Process for Dealing with *Grievances Against Leaders
(and other figures of authority within YWAM)
*Grievance – an official statement of complaint over something believed to be wrong, unjust
or unfair.
Begin with the concise overview, and for a more detailed explanation, click on each link
provided or go directly to the full version from page 4.
This document is mainly dealing with situations and conflicts where there is no evidence of
criminal offence or activity. Where there is suspicion of serious criminal offence, we are
obligated to contact the police.
OVERVIEW
STEPS TO TAKE IN DEALING WITH GRIEVANCES AGAINST LEADERS
CONTEXT
When someone has a grievance against another person, they should go and share their
concern as Matthew 18 encourages. If your concerns are not heard, Matthew 18 advises
taking a friend with you as a follow-up to help in the dialogue. This may be difficult because
of differences in position and influence, but it should be attempted to keep the issue and
situation as low key and relational as possible. We expect that most cases will be resolved
here in step 1 and kept in the local situation.
If a resolution hasn’t been successful in step 1, a simple mediation process is encouraged with
an impartial mediator bringing together the two parties. The mediator or mediators should be
people who are agreed upon by both sides, and could be elders, not necessarily in line
leadership, who have some understanding of mediation. This will enable both parties to share
1
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
their perspectives and seek to bring understanding and reconciliation. Guidelines for ongoing
relationship, as well as learning and leadership development may be needed going forward.
INVESTIGATION PROCESS
In complex situations, a point person should be brought into the dialogue to ensure the
process moves forward in a timely manner. The point person is someone who has been
appointed by the base, nation, Area or Field to handle serious conflict or grievance issues.
They should have a working knowledge of relevant national laws, as well as the formal steps
to take.
The point person should draw together a process team to decide on the next steps and to
determine if there have been other similar complaints from more staff or leaders.
The process team identifies and determines the severity of the complaints.
If evidence emerges of serious suspected abuse in the full investigation process, formal steps
must be taken and appropriate experts and authorities involved. An independent non-YWAM
agency may also be consulted.
We are subject to the laws of each individual country, and the process team should respond
appropriately to all criminal activity.
DECISION PROCESS
The process team with reports now available, have three possible courses of action:
1. The ideal would be both sides meeting again with two people from the process team
and the mediator(s). The purpose of this is to bring clarity of the facts, highlight
misunderstandings, identify wrong- ‘attitudes, behaviour and communication’,
encourage apologies, repentance where there is wrongdoing and reconciliation of
relationships.
2. In cases of serious evidence of abuse (physical, verbal, sexual, coercive, spiritual), a
complainant should not be forced to meet with an alleged abuser. Although Matthew
2
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
18 is a core biblical principle for resolving general inter-personal conflict, it is not right
to insist on this in cases of abuse. If there is clear serious evidence of the law being
broken through criminal activity or abuse, it has to be reported to the police. Such a
step is thankfully very rare in YWAM, but it is written here for help in the worst case
scenario.
3. Where there is an unwillingness from the complainants to enter a mediation process
and yet there is evidence of serious concern, with no question of criminal behaviour,
the process team should put in place ongoing support, supervision, mentoring and
evaluation to help the leader grow.
Whatever option is chosen, communication of the outcome to all parties involved is needed.
The outcome of the process should also be communicated to the staff community.
A memorandum of understanding should be created which also can be accessed by future
board and leadership teams.
Disciplinary action is taken where needed.
APPEAL PROCESS
Outline the appeals process for ongoing investigation.
DURING & AFTERCARE PROCESS
Ongoing care for the leader and the staff and all those affected is extremely important
throughout and after the process.
3
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
FULL VERSION
Steps to take in dealing with grievances against leaders
OBJECTIVE
In the Kingdom of God, relational objectives during conflict involve the reconciliation and
restoration of relationship. It is the responsibility and the obligation of both parties to work
towards this end and to apologise for any wrongdoing which they are responsible for.
A reconciliation process must emphasise the concepts of truth, justice, forgiveness and
repentance in the hope that trust can be established and built on once again.
A helpful resource is ‘Journey toward Reconciliation.’ by John Paul Lederach – Herald Press
1999, with the theme of justice, mercy, peace and truth from Psalm 85:10.
Quote from Dr. Tom Bloomer, Int. UofN Provost Emeritus: “Jesus shed his blood on the cross,
not only to reconcile us to God, but to reconcile us to each other. Therefore, any process that
does not have reconciliation as its ultimate goal is simply not biblical.”
Matt 5:23-24, 1 Jn 2:9-10, 1 Jn 4:7-8, Matt 18:33-35
PROCEDURE
A five-phase process including, Context, Investigation, Decision, Appeal and Aftercare is
suggested below.
A clear timeline of events (as short as possible and as long as necessary) should be
communicated to avoid added uncertainty and stress for everyone. This can be modified with
clear communication as needed.
A. CONTEXT
STEP 1: Sharing a grievance
When a staff member has a grievance against a leader, they should go to the leader
concerned and share their grievance as Matthew 18 encourages. This may be difficult
because of the differences in position and influence, but should be attempted, to keep the
issue and situation as low key and relational as possible.
We expect that most cases will be resolved here in STEP 1 and kept in the local situation.
4
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
In YWAM we encourage a culture of affirmation and inviting constructive feedback within all
teams.
If your concerns are not heard, Matthew 18 advises taking a friend with you as a follow-up to
help in the dialogue.
Examples of grievances could be around unjust decision-making, personality clashes,
perception of unfair treatment, hurtful leadership styles, unreasonable work expectations or a
disregard for YWAM values.
If there are claims of illegal activity you need to immediately involve a more senior leader and
the appropriate authorities, refer to STEP 5. For lesser concerns that are not resolved move
to STEP 2.
STEP 2: Mediation process
A simple mediation process is encouraged with an impartial mediator bringing together the
two parties. The mediator or mediators should be people who are agreed upon by both sides
wherever possible, and could be elders, not necessarily in line leadership, who have some
understanding of mediation. This will enable both parties to share their perspectives and seek
to bring understanding and reconciliation. Guidelines for ongoing relationship, as well as
learning and leadership development may be needed going forward.
NB. In mediation, both mediators should go together to meet each person involved in the
conflict, because then they both hear the same story at the same time. Then they gather all
parties concerned to facilitate a conversation. This prevents one side playing off the
mediators against each other because of different stories being told. Be careful of having
both sexes present in situations which may be delicate.
Note to clarify confidentiality:
The mediator hearing the complaint communicates the expectation that those who bring the
grievance must be interviewed if they want to continue with their allegation. They are
normally expected to meet face to face with the person with whom they have a grievance,
together with a mediator or mediators. This conversation can be held in confidentiality with
the parties concerned.
There is a distinction between a counselling conversation and a grievance process.
Counsellors seek to help a person deal with their past issues. The person seeking counsel
desires to work on themselves and such a conversation in most instances should be
confidential.
A counselling conversation might develop into a need for a grievance process if injustice
becomes obvious. If this happens, confidentiality must be re-defined. In a grievance process
5
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
we cannot guarantee confidentiality to a person who complains about someone else as this
would prevent a full investigation and hurt the other party. Those who are subjects of
complaints have the right to hear the content and be given the opportunity to defend
themselves as further investigation may be needed.
Where there is a genuine fear for an individual to go to their brother or sister with the issue as
outlined in Matt 18, they are advised to take a trusted person with them and sit together with
the mediator. Biblically, this model for resolving issues of conflict should not be overlooked –
whether in friendships, marriages or between peers and leaders.
In a case where the complainant doesn’t want to meet or be named in the process with the
leader(s), their testimony cannot be used. If the situation cannot be talked about with the
leader(s) involved, the complainant needs to understand that little can be done with their
testimony without a further deeper investigation.
Proceed prayerfully, with caution, without taking sides. Operate with love towards everyone
involved, with an ear bent towards listening and understanding the situation from all
perspectives.
Prov 18:13, Prov 18:17
B. INVESTIGATION PROCESS
STEP 3: Formation of a process team
POINT PERSON: In complex situations, a point person should be brought into the dialogue to
ensure the process moves forward in a timely manner. The point person is someone who has
been appointed by the base, nation, Area or Field to handle serious conflict or grievance
issues. They should have a working knowledge of relevant national laws, as well as the formal
steps to take.
