orthopedic surgeon in America's Georgia, and he gained somewhat of an audience because he believed to a tea, everything that Dr. Freeman taught. On the back of the track, the list of Bible verses, and even the order in which they're found is exactly what he learned from Dr. Freeman.

I mean, he believed Hobart. He heard Hobart back in 1971. The early, early member, not a faith assembly, but of following of Freeman's message in ministry. And when everywhere, still in his medical capacity, but believing what Hobart taught, well, look, he didn't stay believing that.

I mean, he stayed in the medical field. He retired in 2020. I mean, that's how long he's still alive today. I think he's in West Virginia's where he ended up practicing. He never took the route of no doctors, no medicine, that medicines, the names of the medicines come from evil spirits, and you've got to cast these demons out.

When I look at all this, I know Hobart's message changed dramatically over the years. It went from a positive message of healing to a negative message of anti-doctors and anti-medicine, which brings up a very interesting...

interesting question and passage, John, and that's the well-known verse, everyone knows it, where Paul is referring to Luke as the beloved physician, that's in Colossians 4 and verse 14. That was always a struggle for Hobart to deal with.

And so what Hobart would do with Colossians 4, 14, where Paul is actually sending greetings to this church at Colossi, a church he did not found, a church that he had never visited, he never knew any of these people face to face, he'd never met them before.

It's one of his so-called prison epistles that he's writing from Rome to the saints at Colossi. Luke is with him because he's sending greetings to the Colossian Christians and he said greetings also from Luke, the beloved physician.

That's not a past tense thing that he used to be a doctor, that he was a doctor, that he gave up his medical practice. So you say, well, how would Hobart deal with that?

Well, Hobart would say, and correctly so, that Luke was the author of the gospel that bore his name, as well as the early history of the church in his early infancy, the call that we call the Book of Acts, and nowhere does Luke record any miracles or any healings by any other means in supernatural, and that is true.

And he would also say that you don't ever see Luke pulling his little black bag out and doctoring on anybody, and that is true also. However, both of those are simply arguments from silence and nothing more, and you can only go so far with an argument from silence.

But the fact of the matter is that at the end of Hobart Freeman's ministry, there is simply no way he would have been able to ever refer to anyone in his church or any acquaintance of his as a beloved physician.

If he would have said beloved physician, he would have chuckled afterwards so that everyone would laugh like, oh, we know he used to be a doctor, but he is not anymore. There is nothing in that passage in Colossians 4 to lead us to think anything but that Luke was still a medical doctor.

And that is just the way that it is. I happen to be someone who believes in healing. I believe in divine healing, but that is a part of God's word. And just because I have a belief, we don't have the right to go and chop something out of the Bible that we don't like that makes our position, you know, uncomfortable or that we're uncomfortable with that passage.

And I know that he was uncomfortable with that passage. He scurred at that and he did not want to address that full on. My point is saying all of this. is simply a virtue of the fact that God has that in the Bible, that it's actually there.

He didn't have to put it there, you know? By virtue of the fact that it's there, it's there for a reason, it's there for a purpose. And maybe it's there, even though definitely the miracles we see in the New Testament were definitely supernatural, we don't find any where Luke's operating on anybody.

I'm totally on board with that. However, it's there for a purpose, and maybe it is to keep a little balance in people's thoughts. You know, whenever I left the cult of William Brannum, I was curious, what was it that we actually believe?

There is no statement of faith as you have in many of other churches, and I was trying to just create some article talking about the things that we believe and why we believed them, and what Brannum and some of the other men said about them.

And I found that was a very difficult task, because like you mentioned with Hobart, what he believed in the early years, in no way, shape or form, matched what he believed in the latter years.

And so I got to studying the doctrine and trying to understand just doctrinally speaking, where did he stand doctrinally? And what I found was that the doctrines themselves, many of them, had nothing to do with the Bible, and I was trying to keep a tally of which ones were based off of the Bible, and which ones were just his opinion, because sadly, in these movements, the opinion of the leader takes almost the same quality of doctrine as they view the Bible.

