Janet Mefford accuses Pastor Mark Driscoll of plagiarizing during a heated radio interview. (Image courtesy of Mars Hill Church - http://bit.ly/17PfWfr)

Mefferd producer reportedly resigns over Mark Driscoll controversy

Janet Mefferd hosts a syndicated show that originates from KWRD-FM, The Word 100.7 FM in Dallas, TX.

Janet Mefferd hosts a syndicated show that originates from KWRD-FM, The Word 100.7 FM in Dallas, TX.

**UPDATE: Christianity Today reports that while Tyndale has defended Driscoll, Intervarsity Press says they aren't happy with it and have reached out to Driscoll for a response:

Several paragraphs from the New Bible Commentary edited by G. J. Wenham, J. A. Motyer, D. A. Carson and R. T. France published by InterVarsity Press appear in Mark Driscoll's now out of print book Trial: 8 Witnesses From 1 & 2 Peter. These improperly appeared without quotation or attribution. With proper citation the material would have been a case of fair use.

InterVarsity Press believes all writers should use great care as they do research and prepare texts for any use to make sure that proper acknowledgement is given to source material.**

**UPDATE: A phone call and email sent this afternoon to Justin Dean, Mars Hill Communications Director, have not been returned.**

**UPDATE: Janet Mefferd sent the following tweet at 2:43 pm:

The column has been updated to reflect these details.**

**UPDATE: Tyndale House Publishers and Salem Radio are "media partners."**


Religion writers at various outlets including Religion Dispatches, Patheos, and Urban Christian News, are reporting that Ingrid Schlueter, a part-time assistant producer for syndicated radio show host Janet Mefferd has resigned. According to these reports, Schlueter claims that the resignation is a result of the Mark Driscoll "situation":

I was a part-time, topic producer for Janet Mefferd until yesterday when I resigned over this situation. All I can share is that there is an evangelical celebrity machine that is more powerful than anyone realizes. You may not go up against the machine. That is all. Mark Driscoll clearly plagiarized and those who could have underscored the seriousness of it and demanded accountability did not. That is the reality of the evangelical industrial complex.

...I’ve read much speculation online, which is understandable given the confusing situation, most of it dead wrong. Being limited in what I can share, let me just say that truth tellers face multiple pressure sources these days. I hosted a radio show for 23 years and know from experience how Big Publishing protects its celebrities. Anything but fawning adulation for those who come on your show (a gift of free air time for the author/publisher by the way) is not taken well. Like Dr. Carl Trueman so aptly asked yesterday in his column at Reformation 21, does honest journalism have any role to play in evangelicalism now? (It was rhetorical.) My own take on that question is, no, it does not. The moment hard questions are asked, the negative focus goes on the questioner, not the celebrity, when there is something that needs scrutiny. Those who have the temerity to call out a celebrity have tremendous courage. The easiest thing in the world is to do fluffy interviews with fluffy guests on fluffy books. So hats off to those like Janet who have the courage to ask at all. And my own opinion on Mr. Driscoll is that despite the bravado, despite the near silence of his Reformed peers and enablers, his brand is damaged, and damaged by his own hand.

The "situation" to which Schlueter refers is the plagiarism allegations made against Mark Driscoll by Janet Mefferd. RNS reported on these allegations here and here. Evidence supporting Mefferd's claims were posted on the radio show's website. They were later removed after Mefferd apologized to her audience for making the allegations in public.

It seems likely that, at the very least, Schlueter did in fact resign. I say this because I called and spoke with Mefferd moments ago. I asked her to confirm whether Ingrid Schlueter resigned. She responded, “No comment.” I asked a round of six follow-up questions about Schlueter and whether Mefferd still believes the allegations she made were true. Each time, she responded with "no comment."

Emails to Bobby Belt, another producer with the Janet Mefferd Show, have not been returned.