PROCESS TEAM: The point person should draw together a process team to decide on the
next steps and to determine if there have been other similar complaints from more staff or
leaders.
Local leaders and elders need to be brought into the process. They understand the context
and history of the actual situation, as well as the spiritual dynamic in the location. National and
Area elders can be approached where there is no possibility of involving elders from the
location.
The number of leaders/elders involved should be appropriate to the severity of the situation.
A straightforward allegation by one person may be solved with the local leaders if that is
appropriate. A more complex allegation from several people requires an involvement of
multiple elders.
6
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
At this point, mediation will turn into investigation. Each person with a complaint will be
interviewed separately, with written reports produced. The leader being investigated will also
be interviewed separately, with a written report produced.
A leave of absence should be proposed to parties while an investigation takes place, but they
should be contactable and available for meetings if called upon. It should be communicated
that a leave of absence does not imply guilt, but allows for a full investigation.
STEP 4: The process team determines the nature and severity of the complaints
If the disagreement is vehement and serious in content, an independent (non-YWAM)
investigation may be needed. Peacemaker ministries offer help in navigating conflict; a
resource link is below.
a. The process team should be prayerfully seeking the Lord for guidance and revelation.
The enemy likes to hide and bring confusion. We need the Holy Spirit to bring clarity
and God’s light into situations.
b. The process team needs a good understanding of what actually happened before
they focus on a person’s interpretation of what happened. Scripture is clear that we
need two or three reliable witnesses to any given event. Witnesses are essential to
establish the difference between fact and opinion. Where there are no witnesses,
however, discernment of the truth will take even more prayer, wisdom, and time.
1 Timothy 5:19, Deut 17:6, Deut 19:15, 1 Jn 5:7-9, Deut 30:19
c. Both those making the allegations and those the allegations are against should
receive a fair hearing. The process team must listen and respond well. Both parties
have the right to be heard and protected.
Hushing victims or perpetuating unsubstantiated allegations is deeply destructive to
all parties.
Prov 18:17, Prov 12:15, Prov 14:12, Prov 28:26
d. The process team needs to listen carefully to see what wrongdoings, if any, surround
common themes of domineering behaviour, manipulation, power play or control.
Patterns can be a sign that a line is being crossed repeatedly and needs addressing.
Godly leaders take responsibility for their actions, admit fault, repent and strive for
growth. No leader is perfect, and we learn from failure where we can be humble in
spirit.
e. The process team must determine whether scripture or spiritual gifts have been
misused to control and support unreasonable requests.
1 Cor 14:29, 1 Thes 5:21, 1 Jn 4:1, Rev 2:2
7
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
f. The process team must determine if the authority exerted has extended into the
individual domain which exceeds that given to leaders in any given time and space.
As individuals we are responsible for how we deal with our finances, how we raise our
families, how we spend our personal time. The Bible teaches that leaders have limits
to their authority.
Mark 10:42-44
g. The process team needs to discover what the complainant hopes for as an outcome
to the process. They may want the leader dismissed, where in fact it is a one-off
offence that is a learning process for the leader involved, who is fully repentant. On
the other hand, the complainant may simply want to be heard, and to help bring
change in a potentially good leader who needs some feedback and mentoring.
h. The process team takes into account how the complainants rate the severity of the
issues. Many people fall into binary thinking that it’s either “no big deal” or “abuse”.
Ask instead if these issues fall under or are similar to any of the categories below. This
is not a comprehensive list, but indicates a growing severity:
● Cultural and personality differences, affecting community life e.g. work,
holidays.
● Disagreements and complaints about how a leader makes decisions about
vision, ministry, priorities or focus of the base/team.
● Incompetent leadership: lacking management, communication and relational
skills.
● Absence of leadership, passive control through lack of decision making or
motivation around a shared vision.
● Controlling or manipulating personal decisions and choices of staff, e.g. what
they wear, how they spend their free time or their money.
● Consistent disregard for YWAM values.
● Financial mismanagement.
● Deep hurt caused to individuals, through domineering, threats, favouritism,
injustice or abusive behaviour such as erratic outbursts of anger, trying to take
the place of God in the individuals’ life.