They view it with such high standards, the opinions, right? And what I came to realize over time, as I'm studying this, many of the doctrines that we believe were solely for the purpose of defending the nonsense against somebody who had no understanding of what it was that we believed in why.

In other words, like you mentioned, the people were saying, well, people die in the doctors in the hospitals all the time. Well, that was one of the defenses that we also had. We shared this.

And whenever Brannum would get on his divine healing rants, he was quoting, I'm sure he was quoting Bosworth. Bosworth was quoting Dowie. And Dowie's main primary doctrine is that you people are dying in the hospitals anyway.

Come give me your money, and I will feel you a different way, and he wasn't telling people that they were still dying under his care. So, and in fact, I think the numbers were slightly worse in his sect than they were in the hospital.

Knowingly, some of the people could have been cured had they gone to hospital. But we were trained and manipulated with doctrines of defense. And that unfortunately became towards the latter years that became the gospel.

So whenever somebody's coming trying to witness you, what is the gospel of Jesus Christ, From one of these other churches and you're talking to a cult member, the instant response is the defense doctrines that was given to them and indoctrinated by the cult.

And you can easily view this. If you go to my YouTube channel, you'll find anywhere where there's any mention of Brannum and some nonsense doctrine, you're going to find people that are parroting the same phrases over and over and over again, where these phrases are part of the doctrine.

And that's why they're doing it. They've been indoctrinated. That is their gospel. And the question becomes, especially when we're seeing people who are still dying in this cult, is a gospel of death as good as the gospel of Jesus Christ that's in the Bible.

That's something that you really need to think through. Absolutely. Great comparison there, John, and concerning Colossians 4, 14. You know, remember, and I want to remind everyone, I was brought up in this. I didn't stay in it long, but I believe everything that the Freeman Knight followers out there today still believe, I believe at one time, 40 something years ago.

So I'm well aware of it. And so when Colossians, when someone outside the group would mention, well, what about Luke being a doctor, then immediately the response is just what I gave you. Well, Luke's one who wrote Luke and Acts, and he didn't record anything, the supernatural healings.

So, you know, that's like, that becomes the doctrine, then, as you just said, that defense of that verse becomes part of the doctrine rather than see what happened with me early on in my life.

I heard that argument, and I thought, that's actually true. That is definitely true. Luke does not record any kind of healing by medical science. That's actually true. You know, I accept that, but I said, but that still doesn't deal with the verse.

All you told me was what it doesn't mean. Now tell me what it does mean. Why is Luke allowed to be a doctor? Why does Paul put him in his position as a physician in a good light, or at least he doesn't put it in a negative light?

At the bare minimum, to be a member of faith assembly, you would have to have put Luke's position, his occupation as a medical doctor, you would have to put that in a negative light.

You simply could not be a member in good standing and talk about Dr. Luke, meaning medical doctor Luke, not PhD or THD, but MD, Dr. Luke. And so I just, early in my life, I said, well, that's not a fair dealing with the text.

You know, goes back John to what we talked about recently with hermeneutics and exegesis. It's so easy because you want to believe what you want to believe that you look for proof. rather than truth whenever you're reading the Bible and I had told people in every area of our lives and I include my own life. I'm a child of God and a student of the Bible and I'm also a teacher of the Bible, but we're all in this together. Nobody has any leg up on anybody else. And so I think of this very deeply as I read the Bible. When we come

to Scripture, we all have our own presuppositions. Some of them are wrong. Some of them are right. Some of them have been influenced greatly by earlier churches and teachers and ministers in our lives. And some of them are just from our own thought patterns or interpretation as we're reading the Bible. But when we read the Bible, we have to read it for the truth and not proof. And I told people, if you're reading along in the Bible and all of a sudden you come to a verse and you read it and you have like this uncomfortable feeling and it

