You may also like...

43 Responses

  1. This plaigerism mess is strange. Nelson and Tyndale are the publishers. These guys aren’t Moe and Shemp with a printing press. Aren’t they supposed to be checking these things out?

  2. Michael says:

    You would think…

  3. Tim says:

    Sarah’s article is excellent. I highly commend it to everyone’s reading.

  4. Ricky Bobby says:

    The publishers don’t care. Nothing sticks in Christian* land unless the pastor is caught with another man.

    Child abuse, hetero adultery, financial misuse of funds for living a life of excess, plagiarism…no biggie. Just Stone Wall and deflect and deny etc. It’ll go away.

    Catch Driscoll in the bathroom with one of his ushers doing the Brokeback Mountain and he’s toast.

  5. Nonnie says:

    I tend to agree with RB. Those publishers are in for the almighty $$ and as long as Driscoll can bring it in, then he is just fine.

    As for Ed Young….Yuck! Just creepy.

  6. Ricky Bobby says:

    Terrible about Saeed. Makes me very angry. I’ll leave it at that so as to not have to be moderated.

  7. Muff Potter says:

    Loved the link on Art. The author seems to be saying let Art be art for art’s sake and not tied to any one particular ideology or theological stance. And with that I’m putting Joni Mitchell’s Blue CD into the player for my drive up to my daughter’s house in the high dessert.

  8. Summer says:

    I didn’t think reality tv could get any worse….until I read about Ed Young. Really?! I just don’t know how we fall for these rip-off artists.

  9. Sarah says:

    Thanks, Tim! πŸ˜‰

  10. Michael Newnham:

    My guy… in a foxhole


    At a party. A Jesus party of course.

    D-Day Dread

  11. I’m taking it Mefferd has been threatened. She pulled all the Driscoll stuff.

  12. Josh,
    Are you serious?

  13. Yes. It is all mysteriously missing.

  14. “A few weeks ago, as many people know, I conducted an interview with Pastor Mark Driscoll. And, I received lots of feedback on that interview, both positive and negative. But, I feel now that, in retrospect I should have conducted myself in a better way.

    “I now realize the interview should not have occurred at all. I should have contacted Tyndale House directly to alert them to the plagiarism issue, and I never should have brought it to the attention of listeners publicly.

    “So I would like to apologize to all of you and to Mark Driscoll for how I behaved. I am sorry.

    “Unfortunately, I also didn’t anticipate that this story would go viral, online the way it did and creating such dissension within the Christian community was never my aim.

    “And, so in an effort to right things as best as I can, I have now removed all of the materials related to the interview off my website and also off my social media.” – Janet Mefferd, 12/04/2013 on The Janet Mefferd Show

  15. Michael says:

    I can’t tell you how troubling that situation is to me…I very much want to know what happened there.

  16. Same here, Michael. I cannot believe there wasn’t a threat of some sort.

    Stay away from anyone who is afraid to show the truth.

  17. Michael says:


    I will say this much…I got to know Janet and her producer a little bit over the last few days…and I like them very, very, much.

  18. That sucks.

  19. Hey everyone,

    I just saw where Mrs. Mefferd yanked all the Drsicoll stuff from her site and some of your comments.

    I don’t think anyone could threaten her. She actually has a much bigger platform than Driscoll, Tyndale or whoever. She also has a microphone that reaches millions on over 100 terrestrial radio stations nationwide. NOBODY is going to mess with her if they have any common sense.

    I applaud her for removing the Driscoll stuff. While it does appear he has committed plagiarism or at the very least failed to cite and source Mrs. Mefferd violated the cardinal rule of interviewing which is to never put your guest in jeopardy. She knows better than that and believe me when I tell you what she did is very easy to do.

    The only thing that threatened Mrs. Mefferd was her conscience and to be perfectly honest with you not many people would remove the material and even fewer would have the guts to admit they were wrong on that type of platform. Her credibility means something to her and that should not be lost in all of this.

    Kudos to Mrs. Mefferd!!

  20. Michael says:


    That’s a great comment and you may well be right.
    I had to do something similar once and the backlash was harsh.
    In any case, I’ll be in her corner…she is a total class act.

  21. She is a class act and she has more to lose in the way of bringing on other “controversial” guests than blowing it on someone like Driscoll. Had she of asked Driscoll or his people about this prior to broadcasting he probably wouldn’t have shown up and what fun would that have been πŸ™‚

    The other thing is that in her apology she stated that she didn’t believe he or Tyndale or whomever responsible for the final presentation of his product didn’t mess up….she only admitted that she messed up which might wind up being a more powerful statement than that interview she conducted and then removed.

    She’s got smarts Michael!

  22. That last paragraph made no sense. Let me try again.

    Mrs. Mefferd never stated that she didn’t believe that someone screwed up somewhere. She only took impressibility for her own actions. That’s a good thing.

  23. *responsibility…..I’m batting a .1000 today huh πŸ™‚

  24. You are really clearing things up for us Phil…:)

  25. And Phil, this is not a loaded question, I’m a fan.

    Is what she did different than what you and Alex did to Chuck Smith?

