Archive for March, 2010

Do Leopards Ever Change Their Spots?

March 18, 2010

For those who have had a chance to read my book you realize that as a politically correct person may say, Hank Hanegraaff is a truth challenged individual (he lies to people a lot).

Originally my book was to be coauthored by a friend. However, he had to drop off the project and did not write the chapters he was planning. One of those was the chapter on how the CRI office in Canada, that had started some ten years before Walter Martin had died, was decimated by Hanegraaff in the mid 1990s. This was  after the director in Canada and staff began to realize the things they were hearing about the lawsuit of Brad Sparks against Hanegraaff and the damage that Hank had done to dozens of CRI staff who were fired without any actual cause (except for realizing how inept Hanegraaff truly was, due to his almost universal lack of knowledge in the areas that CRI specialized in) were true. Unfortunately, my friend had done the research on the CRI-Canada problems and I would have had to delay for months the publishing of my book to come up to speed with the information. Therefore, I did only a cursory treatment of the Canadian issue in my book.

A couple weeks ago my contact in Canada (a former CRI-Canada researcher) sent me a copy of a CRI-Canada board meeting minutes dated 11-12-1994. In the meeting that was attended by the Canadian board, Hank Hanegraaff, and Sealy Yates (Hanegraaff’s attorney from the US); the board asked Hanegraaff a series of questions about what they had been hearing of his problems down under in California.

One of the questions was why Stan Tonnesen left the board, after some 20 years of working with Martin, after Hank took over? Here was the response made by Hanegraaff , recorded in the minutes :

Re: Stan Tonneson [sic] leaving CRI’s board. This was during the 1990 coup. Everett Jacobson voted him off the board after having sat with him for 26 years on the board. Craig Hawkins tried to oust Hank and accused him of being demon possessed after Hank returned from a trip to Brazil.

Darlene Martin replaced Stan Tonneson [sic]. Stan offered a full apology and it was accepted however they agreed to not reinstate him because it was  felt that it would de-stabilize the board.  

First, if you wish to know the truth of Hanegraaff’s distain for Craig Hawkins, read the letters by Craig Nelson and Anthony Horpel found  starting on pages 45 and 57 respectively in my book (hint: Craig never accused Hank of possession). It had nothing to do with this fairy tale coup that Hank was trying to sell to the Canadian board. 

Second, Stan Tonnesen has written me a response to Hanegraaff’s absurd allegations (dated 3-11-2010). The following is the unedited content of his letter:

Dear Jay,

Thank you for sending me page 4 of the Nov. 12, 1994 Canadian Research Institute minutes, pertaining to me, which refers to  a 1990 coup attempt, IS A FLAGRANT LIE (emphasis in original letter). I took letters with me to show Hank the great concerns that the researchers and other staff members had for his irrational behavior (for our board meeting in Georgia). Hank said he would not hear their concerns and then he pulled out a letter he wanted me to sign. The letter stated I had to agree with everything Hank said and did (100%). After working with Walter Martin for more than 20 years, in a wonderful Christian Manner, being totally loyal to God’s word and will, I told Hank I could not be signing such a statement and walked away from the meeting – resigning from the CRI board. Since that time I have not spoken to Hank and NEVER (emphasis in original) “offered a full apology that was accepted” – Another lie.

I write you this note to confirm his paranoid behavior to demean anyone who raised a question about his actions, and give you permission to use this note if you need verification – to refute such lies. Keep up the good work in sharing that truth; so more believers in Christ will not be deceived.

Sincerely your,

Stan Tonnesen

Stan’s letter needs no comment from me. So once again people are going to have to decide who is telling the truth about Craig Hawkins and Stan Tonnesen’s statements about his leaving the board. Who is being truthful here:  Stan Tonnesen or the old leopard who has been shown through my book, and a host of other people to lie with impunity, over the last 20 years, when it benefits his agenda? Because as we all know, Truth Matters. Now, where have I heard that phrase before?

CRI on the Road to Wickenburg

March 10, 2010

The  other day I was watching an episode of a Western called, Paladin(1958). The show in its day was quite unique for Westerns on television. The protagonist was played by the late Richard Boone. Paladin was a gunfighter, who I believe had a college degree in either literature or philosophy. One moment he was shooting at bad guys the next moment he was quoting Aristotle.

In this episode called, The Road to Wickenburg Paladin finds himself visiting a town called, Wickenburg and  is robbed of his gun, horse and $1,000. Within the first few minutes, it is revealed that the peaceful and innocent town of Wickenburg is run by a ruthless and quite corrupt sheriff and his 4 associates who happen to be related to him. This cadre of less than stellar citizens are behind the theft of Paladin’s belongings and what is more, they have done the same to many others.

The town of peaceful people reminded me of those individuals who continue to support Hank Hanegraaff and are totally in the dark about his unChristian behavior over the last 20 years. His constant pushing for larger and larger salaries, his bad treatment of CRI staff, his plagiarism of Dr. D. James Kennedy’s book Evangelism Explosion, and the other equally reprehensible  activities that are painfully recounted in my book, Hard Questions for the Bible Answer Man.

When people in authority become corrupt and use their office for their own selfish desires as the sheriff and his relatives did in this episode of Paladin or Hank Hanegraaff has done for the last 20 years as the head of CRI, many people suffer. I further believe that the integrity of the office itself will suffer for years to come, as trust is rebuilt, even after the corrupting influence is removed.

At the end of the episode, Road to Wickenburg Paladin becomes the agent  by which  the corrupt sheriff and his cronies are removed. In Hank Hanegraaff’s case, he will someday answer for his evil deeds to God Himself . Unfortunately, for Mr. Hanegraaff, his reckoning will not come at the end of a fictional television program.

Former CRI Employee Attacks My Book

March 1, 2010

I found a small article on the net over the weekend: 

http://www.examiner.com/x-27802-Televangelism–Pop-Christianity-Examiner~y2010m2d17-Christian-Research-Institute–fighting-a-battle-on-two-fronts?cid=email-this-article 

Mr. Hunter claims in an incredibly general statement that all the issues I bring up in my book have already been answered. However,  just a few days ago, Paul Young of CRI claimed that CRI was preparing a response to my book. So which is it, CRI has already answered the problems I reference in my book or they are still working on a response?

Please notice that Mr. Hunter gives the same type of answer that a couple others have stated after a fashion: All my issues have been answered  several years ago by CRI to people’s satisfaction. He fails to mention any of the issues I bring up or exactly how CRI went about answering the problems. Is this the best CRI can do? “We have answered all the problems raised but we don’t plan to tell you how we did it.” Since CRI has, since it’s inception, been extremely proficient at answering the public’s questions with seeming ease, why can they not directly answer my questions from the book and satisfiy those who are also asking the questions?  Are you satisfied with CRI’s answers?

You should also know that 2 years ago I created a 2 CD set called, “Is Hank Hanegraaff the Rightful President of CRI?” It was based on some of the material I had put together for my book.  I had delivered this same information in a lecture, March 2008, at the EMNR Conference in Kansas City, Missouri. I placed the CD set on my website: www.focusonthefaulty.org for sale in March of 2008. Within 2 weeks I received a credit card order from a man named Stephen Ross. He lives near Charlotte, NC. There just happens to be a fellow named Stephen Ross who was working as Hank Hanegraaff’s personal assistant in 2008. Just a coincidence?  Therefore, it is apparent they have had 2 full years to answer the issues on the CD set but there has been no public release of their answers. My book has been out for just 6 months but those CD sets contain a large amount of the book and should have been responded to by now.  I continue to look forward to the CRI report and not this form of personal attack found in Mr. Hunter’s internet article, trying to pass it’s self off as an answer.