goes like this, I wish it didn't say that or I wish it wasn't written exactly. You know what that means? There's a problem within me. It's not within the Bible. It's something about the theological system that I have already embedded in me. There's something about me that when I come to that, it doesn't square well with my system. And that's a hundred percent the reason why. So if I had this strong, which I did at one time, this strong, I believe everything Dr. Freeman said, then when I come to a passage like that, you know, you just

kind of want to skip over it. You really honestly do. And if you'd be honest with yourself, you would admit, I mean, I'm being honest with my audience, with your audience, there would be passages that I would just want to skip over because it doesn't square well with my theology. And what I'm telling everyone regarding healing, regarding anything, regarding eschatology, when you think the rapture is going to be, when you think Christ is going to return, if you get to a passage and you are uncomfortable camping out there very long, it's not because there's anything wrong in the passage, it's because there's something

wrong in you. I'll give you another example while wrong is whole subject because it is a wonderful one. And it is the woman with the issue of blood in Mark chapter five, famous story of famous healing. Jesus is, and I'll just try to narrate it from memory and people can read it for themselves.

Jesus was going to heal, race from the dead, actually, the daughter of J.I. Riss. Well, on the way, in this strong of people, there is a woman who's had a blood condition for 12 years. We don't know exactly what it was.

buzz, but it was severe and it was a prolonged. And she had seen and witnessed enough of what was going on in Jesus' ministry and the lives of the people around him that she had come to the conclusion, this man has power and this man can heal me. I think the text actually says she said within herself. And so you get all of this name and inclaim it stuff. It's interesting how these guys will manipulate the Bible to teach what it is they want to teach.

But it's not like she declared, like she said within herself. That's what the text said. She said, so if I say it, that means I get it. No, it's just she's talking to herself in her own faults and realizing, watching everything that Jesus had done, I know. If he can do what I have seen him do, he's open blind eyes. He's cast demons out of people. I bet if I could get close enough to him, I'm too afraid to ask for anything, but I bet if I could just touch the hymn of his garment, I could probably be healed. And you know what? That's exactly what happened. She got close enough,

reached out and touched the hymn of his garment. But let me back up. In Mark's narration of that, Mark gives us the background to her story. And that was because someone in the Christian community must have interviewed her after the event. And this became common knowledge. Mark picked it up and Mark was able to include it in his gospel. Mark said that this woman, after having suffered this condition for 12 years, he says that she had suffered many things of many physicians had spent all she had and was nothing better but rather grew worse. So do you know where we're going with

this? Hobart jumped on that like a wild stallion and said the Bible proves right there that God has a negative attitude toward physicians, medicine, and medical science. And there are other passages like Aiza who was disease in his feet. He sought not to the Lord but to the physicians.

That's in the Old Testament. But we don't have time for all of these. Let's just stay with Mark chapter five. So it doesn't tell us. It just says that she had suffered many things of many physicians had spent all she had was nothing better but rather grew worse. So we as a Bible student are allowed to try to determine what may we infer from that. One of the things you may infer from that is that God hates doctors. I mean that you could infer that. That that is being implied in the text that medical science.

and doctors and medicine that going down that path is wrong because this woman suffered many things of them and that this is a wrong path to go down. You could draw that inference but you know there's another inference you could also draw which I think is the correct one because I think it fits the context of the whole passage here and that is this and this is my belief on that that that's not a negative commentary against medical science. When you already have that in your mind that doctors are evil then you look for passages that you can

justify that with. If you don't have that in your mind and you're simply reading that what I would take away from that is that Mark as the author and gospel writer is simply trying to show by every way he can by the avenues that she took by the amount of money that she spent by how long she had had this condition he tells us she had had it 12 years he is simply by all of those means trying to show us the hopeless and helpless situation this poor woman was in that it wasn't a commentary on anything else except she was

absolutely hopeless and desperate and Mark is trying to show in light of that in light of this hopeless and helpless situation this woman was in here comes the son of God and the glorious grace and kindness and healing power of Jesus and all she had to do after 12 years and all she spent and going to the doctors all she had to do was reach out and touch the hem of his garment and she was made hope. Have you ever wondered how the Pentecostal movement started or how the progression of modern Pentecostalism transitioned through the latter

reign charismatic and other fringe movements into the new apostolic reformation you can learn this and more on William Brandham historical research's website William-brandham.org on the book's page of the website you can find the compiled research of John Collins Charles Paisley Stephen MacGummery John McKinnon and others with links to the paper audio and digital versions of each book you can also find resources and documentation on various people and topics related to those movements if you want to contribute to the cause you can support the podcast by clicking the contribute button at the top and as

always be sure to like and subscribe to the audio or video version that you're listening to or watching on behalf of William-brandham historical research we want to thank you for your support you know one of the most famous events in the Laterane Revivals was this debate between a Baptist minister and FF Bosworth and William-brandham they were debating divine healing And on the Baptist side, we were told that the Baptist were against divine healing, and so therefore they're the bad guys.

And that William Brannum and FF Bosworth defended the faith and see in this type of movement, they have combined what they call divine healing with the plan of salvation, and so the two become one and the same in these movements.

And so in effect, we were trained and manipulated to believe that they were defending the faith, the Christian faith against the Baptists. And years later, after leaving this, I realized what a soldier of the faith, this Baptist minister actually was, the debate resulted in when you look at William Brannum's photographs and you do a search online, you see that halo photograph.

The resulting photograph, the one that captured the memory for all of the cult, all of Laterane, and even today in the NAR, they referenced that photograph, saying that it was a supernatural light instead of a light above his head, which we have proven beyond the shadow of a doubt, they had lighting in there.

But according to the story, William Brannum said it was the only photograph that got allowed to be taken. Every other photograph of that event was destroyed. The one would develop. And so to my surprise, when I finally left this thing and I do a search and I find the newspaper, there's all kinds of newspapers with photographs and pictures of this event that's going on, right?

Well, the moral of the story, if you follow from the Baptist side, is that the Baptist ministers gathered together and they said, we have to put a stop to this because these guys, not only are they swindling people out of their money in the name of the gospel, there are people who are really sick that could get help.

Some of them might die if they don't get help. And so there was this consortium that they picked one guy who's going to defend the actual Christian faith against these stage acts. And his name was Reverend Best, you can go to my website and you can type it in.

Anyway, years later, after learning that everything that I had been trained to believe is false, I come to find out Mr. Best actually wrote books on divine healing and believed in it. He just didn't believe in the stage acts.

So he was actually defending the faith against the stage acts. And the funniest part of this whole story is at that event where we were taught that Brannum and Bosworth were defending the faith, the members of the people who were on the divine healing side broke out into an actual literal fist fight with the people who were the Baptist.

And they had to escort Reverend Best out because they were trying to actually physically do him harm. and carry this forward into the doctrine that we believed. We believed that you had to have faith for your healing and God alone could heal you.

We were disc, it wasn't so bad as Hobart did. We were discouraged from taking medicine and to this day, that's in the back of my mind. I rarely take even Tylenol whenever I'm, you know, I have a headache or something.

But here's the interesting part. We placed value of doctrine over scripture, as I've said earlier. We believed the doctrine, we didn't care what the scripture said. And one of the passages that I always go back to when people talk about this divine healing debate.

For years and years, I had acid reflux disease. And if you've ever had it or know what it is, this is a terrible, terrible thing to deal with. And we were also manipulated by the fundamentalist movement of the United States joined with the T totalers and we were not allowed to drink alcohol.

Yet the Bible says, drink a little wine for your stomach. There is an actual Bible verse that tells you how to take medicine. And if you think about what's going on in the ancient world, they had very, very poor water quality.

People got sick on their stomach often. And wine had many healing properties for your stomach, right? I learned later after, I no longer have acid reflux disease. It's totally gone. But I learned after that wine aids in digestion.

It supports your gut microbiome. It has antibacterial effects that go on in your stomach. And one of the attributes, if you can read searches on this, you can read studies on this online. For certain people, it gets rid of acid reflux disease.

Yet if I were to still be in the movement, I would not be allowed to drink the wine because it's a sin to do what was instructed in the Bible. They placed the doctrine above the scripture.

But all of this to say, here's an example in the Bible of using medicine. Back then, wine was the equivalent to a medicine for this particular problem. You had a stomach problem, drink a little wine.

And whenever I heard, I went back and I tried to search out, well, what did they say about that? How do you avoid that? Because that's an alcoholic drink. And the excuses for drinking wine back then is just unbelievable.

Like, it was okay for them back then, but today we know better, my brother. I'm going to avoid the temptation, John, or I'll never get through today to go down that trail. I would love to because that is the context in which Paul said that Timothy was often sick.

He said, because you're often sick, then I want you to do this. And so, yeah, I'm going to... that temptation, but I just hope people, that's an excellent example, as long as in addition to these other ones we just talked about, I just hope people will, I don't know, just consider what I said about Mark 5.

There's another way to interpret Mark 5 than lambasting medical science. I don't think that's what the original author of Scripture had in mind. I just think it's a great verse, if you are anti medical science and hospitals and doctors, it's a great verse for you to go to.

Anyway, moving along, it's just amazing to me that Hobart was allowed to get away with this for as long as he was, and I guess it's equally amazing that he ever got caught. He got caught because of Pam LaMini and her death, but that the man actually got caught was indicted, arrested, fingerprinted, booked, and jailed at 10.30 a.m. on Thursday morning, October the 18th, 1984, still just blows me away.

And you know, he was right back in the pulpit saying, you know, nothing about the Mini family, I'm so sorry for them, nothing about, let's put the brakes on. You had so many children die and women die and people get off their insulin and they have died.

We've had people dying left and right. Let's put the brakes on and see what's going on, what's going wrong. You know, it was never his fault, it was never the doctrine fault. It was always, oh, you didn't have enough faith or you had a cult involvement in your life or you had not renounced a drug that your parents gave you when you were three years old.

It was always that kind of search. It was never an honest, transparent search, which should have been what took place within a Christian group of people because what we are most after is God's glory and the welfare of his people, not our own doctorate, not our own views.

It's God's glory and the safety and health of our people. And it was just a completely erroneous view of God for Hobart or any of the other ministers there to have ever thought God would have been displeased with them.

Even if they still wanted to hold on to their extreme doctrine of healing to think that God would be displeased because of all these people that have died, can we just call time out for six months, let's figure things out, let's do a study, I mean people's lives are at stake here, it didn't seem to matter to them.

After Hobart had been arrested and booked and jailed and fingerprinted and then released on his own reconnaissance, he's right back in the pulpit just boasting about, well, I'll just preach from prison if I have to and God's going to set me free.

and God's going to deliver faith assembly, it was nothing about what in the world have we gotten ourselves into. You know, did we not start in the spirit as Paul said to the Galatians in chapter 3 and now we're ending in the flesh?

I don't doubt that a lot of the beginnings of faith assembly way back to early days in Claypool. I don't doubt that there was a move of God and that good things were done and said and taught.

But we tried to document as we go along, there were just the tale, tale signs of some severe insecurity in the leadership, some severe need because of his background, his personality who he was for control, there were big control issues, there were big issues of narcissism, it's just evident and listening to his 1157 tapes that he was his most important topic.

He loved to talk about himself and I think as it went along, we end up finally with this indictment and then as soon as the indictment happens, things really get tight, then they just said, we're shutting services down to just membership, they were going to close the services.

You know, I talked about that a few podcasts to go and here was a response that I had from someone who was there when this was going on, but who since then has been freed.

That's so crazy, they made the meetings close to anyone. It would be the next logical step however in the how to build a cult handbook if there were one, even though I was there and remember it, it seemed like a protection measure instead of the isolation that it was.

You know, yes, it would have seemed like a protection, we're doing this for your good because everyone outside of these four walls is evil. So we're closing down services, it's going to be just for members only and we're doing this to protect you.

They probably didn't say that, but that was what this woman who was sitting there gathered from, but even though I was there and remember it, it seemed like a protection measure instead of the isolation it was.

She said it was so not like Jesus and his open ministry. He would have invited all the skeptics in to see a miracle or two. I don't remember seeing any miracles. What a faithless lot of sinners, Freeman, have pastored.

That's not me writing that, I'm just quoting what she said and she was actually there. So with the time we have left, John, I thought we might dig in a little deeper. to this exchange between the judge who was a superior court judge by the name of Robert Berner and Hobart Freeman on the day he went to jail. Here is what the indictment actually charged Freeman with, and I will quote, that the indictment alleges that, I quote, Hobart E. Freeman did knowingly and intentionally aid, induce, or calls. Another person, James and I own Mimi, those were the parents of Pamela, because she was a minor,

to commit an offense, end of quote. And the way the Indiana statute was written, concerning aiding or inducing, it reads like this, a person who knowingly or intentionally, these are written by lawyers, so they're very precise and they're very crystal clear. A person who knowingly or intentionally aids, induces or calls is another person to commit an offense, commits that offense themselves. So if you calls, aid or induce, James and I own to commit an offense, then the way the statute reads, you have committed the offense yourself. And that's just, you know, good legal terminology. So whenever Hobart was booked on that morning, 10 30 AM, Thursday morning,

October the 18th, 1984, he went before Judge Berner. He's already been indicted by a six-member grand jury. That's what got him in the indictment, take place and got him before this judge, and into the courtroom in the first place. But the judge is obviously wanting to know the nature of the case that is about to be before him that's going to be in his courtroom. He wanted to know the content, not of what Hobart himself believed. You can believe whatever you want to believe. You know, you can literally, thankfully in this country, you can believe whatever you want to believe.

He wanted to know what did you teach? How did you affect other people's lives? Is there any aiding, inducing, causing or abetting involved here? And as I watched, both Hobart and Steve Hill and Tom Hamilton and Jeff Barnett and the people that came afterwards, as soon as they got close to the law, then all of a sudden, American law became really valuable and important to them. And they wanted to, you know, champion. Don't we have freedom of religion and freedom of speech here in this country? You know, they didn't care about this country and its freedoms until they need them.

And then all of a sudden, well, don't we have freedom of religion? Yes, you absolutely... do. Don't we have freedom of speech? Yes, you thankfully. Thankfully, you can get in the pulpit. Thankfully, we do. You absolutely do have freedom of speech, but freedom of speech is not a blank check. You know, we all know you can't go into a crowded movie theater and yell fire when there is no fire. Well, I thought I had free speech. I can say whatever I want, wherever, whenever. No, that's not what free speech means. You have free speech until it infringes on someone else's life or health

or safety. You know, if you infringe on them, then no, you cannot yell fire when there is no fire in a crowded movie theater. And so we have this interchange, this exchange between Judge Berner and Dr. Freeman, where he quizzed him, do you teach that going to a doctor is wrong or that taking medicine is wrong? You know, he wants to know if you are sharing with your congregation that to do that is wrong and that to do that would jeopardize your relationship with God or maybe your position or relationship in your church. You know, do you say that's wrong? What is it you

preach? And what Hobart said was this, I teach what the word of God teaches that Christians are to trust the Lord. You know, the whole time I'm thinking, wow, you've got you're you're going to be in national media. You have the perfect opportunity to teach the total end time message of faith, quote, unquote, before the whole world, you've got that opportunity to teach your view, the end time message of faith and healing and deliverance and how evil doctors are that they all come from the background of sorcery and witchcraft. Since you believe that's true and we need to know that,

the world doesn't know that, you've got a perfect opportunity to educate everyone and to share the gospel with everyone. Hobart said, well, what I teach is what the word of God teaches that Christians are to trust the Lord. And of course, Judge Robert Berners, no, no, no, no, no, that's not what I'm asking you. That's the kind of a vague statement there. Do you encourage people to not go to the doctor and to not take medicine? This is the bottom line. This is what he is after.

And what Hobart says is this, I just teach the Bible and people have to apply it in their own lives.

Now, I was really hoping at that time, I thought, here is the opportunity where Hobart can show honesty and integrity and the answer to the judges' questions would be yes, yes, yes, Yes. And if I didn't say it, yes, this is what I teach. And instead, he wants to, this is where the rub enters. He wants to hedge the bets now, rather than saying, I absolutely teach that sorcery and witchcraft is a background to all medical science. After all, it's a serpent on a pole. It's the devil wrapped around the pole. Remember, absolutely, this is what I teach.

And that if you go to a doctor, it's questionable. If you can't believe for your healing, how do we know you can believe for eternal life? He used that argument all the time. And you mentioned that before. That was a popular argument, because it's like, you don't know where you've got eternal life. That's in the next slide. But we can see whether you have faith for healing of a bodily illness right now. So demonstrate that. And if you can demonstrate that, then you know, you can believe you can know and we can know that you have faith for eternal life.

So I was really disappointed and I was shocked when I heard Hobart say he would not say, yes, you're wrong. That is exactly what I teach. No, he just said, I teach what the Bible teaches that God has provided healing. That is a true statement that God wants to heal. That is a true statement that God will heal his people. That is a true statement that God can heal his people.

That is a true statement. All of those are true statements. The judge is smart enough to know. See, the thing with Hobart is now he's in a courtroom. He's not up behind a podium where he has manipulation over all these people. What I wanted to hear him say is, that's exactly right, your honor. This is what I teach. So John, if we could, I have a great clip so that the people can actually hear Hobart himself. This is on a message entitled Avoiding and Unsettled Mind. Part 2, it was taught in February of 1984, the same year we're talking about. As some have been even in

this church involved in any way with medical science, you've had all of the teaching just tape after tape, message after message, the faith book about the dangers of getting involved with medical science and drugs. We don't have to rehash all of that again, but are you giving medical drugs to someone you're caring for? We dealt with that last week. The person died as a result because admitted that they were sending against the light they had. You see, dear friends, why do we have to tell you or should we have to tell you? That's the same as you taking it yourself. And with

the light you've got about divine healing and medical science, well, you can expect, you know, the chastisement to come. Are you involved in any way with handling medical supplies or medical equipment? And yet we hear of people in faith.

assembly. I've been here. I don't know how long years many times and still will see the inconsistency of ministers who claim to be teaching divine healing and then go to the doctors at the first symptom themselves and yet they're involved in it. If you don't know the answer, if you've got an old mother or a father or relative that needs medicine, if you don't know the answer that you better get in the word and get alone with the Lord and find out what you should do in a situation like that. First of all, you shouldn't get involved in situations like that. I'll just tell

you ahead. There are answers that I'm not going to supply them all to you, but if the choice for me would be giving medicine to a relative or putting them in a nursing home since they want the medicine then the choice is clear to me. I'm not going to give them that. I'm not going to be charged with them dying on my hands in my house. You can figure these things out, friends. If you bring old people into your house relatives or whatever, they have to come. You should know that already on your terms. This is a house of faith and if you get sick, we're not calling the doctor for you. We'll

pray for you if you'll believe it and so on. You have to saddle those things beforehand and yet they're people in this assembly who are paying people to nurse their mothers and give them drugs and so forth. Friends, it's only a question of time, a question of time until the boom falls on you.

You've heard the teaching over the years. You have to make the choices. But why do you want in faith assembly where it's such a hard walk? If you're not going to walk that narrow way in that hard walk, why don't you just, well, find an easier road and easier path because you're sending against the light. And you know, this is only part one or part two. You go back and listen to part one, but this he goes in order saying you cannot go to the doctor. You cannot take medicine. Then he goes to say you cannot provide medicine for other people. Then he goes on to say even to work in any

medical supply field, whether they're making rubber gloves or stainless steel instruments, you cannot work in any kind of medical supply field. And then he goes on to say, because this had been the case in the previous message, avoiding an unsettled mind, part one, you can't even take your elderly parent into your own home if they need some kind of medical care because that will bring you under God's curse. And he actually says, John, in that clip that you'll just have to send them to a nursing home. I mean, this is a Christian minister with all

the Bible's teaching of how we should care for the elderly, care for widows, orphans, the elderly and children, and especially your own parents, that if it's your own parents and they have some medical issue that's going to require medicine, that's going to require drugs.

that's going to require anything like that, you will bring yourself under the curse of God. If you bring that person into your house, you'd be better just to send them on all to the nursing home.

You know, for me, it's this simple. Paul defines in 1 Corinthians 15, what it is, what he taught as the gospel. And it's very, very simple. It is that Jesus Christ died for your sins.

He was buried. He raised on the third day. And therefore, you too can be saved. And one of the problems that I have with Hobart's movement, Bram's movement, et cetera, they kept trying to enter themselves into what they called rapturing faith.

You had to be perfect. And they would use verses that were, you know, they were Bible verses, but they would tie it into the gospel and call it gospel, such as B, therefore perfect.

Things that if you take it out of context and add it to your gospel, you're really just adding a man's opinion to your gospel. And I really don't have a problem with that. If somebody wants to add their opinion to the gospel, but it's not the gospel once you do it.

It is the gospel plus some man's opinion. It would be the same as if Hobart Freeman had said, you must believe that Jesus Christ died for your sins. He was buried and he rose on the third day.

And we all, as a people, like to watch Daffy Duck on Saturdays. That's his opinion. It's fine, it's, you know, but it's not the gospel. The way that these things are taught, they're teaching them as the gospel.

And because they're repeated over and over and over and over again, people start to mistakenly think that the gospel plus the opinion is the gospel. And they don't really go back and read. It's very easy, very plain and simple.

First, you know, Corinthians 15 goes through it pretty clearly. It's, I think it's only four verses, if I remember right, right? So this is the gospel. And people's opinion have skewed it into something that it never should have been.

And in the Daffy Duck example, you're welcome to say to the minister who's saying these things, well, that's a weird opinion, my brother. And if they had have just done that in Hobart Freeman's movement, yeah, this divine healing thing, that's a little bit weird.

You're welcome to think that opinion if you want, but as for me and my family, when we get sick, I'm gonna take him to get special care in the doctor because that's what people do.

Well, you and I know, John, it's just, it's easier said than done to say, I wish they would have thought about what the man said. The problem with that, as we know, is these cult leaders cast everything that they say as being the saith of Lord.

Yeah. They've already intimidated you with their education and bloody, bloody, blah, blah, blah. They've already intimidated you and manipulated you to the point that people who were normally would be an intelligent, reasonable, responsible person, you know, they just cave in and I understand that.

and that's the value of these podcasts, and it's why they take so long because there's just a lot to untangle. And I totally agree on your daffy duck. I'm fine with the minister saying what you want to say, just preface it with this is my opinion.

And I'll do that. I'll say, this is what the Bible teaches, and then I get to an area where it's maybe not exactly clear. And I'll say, this is the way I see it.

This is the way I see it. Well, you're welcome to see it a different way. And I've had people come to me and say what you just said was a crazy thing, Utah, are you sure you're right?

And they had to go, no, I don't think I was right, thanks for pointing that out. But it requires transparency and humility for all of us. And if people are expecting perfect ministers, they're not going to find them.

And if ministers are expecting themselves to be perfect, that's not going to happen. And we just live and learn and grow and we all work together and to God be the glory in me.

I usually try to leave my opinion out because my opinion sometimes is out there, but I do preface the things that I say that are my opinion, usually with daffy duck or bugs bunny.

But it is my opinion and I'm welcome to it and you're welcome to your opinions. So if you've enjoyed our show and you want more information, you can check us out on the web.

Find us at William-Branum.org. For more about the dark side of the new Apostolic Reformation, you can read Weaponized Religion from Christian Identity to the NAR, available on Amazon, Kindle, and Audible.