  26. Hehe….this all night radio stuff has affected what little brain I have πŸ™‚

  27. I don’t think so and here’s why. I attempted to contact Chuck Smith and I contacted Dave Rolph prior to doing the show. Invited them both to appear on either that or another show. I never heard from Mr. Smith but Dave wrote back and was very gracious so I don’t think so.

  28. “Mrs. Mefferd violated the cardinal rule of interviewing which is to never put your guest in jeopardy.”

    What does it mean to put your guest in jeopardy? It seemed to me that she just asked tough questions. And if she did put Driscoll in jeopardy, how is that different from what you and Alex did to Chuck?

  29. It means putting your invited guest into a situation that could cause him great harm or embarrass them. Tough questions are one thing. Inviting them to come on a live program and then basically accusing them of plagiarism is quite another.

    I didn’t do any of those things to Chuck Smith. I ran a snippet of a message he delivered that later was placed up as a podcast for all the world to hear. I asked for permission to air that portion and was informed that it was okay as long as I cited the original which I did.

    Josh, Alex shared his story with me. Not Chucks. Most if not all of it was already published in the public domain by Alex. Chuck was invited to come on. He knew what we were going to do beforehand. One of his top assistants also knew and corresponded with me prior to airing.

    Also, Alex knew what I was going to ask him LONG before he ever agreed to being on the show. You can ask anyone who has ever been on my show and they to the man will tell you I always let them know beforehand what direction I want the program to go and what I plan on asking them so they can prepare so I don’t put them in a situation that could harm their reputation or credibility.

    Mrs. Mefferd didn’t do that with Driscoll and is most likely why she removed the material.

  30. Ok, I appreciate the response. I did not see the difference. I appreciate you laying that out. I will say, it sounded like you guys caught Chuck off guard, but perhaps that is just my perception and not reality.

    Nevertheless, If Mrs. Mefferd felt that she had done something wrong that deserved apology, good for her. However, I know for a fact that Driscoll uses lawsuits and threats of lawsuits to get his way. I wouldn’t be surprised at all.

  31. Thanks Josh.

    Honestly I don’t believe either Tyndale or Driscoll are big enough to harm her in any way. It would look worse for them if they did. It would be a PR nightmare and Driscoll only bullies people weaker than him and Mrs. Mefferd isn’t weak, She has a platform that very few have and if they ever did threaten her she would use it to her full advantage….think of it “Pastor bullies and threatens female Christian talk show host for exposing his plaigerism”…..Driscoll would be finished.

    The radio is a powerful tool my friend and she has a big freakin hammer πŸ™‚

  32. Kevin H says:


    I had not listened to Phil’s show with Alex. (Maybe if Phil would denounce his Mets fandom I would listen more often. πŸ™‚ ) So I don’t know what was all discussed and done on the show. But I do know that Alex had done another show with another program where they called Chuck live during the show. Is that maybe what you’re thinking of when you’re speaking of catching Chuck off guard? I don’t remember the name of the other show, but it wasn’t Phil’s.

  33. Maybe. I had no clue who she was before all this, but that doesn’t mean she isn’t rich enough to afford a lawsuit. Still, it’s no fun, and some battles aren’t worth fighting. I could definitely see a possibility that there was a threat, a consideration of options, and then an apology. Either way, she did what she thought was right, and that’s great.

  34. Oh. Maybe you are right, Kevin. Hmmm. It’s been a while. The one I am thinking of, the host talked to Chuck for a while while Alex was quiet. It sounded like at some point Alex butted in and Chuck did not realize that he was there. Maybe it wasn’t Phil’s show. Dunno.

  35. Hey Kevin!

    I remember that show and I wouldn’t do that. It wasn’t right what the blog talk radio host did but then he doesn’t like Chuck Smith, has no accountability whatsoever so anything goes in that world.

    BTW: Baseball Podcasts dot net airs my show. The owner hosts a Phillies show of his own and even he listens πŸ™‚ I’ll let you know when he comes on to talk Phillies with me πŸ™‚

  36. It wasn’t me Josh. I would never do that or even allow it.

  37. Very sorry Phil. I must have been mistaken. I did not mean to impugn your character.

    Again, I am sincerely sorry.

  38. Josh,

    You have nothing to be sorry for. It allowed me the opportunity to explain some things and that’s always a good thing. In no way did I feel impugned by any of your honest questions.

    Thanks Brother!


  39. Kevin H says:


    So the owner is a Phillies fan yet he allows your show to be aired? Heresy! πŸ™‚

    Regardless, I’ll have to try to make the time to listen to your show, even if you’re not talking Phillies. My time of listening to the radio is usually spent while I’m in the car. So if a Philadelphia affiliate ever picks up your show, let me know. Of course, that would be tantamount to heresy, too. πŸ™‚

  40. Haha Kevin! Philly might be too big for me right now but if you have an iPhone give this link a whirl and you can listen to the show every morning on your way to work!

    Hope that helps πŸ™‚

  41. Thanks Phil, and I did appreciate the longer explanation.

  42. No problem! Have a great day and nice chatting with you again Josh!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Discover more from Phoenix Preacher

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading