anointing, betlam, c3, CHC, court case, faith, jake betlam, Kong Hee, painting, Phil Pringle, Pringle, scam, scam artist, Singapore
You can see Phil Pringle produce a painting in his Presence Conference 2014 promo:
Here is Jake Betlam encouraging bidders to buy (in faith) Phil Pringle’s “anointed” artwork :
Not only is Phil Pringle an artist, he likes to parade himself as a prophet to his church and to Christians in Singapore’s City Harvest Church,
“Prophet for Profit” Phil Pringle Enticing the CHC “Foolish Virgins”?
Apparently it’s important that you see Phil Pringle’s art as “anointed” if you buy it. Pringle had his henchmen say this about his art:
You Too Can BUY Phil Pringle’s ‘Godly’ Anointing!
This was the result of the auction. Who would have seen that coming?
So whoever the Singaporean person was, whoever bought the “anointed” painting from “Prophet” Phil Pringle in “faith”, well done!
You indeed bought Kong Hee his victory. Kong Hee is indeed innocent and the Singaporean government are those evil people that tried to bring him down. Well done for thwarting Satan’s plans by your obedience to buying Phil Pringle’s “anointed’ painting! What an amazing testimony! To God be the glory! The innocent Kong Hee has walked free.
Pfff! Who are we kidding?
Can this Singaporean get a refund for being scammed into buying “trash-heap” artwork? Clearly, Pringle and Betlam’s cheap gimmick gained them a $50,000 reputation, offering tainted money to needy people in the Sydney community. How well do Phil Pringle and Jake Betlam sleep at night?
“And he taught, saying unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves”
Who valued it?
Typical c3 out-of-touch, unapproachable HYPE.
As for all the “prophesies”, I reserve my reactions until after the court’s decision, AND his sentencing (the “hair of his head/jail” comment).
That was my question too! When I viewed the video all I could think of was “AS IF !!!!!”
These people live in another Universe. And anyone who watched that “performance” that day and accepted such a claim is just, I am sorry to say, naive, bordering on stupid!
“These people live in another Universe.”
Haha! That’s EXACTLY the words another ex-c3 member used.
Some questions – who valued the painting? And since when does the size of a painting reflect on its value? Is Jake Betlam manipulating the perceived market value of this painting? I saw a large Brett Whiteley “Willow” painting sell for $15,000 years ago and it’s probably doubled in value by now, and somehow I just can’t see a Pringle painting being valued higher than a Brett Whiteley (in any country).
I would have thought making such a claim is bordering on fraud. Perhaps one of his sycophantic followers would be willing to ascertain the name of the valuer and post it here for everyone to see.
I might have missed it but can anyone clarify who gets the $50k? Does it go straight to Phil? Does it get donated to a good cause?
It was donated. It’s in the article – “to needy people in the Sydney community”.
Funny, we would have thought that you can’t put a price on the “anointing”.
@Churchwatcher It seems my comprehension skills have failed me! Thanks. 🙂
It supposedly gets donated to a good cause.
If you listen to Betlam, he says that another of Pringle’s painting was sold for $60k the previous year.
Don’t forgot about how all the PP supporters tell you that he doesn’t take a wage from c3, and just “survives” on his art sales.
Squidaloopa – And all the preaching honorariums from his very extensive “preaching” itinerary worldwide. It’s called the “circuit”. They all stay within their very small group preaching at each other’s churches. Look at the itinerary of the pastor’s church where PP is preaching next – you’ll probably find that pastor listed for a C3 engagement in the near future.
Merchants in the Temple said:
‘[Phil Pringle] just “survives” on his art sales.’
A $3.4 million dollar house and a late-model BMW are clearly the trappings of a man who is scratching for funds, but Phil is probably happy to live in such penury since it has doubtless come as a result of him having donated his every spare cent to the “church”.
As to the quality of Phil’s “art”, it makes one wonder what is worse – his painting or his “preaching”. I wonder if Jake Betlam had any reservations about flogging off such a piece of rubbish – I don’t imagine that Phil would have given him any choice in the matter, and I suppose that pragmatism can trump integrity when one has a family to feed.
jim Styles said:
Since Brian Houston has shown off his famous acting career, Phil Pringle has to try to do something to keep up,
Rolf Harris thought he was an annointed painter to maybe?
Unless Rolf Harris was a preacher of any variety that’s a pretty low blow to compare Pringle with someone as perverted as Harris. Way too soon after the event for that type of “joke”.
I’d like to know what a someone who appraises art really thinks of this, because to my untrained eyes it looks like what I suspect it is, nothing more than the end product of someone engaging in their hobby.
The interesting things is that the tools and paints used are probably expensive which would be reflected in the quality of the painting itself. Phil I’m sure has all the top of the range toys to support his hobby, because he earns a fortune from selling the things he produces to the people who view him as a “leader”.
I guess the true measure is what would someone who is not involved in the church and does not know who PP is pay for that? Personally for a painting that size I wouldn’t go higher than $1,000 – and I’d go that high only because it probably cost a fair amount to create.
I won’t comment on the “anointed” part as it’s too ridiculous for words…
OK we need to find an art valuer. Surely we would know someone….
On the other hand, I’m wondering if there was some “round tripping” involving the sale of this painting!! Haha
“I won’t comment on the “anointed” part as it’s too ridiculous for words…”
Well Icarus, if it was painted using oils, then there’s probably some kind of ‘anointing’ on it – even if it exists only in oil based paints. 🙂
Having skidded a brush over canvas on one or more occasions, I’d like to state the following:
“Real art, that is properly and professionally done, ends up on the walls, foyers and atriums of the rich and influential…”
For example, the local ‘Fireworks’ gallery in nearby Newstead hung a 3 piece masterful work of art several years ago that was professionally valued at around $800,000 – it sold some time later, and had to be carted away in 3 separate trucks – it was so large, and truly valuable to those who purchased it…
Fireworks wouldn’t have even considered hanging it at that price, unless it ticked ALL of the boxes… so how many ‘ticks’ does Phil’s art get from the experts, when it’s all said and done?
Is this just another angle to fill his pockets with gullible people’s money? Anointed art? I’d have to agree with you Icarus – that would be impossible to define in professional terms…
Hay girl said:
What peeves me off is my cousin is an artist and a trained “qualified” (actually studied technique etc) artist, who’s work, in my opinion is incredible. The kind you’d imagine seeing in a New York gallery.. He struggles to sell the works because he is young and just starting… He works all day on a regular job and paints at night. He works flipping hard and does it all from his tiny bedroom (not an “art studio” as Phil has). I just think wow, where is the justice? my cousin is a Christian and loves the Lord… No he doesn’t pain crosses and “holy spirit” imagery, but yet Phil’s is somehow anointed? Why? Cause he is a pastor? Or is it the symbols represented in the paintings? I tell you, if a no-name was painting the exact paintings as Phil’s, I wouldn’t imagine too many people would buy the art work. Actually some aren’t too bad (some) but i struggle to see where $50k is in this one or any of them…? That promo for Presence was a nice sneaky Segway for some sucker to pay all that money (for a hype). My cousin is lucky if he gets a few hundred for his paintings. It reminds me of a talented musician who never gets discovered because they aren’t associated with a “somebody” and then you see some little hussy who can’t sing “make it” because why? Well you know why… I just hate this injustice.
Hay girl, from an entry on Churchwatcher’s other blog (Hillsongwatch):
* Most churches have a website that give their core doctrines. Not 100% foolproof of course. e.g. some non-denominational churches are down-to-earth, others are extreme Charismatics.
*Are their beliefs and values in agreement with the bible and core Christian doctrines? e.g. JWs, Mormons, Oneness Pentecostals absolutely prohibited. I would also immediately rule out pro-gay (like Uniting Church), Charismatic churches (attended one in another city, badly affected), women pastors (politically correct, ignoring clear directions in New Testament), New Apostolic Reformation supporters, Emergent churches.
*Assuming you find one that sounds promising, make sure you keep your “buyer beware” glasses on for the whole service. That might be a bit challenging especially if the performances are very professional but it is worth the effort.
*Is the service’s strength the music or the sermon? Now I would rule out the music-focused church because experience tends to be valued more than (sometimes convicting) truth. Low effort put into preaching God’s Word is a bad sign.
*Are people’s emotions or minds engaged throughout the speech? Are heart-strings tugged and soppy music relied upon to “bring people to Jesus” and “close the deal” instead of calls to repentance and relying upon the Holy Spirit to convict the sinner?
* Compare what they say and do with what the bible actually says *in context*. Beware of speakers who throw in a few proof texts with no relation to each other to support their worldview instead of a careful examination of a passage/ concept.
* Beware of legalism “thou shalt tithe if thou wishst to be blessed” or cheap grace “nobody’s perfect, just make a decision for Jesus and you’ll be right mate”.
Probably the best rule-of-thumb question I can suggest for you when visiting any new church (no matter what denomination) to ask yourself is “is God *Himself* the focus of their worship/sermons* – yes or no?” If yes, then it’s a lot more unlikely to be a church that is guilty of scratching itching ears, leaving out what offends unrepentant sinners etc.
An interesting thing..Phil never actually got ANY credentials from ‘attending’ art school [and still doesn’t have ANY artistic credentials]. If i remember correctly..phil said he left art school in NZ to follow Christ. Funny thing is…that art school department in NZ burnt down and was shut for over a year in the 70’s. Is that what REALLY made phil choose ‘preaching’ instead of an Art career?
Some of the greatest artists of all time were self taught.
So true Annette. But the value of most artists’ work came after their death. Does this mean Phil Pringle’s work will sell for millions after he dies? That would certainly help cover the cost of some great (future) Vision Night dinners!
“Some of the greatest artists of all time were self taught.”
That wouldn’t work for Phil, because he’d have a well below-average instructor…
Not all artists only sell their works after death. However, the point I was trying to make is the truth made a negative remark about Phil not completing art school. I say big deal! In the world of art you don’t have to have art school qualifications to be a good artist.
Amused – It’s so easy to criticise someone’s art talents, especially since you probably know nothing about art. Even if you do, it’s a sign of bad character to put someone else down, especially for their creative pursuits.
Annette – lighten up! I was agreeing with you, and the others are joking.
This is a site that critiques Phil Pringle and C3. It was a particular dig at the $50,000 value on his work. By the way some of us who comment here are artists, graphic art and fine art who can speak with some authority.
“It’s so easy to criticise someone’s art talents, especially since you probably know nothing about art.”
I know a little about art – but even if I knew nothing, I would still know a lot more than Phil Pringle does. As for artistic talent, I have seen young children who easily eclipse Phil in that respect.
“Even if you do [know something about art], it’s a sign of bad character to put someone else down, especially for their creative pursuits.”
I don’t put Phil Pringle down, I simply point out the truth about him (in fact, it is he who is manifesting any number of defective character traits). As far as his so-called art goes, it’s not a “creative pursuit”, it’s a joke (and a bad one at that).
Phil Pringle can only flog his eleventh-rate rubbish because he’s famous for being famous. He fancies himself as quite the polymath, but the sad truth is that he cannot paint, cannot write, cannot preach, cannot teach, and in fact is neither overly intelligent nor particularly gifted in any discernible way. Why else do you think he gets so upset and defensive when people take him on? It’s because deep down he knows the truth – that he is just a big-talking nonentity who wouldn’t last five minutes in the real world. It’s too bad for him that God isn’t impressed by bombast, bluster, and bums on seats, isn’t it?