● Immoral lifestyle choices, substance abuse and addiction.
● Sexual or physical harassment, bullying or intimidation.
8
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
It is easy to jump into labelling a situation as ‘spiritual abuse’, and so it’s wise to bring a
clear definition to the person bringing the allegation. See the definitions of spiritual
abuse in the appendix on Spiritual Abuse.
i. The process team should make a written report outlining the severity of the
allegations for their own clarity. The report should include who is making the
allegations and the details of what is alleged. This report should be agreed upon by
the process team.
STEP 5: Appropriate Intervention
If evidence emerges of serious suspected abuse in the full investigation process, formal steps
must be taken and appropriate experts and authorities involved. An independent non-YWAM
agency may also be consulted.
We are subject to the laws of each individual country, and the process team should respond
appropriately to all illegal activity.
C. DECISION PROCESS
STEP 6: The process team, with reports available, have three potential courses of action
1. The ideal would be for both sides to meet again with two people from the process
team and the mediator(s). The purpose of this is to bring clarity of the facts, highlight
misunderstandings, identify wrong ‘attitudes, behaviour and communication’,
encourage apologies and reconciliation of relationships.
It is not assumed that the people concerned will be able to work together in the future,
but a good outcome would be repentance, forgiveness, plus a willingness to learn and
grow. Humility as an attitude is a key to look out for, the willingness to say sorry.
2. In cases of serious evidence of abuse (physical, verbal, sexual, coercive, spiritual), a
complainant should not be forced to meet with a possible abuser. Although Matthew
18 is a core biblical principle for resolving general inter-personal conflict, it is not right
to insist on this in cases of abuse. If there is clear serious evidence of the law being
broken through criminal activity or abuse, it has to be reported to the police. Such a
step is thankfully very rare in YWAM, but it is written here for help in the worst case
scenario.
3. Where there is an unwillingness from the complainants to enter a mediation process
and yet there is evidence of serious concern, with no question of criminal behaviour,
the process team should put in place ongoing support, supervision, mentoring and
evaluation to help the leader grow.
9
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
Whatever option is chosen, communication of the outcome is needed to all parties involved.
The outcome of the process should also be communicated to the staff community.
A memorandum of understanding should be created which also can be accessed by future
board and leadership teams.
STEP 7: Disciplinary action taken where needed
Where the leader(s) is found to be leading in a dysfunctional way and where people are being
hurt, then the process team needs to bring disciplinary action.
The disciplinary process should include at least one verbal warning, a written warning and a
final warning.
Eventually the process may result in the leader stepping down from their role, attending
counselling and receiving mentoring before being released back into ministry/leadership.
In an extreme case where the leader is not responsive to accountability and unwilling to
change, he or she should be dismissed from any leadership responsibility in YWAM. They may
not use the YWAM name in starting another ministry. A decision like this should not be taken
lightly, and must involve an eldership’s prayerful consideration.
Quote from Lynn Green: ‘We do not quickly resort to legal action, but on rare occasions it may
be necessary. The name of YWAM is precious and is to be protected.’ (Prov 22:1 “A good
name is to be chosen rather than great riches, and favour is better than silver or gold.”).
Ministries that don’t adhere to the values of YWAM have no right to be called by that name.
The name of Youth With A Mission/YWAM was first legally owned by the non-profit
organisation set up by Loren in California in the early 1960s and it still is owned by that legal
entity.
Where the staff person is found to have been judgmental or unreasonable, or unjust in their
criticism of the leader, they also may need ongoing support and mentoring to help them play
a positive part in a YWAM team. Where they are unwilling to repent of these attitudes and
behaviours it may not be possible for them to continue working within YWAM.
If a team or ministry is engaged in illegal activities, then they must be accountable to their
board and the appropriate legal authorities in their nation.
10
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
D. APPEAL PROCESS
STEP 8: Outline the appeals process for ongoing investigation
The expectation should be that this decision is final, having had an unbiased team working
through it. In the case of a very complex situation, where the complainants continue to
struggle, there can be a process of appeal for a wider group of leadership to be involved.
Where Area elders have not been included in an initial investigation – they can be brought in
for further process. Where Area elders have been brought in already – another Area within
YWAM can be contacted to consult.
E. AFTERCARE PROCESS
STEP 9: Ongoing care for all parties involved should be offered
Whatever the outcome of the investigation, care and support can and should be offered to all
parties involved.
Debriefing by trained debriefers in the nation or outside can be offered to all those who need
such a process. This could also be a group debrief of a team. Ongoing counselling or
psychological therapy may be suggested if necessary for individuals to help them process
and heal.
Although the process involves forgiveness, admission of wrongdoing and reconciling the
relationship, it may be that the parties concerned can no longer work together. This is
unfortunate and in this case the leader or the staff may need to find a new location to work
from and may indeed thrive in another context.
As followers of Jesus, we know that the key to healing is forgiveness whether the offense is
great or small. Paul encourages us to forgive each other as Christ forgave us (Col 3:13).
Barbara M. Orlowski writes that forgiveness is the central factor in emotional healing and
crucial to recovery.
11
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Safeguarding / protected
Safeguarding means protecting people’s health, wellbeing and human rights, and enabling
them to live free from harm, abuse and neglect. (Care quality commission UK.)
Memorandum of understanding
What is a memorandum of understanding? A memorandum of understanding, or MOU, is a
nonbinding agreement that states each party’s intentions to take action, conduct a business
transaction, or form a new partnership.
REFERENCES & EXTENDED READING
1. McClung, Floyd, 1980s, Abuse of Authority
2. Orlowski, Barbara M., 2010, Spiritual Abuse Recovery
3. Peacock, Dennis, 1996, Doing Business God’s Way, The Nature of Truth
4. Pope, Stephen J., 2014, The Role of Forgiveness in Reconciliation and Restorative
Justice: A Christian Theological Perspective
5. Rhoades, Randy, 2013, Thoughts about Spiritual Abuse
6. Lederach, John Paul, Journey Toward Reconciliation, Herald Press 1999
7. Oakley Dr Lisa, & Humphries Justin, Escaping the Maze of Spiritual Abuse, SPCK, 2019
8. www.dwellcc.org/learning/essays/spiritual-abuse-avoiding-two-extremes
9. www.churchofengland.org/safeguarding/safeguarding-e-manual/safeguarding-children
-young-people-and-vulnerable-adults/42
10. https://www.peacemakerministries.org/
12
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
APPENDIX 1
FULL BIBLE REFERENCES – NEW LIVING TRANSLATION
Matt 5:23-24 – So if you are presenting a sacrifice at the altar in the Temple and you suddenly
remember that someone has something against you, leave your sacrifice there at the altar. Go
and be reconciled to that person. Then come and offer your sacrifice to God.
1 Jn 2:9-10 If anyone claims “I am living in the light” but hates a Christian brother or sister, that
person is still living in darkness. Anyone who loves another brother or sister is living in the
light and doesn’t cause others to stumble.
1 Jn 4:7 – 8 – Dear friends, let us love one another because love comes from God. Anyone
who loves is a child of God and knows God. But anyone who does not love does not know
God, for God is love.
Matt 18:33 – 35 – Shouldn’t you have mercy on your fellow servant, just as I had mercy on
you? Then the angry king sent the man to prison to be tortured until he had paid his entire
debt.
That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you if you refuse to forgive your brothers and
sisters from your heart.
Prov 18:13 – spouting off before listening to the facts is both shameful and foolish
Prov 18:17 – the first to speak in court sounds right – until the cross examination begins
Matt 18:15 – 17 – If another believer sins against you, go privately and point out the offense. If
the other person listens and confesses it, you have won that person back. But if you are
unsuccessful, take one or two others with you and go back again, so that everything you say
may be confirmed by two or three witnesses. If the person still refuses to listen, take your
case to the church. Then if he or she won’t accept the church’s decision, treat that person as a
pagan or a corrupt tax collector.
1 Timothy 5:19 – Do not listen to an accusation against an elder unless it is confirmed by two
or three witnesses.
Deut 17:6 – Never put a person to death on the testimony of only one witness. There must
always be two or three witnesses
Deut 19:15 – You must not convict anyone of a crime on the testimony of only one witness.
The facts of the case must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.
13
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
1 Jn 5:7-9 – So we have these three witnesses – the Spirit, the water and the blood and all
three agree. Since we believe human testimony, surely we can believe the greater testimony
that comes from God
Deut 30:19 – Today I have given you the choice between life and death, between blessings
and curses. Now I call on heaven and earth to witness the choice you make. Oh that you
would choose life, so that you and your descendants might live.
Prov 18:17 – the first to speak in court sounds right – until the cross examination begins
Prov 12:15 – fools think their own way is right but the wise listen to others
Prov 14:12 – there is a path before each person that seems right, but it ends in death
Prov 28:26 – those who trust their own insight are foolish, but anyone who walks in wisdom is
safe
1 Cor 14:29 – Let two or three people prophesy, and let the others evaluate what is said.
1 Thes 5:21 – but test everything that is said. Hold on to what is good.
1 Jn 4:1 – Dear friends, do not believe everyone who claims to speak by the Spirit. You must
test them to see if the spirit they have comes from God.
Rev 2:2 – I know all the things you do. I have seen your hard work and your patient
endurance. I know you don’t tolerate evil people. You have examined the claims of those who
say they are prophets but are not. You have discovered they are liars.
Mark 10:42-44 – So Jesus called them together and said, You know that the rulers in this
world lord it over their people, and officials flaunt their authority over those under them.
But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your
servant, and whoever wants to be first among you must be the slave of everyone else.
14
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
APPENDIX 2
SPIRITUAL ABUSE
Definitions of Spiritual Abuse:
“Spiritual abuse, a pattern of serious, objective and sinful behaviours that centre around
control and coercion whereby a spiritual authority exploits their position and scripture for the
purpose of selfish gain.”
Objective – Spiritual abuse must be based on objective, observable sinful behaviour, not
subjective intuitions, perceptions or emotions.
The Church of England outlines key characteristics of spiritual abuse:
● Misusing scripture to coerce behaviour
● Coercing through censorship (asking for secrecy and silence)
● Requiring unquestioning obedience
● Using a sense of divine position to exert pressure to conform and suggesting this
position is unchallengeable
● Enforced accountability
● Exclusion or isolation of individuals as a punishment for non-compliance
● Coercing behaviour through exploitation and manipulation
● Publicly shaming and humiliating individuals in order to control their behaviour
● Threats of spiritual consequences
● Inappropriate mentoring relationships
www.churchofengland.org/safeguarding/safeguarding-e-manual/safeguarding-children-young
-people-and-vulnerable-adults/42
“Spiritual abuse is a form of emotional and psychological abuse. It is characterised by a
systematic pattern or coercive and controlling behaviour in a religious context. Spiritual abuse
can have a deeply damaging impact on those who experience it.
This abuse may include: manipulation and exploitation, enforced accountability, censorship of
decision making, requirements for secrecy and silence, coercion to confirm, controlled
through the use of sacred texts or teaching, requirement of obedience to the abuser, the
suggestion that the abuser has a ‘divine’ position, isolation as a means of punishment, and
superiority and elitism”
Dr. Lisa Oakley, ‘Escaping the Maze of Spiritual Abuse,’ Dr. Lisa Oakley and Justin Humphries,
SPCK 2019, p.31.
15
Version 21.02.24 European Field Circle Team working group. Revised as needed.
It is important to note that the complexity of this subject is increased in situations of
cross-cultural communication.
Spiritual abuse can overlap and include emotional, coercive and psychological abuse.
However, it is unique because of its religious context and control used through the misuse of
scripture. It is the role of every Christian to discern scripture carefully and test the teachings
they hear.
3 John 10 – When I come, I will report some of the evil things he is doing and the evil
accusations against us. Not only does he refuse to welcome the travelling teachers, he also
tells others not to help them. And when they do help, he puts them out of the church.
Titus 1:16 – Such people claim they know God but they deny Him by the way they live. They
are detestable and disobedient, worthless for doing anything good.
2 Cor 11:15 – So it is no wonder his servants disguise themselves as servants of
righteousness. In the end they will get what their wicked deeds deserve.
16