**RELATED: For the full context of this story, see my first two columns: "Mark Driscoll accused of plagiarism by radio host" and "More allegations of plagiarism surface against Mark Driscoll"**



  1. I’m getting so tired of Driscoll being labeled “Reformed.” Calvinistic would be more accurate.

  2. So, wait. What am I missing? You spoke with Mefferd and she only said “No comment”? I’m missing the significance of you talking to her.

  3. If this producer is so upset about this situation why would she quit and blame it on external issues? Seems to me that her complaints are misplaced because she seems to be upset about the way things are playing out within Salem.

  4. So glad Janet was able to get the truth out there. Perhaps we can’t be the ‘accountability police’ anymore as from what I’m gathering the wolves have been released on her and her staff. God is with the righteous.

  5. @Steve, letting us know that he talked to Mefferd tells us Merritt did his due diligence as a reporter and followed up with those involved. It also tells us that for whatever reason she is not willing or able to talk about the situation.

  6. Author


    The point is that if the claims were false and no one resigned, the answer would have been, “No. That’s not true. Everything is fine down here in Dallas.” When someone says “no comment” and repeatedly every journalist will tell you, there’s a reason. I don’t know what the reason is and I am certainly NOT implying anything more. I simply recounted the conversation as it occurred.



  7. Steve has been a long time defender of MD, he’s only asking to imply nothing happened and Mark didn’t plagiarize.

  8. I getcha. I guess I’m trying to figure out the situation. I think Driscoll has done some stuff wrong. But I wonder if the resignation of someone in this position, since I thought Janet brought this up in such a poor way, is actually still warranted. As much as I first was shocked this happened to the producer, I’m starting to wonder if we shouldn’t be so shocked. Not because of the Driscoll “war machine,” but because it’s a necessary response to botching how this went down. It’s a mess, this thing.

  9. Jonathan, I was tempted to tell you to be sure and watch your back, based on how other journalists have ended up. But then I remembered: “You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.” (1 John 4:4.) So Jesus is watching over you, including watching your back.

    So you’ve got that going for you.


  10. I’m not sure it was done so poorly. If Mark had been an adult about it they could have moved on, but he kept having to put it back upon her. If he would have stopped at, “Whoops, I’ll look into it, it wasn’t intentional”, it would have been fine(er). I applaud her for not backing down.

  11. Henry, I think you are wrong about how it happened and who wouldn’t let it go. But that’s not my point. Her apology was that she didn’t take it to Tyndale first. I’m calling it botched from that angle.

  12. I share your fatigue. Even the term ‘Calvinistic’ is a stretch for Driscoll.

  13. My reply is to McCoy’s reply, but I didn’t know how to reply it, lol.
    I am confused, because I don’t think she had to take it to Tyndale, It is his book. Right? Wouldn’t it be like bringing it to the boss first instead of to the person. No one wants to be reported to the boss.
    I’m just so sad about this whole situation. It’s so sad what these super star pastors are doing with the name of the Lord.
    very sad. Sad sad.

  14. Okay, so for weird reasons, I decided to start listening to Janet. I think that she has guts to challenge a superstar on something she believed to be wrong. I also think she has guts to apologize in such an eloquent, moving way. It was beautiful.

    I like her, where before she kind of annoyed me. She got my vote, for what it’s worth.

    Generally producers – even assistants – resign because, well, they need to for whatever reason. I have my ideas of why that may be.

    I also like Driscoll. I dunno’. I don’t think that very many of us who feel strangely drawn to the doctrines of grace would pass a Reformed Theology test – especially those of us who practice believers’ baptism by immersion.

    I guess I don’t buy the publishers’ cabal theory, but maybe come next full moon, I will be more inclined to see things that way. For now, I’m goin’ with Occam’s razor on this. Janet went too far; Tyndale doesn’t agree with her; publishing standards have changed; she apologized.

    I don’t think she was wrong for bringing this issue up. I don’t think she was wrong to challenge Pastor Mark on this. It’s the way she did it, not the fact that she did it that was so controversial.

    Not sure how many are interested in the subject.

  15. I have looked at the clips and I don’t know how anyone could negate the charge of plagiarism. Publishing is a big business, and the publisher will go to bat for a money maker, whether Driscoll or D A Carson. This is coupled to the cult of personality that has permeated mega church pastors’ ministries. They are men of God so they can do no wrong, nor do they do any wrong. I think there is so much a common interest that few will speak about it. I don’t even believe that ethical gadfly, John Macarthur will speak about it, even though I wish he would.

  16. Plagiarism is still plagiarism. I’m not sure if you are aware of this, but in one of Mark Driscoll’s earlier books he wrote this:
    “plagiarism… subverts God’s work in and through you… If you use the work of others, you are not a teacher, and you should quit your job and go do anything but speak.” – Mark Driscoll, Vintage Church.

    It sounds like Driscoll needs to listen to himself.

  17. If this interview took place in a secular arena — would what happened with Janet and her producer be reproduced? Don’t people lose their careers over plagiarism? I’m puzzled because of the dead silence from most of the main stream on these allegations. The Christian celebrity is almost untouchable unless they have an affair. This could easily be old news tomorrow. How does Driscoll get a pass on this? I spoke with a new grad from seminary who stated that plagiarism is a rampant problem with many authors. Is this true?

  18. This is pure speculation but from what I understand, Janet Mefferd is a personal friend of Peter Jones. Perhaps Dr. Jones was not so happy with what appeared to be stolen intellectual ideas in Driscoll’s new book. Hence, a nudge to his friend Janet (or from Jones’ friends). When Janet spoke about the Driscoll interview, she became quite emotional about how Jones had been wronged and asked the question who would stand up for Jones. From Dr. Jones’ public comments, he obviously is supportive of your work Jonathan which leads me to believe he feels Driscoll plagiarized his work.

  19. So, I guess now journalists have to go through publishing companies before they can ask hard-hitting questions of Christian authors? For all of his talk of “act[ing] like men,” Driscoll sure didn’t weather this “attack” very well. I’m not without empathy. I can imagine being taken aback by a question like Mefferd’s that seemed to come out of nowhere. Still, for all of his bravado, Driscoll had to resort to trying to shift the conversation to Mefferd’s character, rather than responding like a man.

  20. Please don’t let this go or fade away. This story needs to stay alive.
    It seems like MD makes a splash and then people just let it go.

  21. Having read Steve for years, he is not one to shy away from criticizing when it seems warranted. His only exception may be Tim Keller : )

  22. “publishing standards have changed”

    Have they? If so, should they have?

  23. Interesting side note, Ingrid Schlueter used to blog at Slice of Laodecia back in 2009. She was violently anti-Driscoll over his sex sermon series on Song of Solomon. Strange that her name turns up here in this mess and that she resigns after the apology. Makes me wonder how much influence she had on the piece at its inception, the tone of the interview, and the research done on the piece.

    I think there is definitely an issue for Driscoll here- the info looks improperly cited at the least, but I wonder if Ingrid may have overstepped a bit considering her past history with Driscoll.

  24. Does this whole ‘event’ provide evangelicals an opportunity to engage in a fruitful discussion about intellectual property? Just a couple of years ago, DA Carson, Tim Keller and others discussed pastoral plagarism: Carson applied secular academic standards of citation to pastors, while Keller said more freedom is appropriate. This discussion needs to continue.

    A quick story: Years ago I read that Spurgeon on holiday, in a very low spiritual state, attended a country church and heard a sermon that helped him trust Christ afresh. Then he realized he had written that sermon years before. Spurgeon this experience as a gift from God, as it showed him that he did indeed believe what he was preaching. A very different understanding of ‘property’ going on here! I am not at all convinced that the ‘plagarism police’ out there are working with a Christian account of property or authorship.

    Is anyone discussing this issue?

    (To be clear: my comment is not a defense of Driscoll, whom I know very little about.)

  25. Janet did an excellent job exposing this false pastor. The devil has of course regrouped and is attacking the righteous with a vengeance. Driscoll has since been publicly silent on the issue, but is no doubt roaring in his own den. Christians who are not aware of Driscoll’s false ministry should read the Memorandum to Church Leaders by Cathy Mickels: http://www.driscollcontroversy.com/?page_id=12

  26. I don’t know about the question of influence prior to the interview, but I think if anyone is looking for significance in Mrs. Schlueter’s resignation you will find less than meets the eye. Spend a half hour or so reading her previous work (your example of Slice of Laodicea is a good place to start, if it’s archived somewhere) and get a feel for her tone and attitude.

    Schlueter is just one of a number of bloggers/commentators who think they stand in the tradition of biblical prophets (“watchmen on the wall”) contending for the faith when they are just being contentious. They don’t understand the distinction between persecuted for righteousness’ sake (“truth tellers” feeling pressure) and being disliked because they are self-righteous, harsh, hypercritical, censorious and chronically negative. My question to them is the same as posed to Jonah: “Do you have a right to be angry?” And their implicit answer is Yes, because God (and most of the church) is too lenient on those who make me angry.

    If you’re wondering how I relate this to the situation with Driscoll, I would say there may well be a certain protective cover given to celebrities since there is a lot at stake (e.g., personal reputation, large financial investment in a publication), but that doesn’t mean someone with an axe to grind gets to control the discussion, either.

  27. Without over speculating, standards haven’t changed, and in fact citation standards have evolved to keep pace with new media sources, and if Tyndale simply did not agree, the denials of the charges would be loud, forceful, vociferous, and public. At the bare minimum Tyndale is unsure about this and taking a wait and see attitude while it conducts an internal review.

  28. Ingrid ran Slice of Hate for many years. Her life as a full time fault finder does not impress me, nor make me think that anything she has to say on this topic is related to the truth

  29. I love how its everyone else’s fault except those responsible. The “evangelical industrial complex.” Lol!

    Good riddance!

  30. Terrific summary of these so-called watchmen, Dave. You summed it up in a nutshell.

  31. I don’t understand why this whole situation is complicated.

    1. Mark Driscoll has said unequivocally that any pastor who plagiarizes should quit.

    2. Mark Driscoll has been shown unequivocally to have plagiarized.

    3. Why should Mark Driscoll not quit and be held to the same standard he demands of others?

  32. The producer, Ingrid Schlueter, is a trauma queen. She’s the daughter of Vic over at VCY America, with whom she had a public falling out with a few years ago. Ingrid has spent over 20 years doing radio and she’s know the radio world and Christian media world. The question is why did she bother to get a job with Janet Mefferd knowing, KNOWING, how the Christian media world is run. She’s no idiot, but she is a martyr and plays the victim constantly. For YEARS Ingrid has had public disputes with others in the Christian media world – Richard Abanes, Ray Comfort, Mark Driscoll, Rick Warren etc…. she also does her best to wipe her emotional outbursts clean off the web after she comes to her senses. There’s ZERO reason why she should even be mentioned in this story, EXCEPT that a classic narcissist needs to put themselves in the spotlight. If Ingrid knows she hates how the Christian media world is run, gets a job in it anyway and now is resigning in “protest” over this Driscoll mess… WHO CARES. This whole situation is a disgrace to the name of Jesus who all of these people say they love. It’s pathetic.

  33. You mean like, the person who is actually guilty of plagiarism?

  34. It’s a disgrace to the name of Jesus to hold pastors to their Biblical responsibility, and to hold Mark Driscoll to the same standard he demands of others?

    It seems from what we read in the New Testament, such as Matthew 18, 1 Cor 5, Galatians 2, and other letters to churches that it’s the exact opposite when we gloss over sin and don’t hold people who claim to be believers accountable.
    This goes back to the whole issue of “the problem is not the problem, but the person who observed the problem is the problem.”

  35. I don’t think you need to be a fault finder to observe blatant plagiarism.

    Considering Driscoll himself has called for pastors to quit over the same thing, I don’t think you need to be much of anything other than an objective observer.

  36. There is absolutely nothing wrong with how Mefferd handled it.

  37. All Holy Spirit inspired thoughts about God belong to God and his people therefore its public domain.

    If its human inspired without any divine inspiration then human laws apply.

  38. Mark Driscoll needs to be held accountable not only to his standard of plagiarism but for many other issues within his communion, such as the question if his church is a cult? It appears from the testimony of people (they are in the internet) who left MD’s organization that Mars Hill exercises absolute control over its members’ lives. I come from a conservative evangelical background and this kind of control isn’t part of our doctrine.

  39. Andrew — I agree with you. I wish this situation would spark a “fruitful discussion about intellectual property.” I used to be a newspaper guy, for about 11 years, so I cited Plagiarism.org and U.S. Copyright Law here: http://wp.me/p3TOr-1km . I don’t want to use the phrase “secular academic standards,” because to me, this issue is such a basic ethical matter within God’s created order. I’m baffled by the implicit lack conscience in Tyndale’s response, and Driscoll’s silence, and Mefferd’s sudden censoring of previously released evidence. At first, this felt like a mistake. Now it feels like something creepy is going on.

  40. This is how it operates in Evangelical publishing, but also in some local churches: the person who is the messenger of a problem is shot; in Mark’s church, a person wants to quit smoking is deemed an idolater and must submit to church authority; in the IFB, and in conservative politics and in some other churches, a rape victim is blamed for the rape. Ms. Mefford was a messenger and she upset the delusions and the status quo. It also wouldn’t surprise me if she was double blackballed for being a woman. If you are Ingrid, you are no sock puppet. What you write is valid.

  41. I want to go back to the statement, “publishing standards have changed.” No, they haven’t, but even if they had changed, U.S. Copyright Law has not changed. Proof begins here: http://wp.me/p3TOr-1km .

    I really, really, really don’t understand why *some* folks in this debate — both here and elsewhere — are talking about the issue as if it were completely abstract and just a matter of opinion. The law of the land is clear. The law has been broken. That is a fact. See both http://www.plagiarism.org/ and the U.S. Copyright Office at http://www.copyright.gov/ . It’s clear. And then look at Jonathan’s interview with Brad Greenberg of the Columbia Law School. And then look at the examples that *once* were posted on Mefferd’s site, which you can see here: http://asecondslice.blogspot.com/2013/12/evidence-of-plagiarism-or-swatting-at.html .

  42. Holding to the “5 points” makes one Calvinistic when it comes to soteriology. A Calvinist must hold to substantially more than that.

  43. Good grief!!! Go look at the evidence. Driscoll plagiarized another man’s work…not once…not in just one book.either..many times! And it has been going on for a while now. No one called him on it. No one! But who gets criticized now…Ingrid Schuelter. She is the bad guy….supposedly had a vendetta against Driscoll, so she dug this stuff up just to get him. And she, too, is criticized as being responsible for the ‘terrible tone’ of Janet’s interview. The tone of the interview by was just fine, by the way. It is a very serious thing to plagiarize…a crime in fact, and certainly not behavior acceptable for a Christian…let alone of a Christian pastor!! If Driscoll had taken it seriously right at the start, the interview never would have gotten heated. He hedged, hemmed and hawed around. Then he turned on Janet and made her out to be the bad guy because of her ‘unloving’ tone. My disappointment in her is that she did not hold firm. She did not have to take it privately to the publisher. No apology was necessary at all. It is a public matter and a serious one. The man is pompous and thinks he is above any kind of scrutiny. If Ingrid did the investigation behind the scenes that led this blatant plagiarism being exposed for what it is…good job Ingrid!!! Wish we had a few strong men with as much spine/guts as she and Janet for tackling this issue. Mark Driscoll always gets a pass. He DID knowingly plagiarize, won’t admit it even now, but just downplays the whole thing. Will all of his present and past books now be corrected? I wait with baited breath to see that happen. He also lied about the incident at the Strange Fire Conference. Claimed his books were confiscated when there is a video of him giving the books away to the security guards. He LIED…now he has plagiarized and guess who gets bad mouthed…Ingrid Schuelter. Grow up people. Stop judging Ingrid and put the blame where it belongs…square on the shoulders of Mark Driscoll. He was caught red handed…the proof is undeniable. That people here can say such unkind things about Ingrid…who did not plagiarize…did not lie…well, doesn’t that say a lot about the mess Christianity is in today. A godly woman is maligned and a rock-star pastor who lies and breaks the law gets a pass….again.

  44. And what does spreading gossip about a fellow Christian do for the cause of Christ?Isn’t that a disgrace?! You just did that in your remark. You have maligned a sister in Christ who has done nothing wrong at all. She simply did her job. If she indeed was the one who uncovered the blatant plagiarizm by Mark Driscoll, she is now at fault? What Driscoll did is of no concern to you…bold faced lies, stealing another man’s published works?! That is not a disgrace to the name of Jesus Christ in your eyes? Ingrid told the truth, but you are a gossip and a tale bearer quitly of maligning the character of a fellow Christian. Your comment should not have even been allowed here. It added nothing to the conversation. On the contrary, it cheapened and coarsened it. You need to repent of YOUR lack of love, lady.

  45. The above comment was in reply to Stacy Harp…just in case she has any doubt who I was addressing

  46. Fault finder, huh? So you think Ingrid is a liar? Go to slaughteringthesheep.wordpress.com and you can read whole portions of not juist one…but several other past books of Mark Driscoll where he took ideas of another person and used them without footnotes. …and even quoted an author WORD FOR WORD in his books with no credit given to that author. Word for Word, sir!!!
    Go look at it for yourself. This is the evidence Janet had posted on her website that was taken down. It is still available to view. It shows he undeniably plagiarized. I am still in awe of how the bearer of that news becomes the bad person. The one who is quilty of wrong doing is Mark Driscoll and him alone. Get the facts before you malign a person’s good name.

  47. Was Ms. Schleter angry at Janet Mefferd. Was she the motivator of the attack on Driscoll?

  48. Did she resign because of Janet’s refusal to go “Gotcha” journalizm??? Her Slice
    blog was always kinda viscous with a lot of people under the bus!

  49. David, why was her name even mentioned and her resignation headlined. It was Janet’s call on when to back off. You may be on to something.

  50. Stacy, you have raised an answer to the big question. Did she overplay
    and push Janet into this mess?

  51. Kate,,,Janet is a big girl. Ingrid merely researched for the program, presented information she found to Janet, and Janet alone decided what she would cover on her program. Ingrid had no power to force her to do anything. Even if Ingrid may have encouraged her to use the information abouit Mark, that does not make Ingrid the bad guy in this whole sordid affair? Mark Drsicoll is the issue here,…he is the one who plagiarized and there is undeniable evidence of that. I am simply amazed at how people want to continue giving him a pass on these serious moral issues and blame people like Ingrid because she may be the one who uncovered the dirty truth. You blacken her name…strain at a knat…and fail to see the huge and growing problem with Driscoll. He is the issue….not Janet…not Ingird. You have no right to assume anything about what Ingrid did or did not do…to conjecture and talebear about her. That is sin, plain and simple. She did not plagiarize. Mark Driscoll…everyone’s favorite rock star pastor…did!

  52. The only hate I am seeing is right here, David, in people like you who talebear and malign the character of a person for no other reason than you don’t like their views on issues. Where is your outrage about what Mark Driscoll has done (!!)….a pastor who is supposed to be godly and above reproach. There is reproach and accusations all over the place, but…no matter. Driscoll is a popular man and his defenders are legion. They will continue to defend and elevate him in their own eyes, refusing to believe the truth, while bringing derision and reproach upon anyone who gets the way of their idol worship, especially strong Christian women, like Ingrid and Janet who dare to buck the tide and tell the ugly truth.

  53. The deeper issue is not whether Mr. Driscoll plagiarized anything or whether Ms. Mefferd should have handled her suspicions differently. The real issue is that people are being hurt by the way that those in supposed leadership positions are handling this, and that this happens far too often. Accountability seems to be anathema to some in church leadership: http://timfall.wordpress.com/2013/12/09/the-game-is-rigged-christian-leadership-and-worship-of-the-almighty-dollar/


  54. Yes, big money making ‘Christian’ cooperations are allowing people like Mark Driscoll to get away with plagiarism (and who knows what else!) because their main concern is not Almighty God, but the almighty dollar. People totally miss what is happening behind the scenes with the people pulling the strings of this mess…a terrible spiritual rot that is growing like cancer. Instead they want to throw stones at Ingrid Schuelter and Janet Mefford…the weaker sex no less…who bravely stood up to Goliath and lost….for now. But God is in control and those in ‘high places’ who are in gross sin and error will be held accountable. A day of reckoning is coming and their money will be poor comfort for them in those days.

  55. Yes, Driscoll is still the issue. However, as Stacy noted, Ingrid is a drama queen, and therefore, I would take her reasons for resigning with a grain of salt. She has credibility issues with me, and therefore, I wouldn’t jump to the conclusion that there is some big “evangelical machine” out there trying to pressure people from revealing the truth.

  56. Reads correctly to me as well, Colin. It is unequivocal.

  57. “She has credibility issues with me.” And who are you? Do you know Ingrid personally? Tell me how she is a ‘drama queen’. Get specific. There are many who have (and continue) to spread vicious lies about Ingrid. What is the source of your ‘issues’ with her exactly? Lots of stories are bantered about…lots of very hurtful gossip in recent years. Give us specific accusations against Ingrid that prove she is a ‘drama queen’…that prove she is untrustworthy in her research. Talk is cheap and, if it is based on opinion, impressions, and heresay, it is just gossip, plain and simple, and we as Christians should not be engaging in that. Right? You readily ‘jump to the conclusion’ Ingrid is somehow at fault, acted in an unseemly manner. But you seem to have a hard time believing that the Christian corporations benefiting from Driscoll’s popularity will do anything in their power not to lose their money cow. You know nothing about Ingrid and what she has gone through in the past several years. If she resigned and why she resigned is her own personal business…it is between her and Janet and God and no one else. If and until the reason is made public, you are just plain wrong to insinuate evil motives and actions in another person.

  58. “He DID knowingly plagiarize”? And your incontrovertible evidence for this is . . what? Are you aware of the legal concept of libel?

  59. Colin, I just gotta’ ask. Did the blog owners get permission from the owners of the material you linked to before they published copyright material on their websites?

    Did Janet give permission for her blog posts to be published elsewhere on the Internet?

    If not , then they would be in violation of the law.

    Until and unless more evidence comes to light, this is a dead, or at least a dormant issue.

  60. I have concern over this overly vague statement that she makes:
    “All I can share is that there is an evangelical celebrity machine that is more powerful than anyone realizes”

    If it was so important to call out Driscoll, this notion of a super powerful cartel should be much more worth exposing. I want to see emails, hear phone conversations, etc….otherwise just quitting and saying the equivalent of “the big bad wolf made me” is just crying wolf instead and is much more suspicious than what has likely turned out to be a case of ghost writing or team writing done poorly.

  61. Exactly – I posted this comment in reply to somebody else:

    If it was so important to call out Driscoll, this notion of a super powerful cartel should be much more worth exposing. I want to see emails, hear phone conversations, etc….otherwise just quitting and saying the equivalent of “the big bad wolf made me” is just crying wolf instead and is much more suspicious than what has likely turned out to be a case of ghost writing or team writing done poorly.

  62. Is that is the way you treat you own, I cannot imagine how would you treat sinners.

Leave a Comment