“Not all artists only sell their works after death.”
Thinking about that made me wonder – of all the people who have figured out the truth about Phil Pringle, are there any who don’t consider him to be a dead man walking?
Annette…I am alluding to the fact that pringle has the audacity to consider himself teaching ‘Master Art Classes’. C3 students also have referred to these ‘art workshops’ as a ‘Master Art class’. That is just complete vanity on phil’s part and a complete untruth.
That’s true, the truth. Master Art Class is a bit over the top, and dishonest.
Hay girl said:
@churchwatcher – any blogs/info about the latest Vision Builders? I used to hate the month of June when I was at c3. The lead up to this night is over the top and by the end of it, Id be either broke or feel like I’ve missed out on the blessing God was dishing out to those who put $$ towards it. One year, I took a non-christian one year to church in the City campus and the Pastor was going on and on and on and on about sewing money into the building fund etc etc… My friend, who is a wealthy entrepreneur was almost offended. Im certain he thought I brought him along for the purpose of “getting” his money… or “sewing” it… 5 years on, I still have nightmares about it. My church I go to today is awesome. We have an offering once a year for building the church’s facilities and there is hardly any emphasis on this day. Not once have I felt like i HAVE to be part of it out of guilt. It’s really something that is put out there and between us and God as to how and if we want to participate… Just so beautiful..
Guess how long it takes to paint one? Guess how many he does at one time in one room?
“Guess how long it takes to paint one?”
I’d reckon even less time than it takes him to prepare a sermon (with the final result being about as compelling).
Some of his “works” look like they are five-minute jobs at most – how about the cross, where he puts down a background and then overlays it with two intersecting bars of paint that are perpendicular to each other? That work looks *so* complex – it must be really, really difficult to produce something like that; I mean sometimes the bars of paint are *multicoloured*. Wow, Phil, just wow – I bow before you, C3’s “Master Artist”, what amazing talent you have.
You can find Phil’s paintings on the web, but, strangely, no prices seem to be quoted. Is Phil too embarrassed to admit the extent he is ripping off his tasteless victims? (Does anyone remember the splash pens he used to flog for around five or six hundred dollars? They don’t seem to be available any more, so I guess that means they’re collector’s items now).
“Guess how many he does at one time in one room?”
Are you saying that he takes a production line approach to his art? Seriously? That doesn’t seem very “artistic” to me – more like a way of maximising profits. Could Phil really be in it just for the money? Say it ain’t so, Phil.
Ah yes…but the smaller paintings don’t have as much of Phil’s ‘anointing’ sprinkled in..hence the price tag.
Paint fumes can sometimes be confused for the “anointing”.
I bet PP purchased it
Hi Dizzy..you are probably right in a way..but it’s far more hidden than that. Pringle would love to think that his ‘creations’ are sold to the art discerning public, or people who would just love to have it above the foyer entrance or mantlepiece. The truth is…drumroll please…they have ALL been purchased by C3 affiliated campuses, ‘churches’, and relevant people associated with them.
Would there be just ONE C3 institution that has not been ‘encouraged’ to buy a painting [ with congregation offerings/ tithe money, no less] from the boss of C3?
And that money goes straight to the northern beaches, sailboat painting, phil.
Would ANY C3 ‘plant’ EVER have the nerve to NOT purchase an original phil masterpiece for the foyer or reception? I doubt it.
Could there EVER be a non C3 person who has actually spent money on these ‘anointed paintings’ ?
There are art galleries selling his work. http://www.davidhartgalleries.com.au/show_artist.php?artistid=158&start=0&end=11
This is Pro Hart’s son, the Hart family are friends with Tim Hall, often a guest speaker at C3. So a good networking market (no problem there) is being established and prices set but by who? The prices very high, we’ve bought some good collectable pieces from Australian artists over the years and this is way overpriced for a “new” artist. New as in he’s really only hit the market in the last few years.
From the website:
“Phil PRINGLE: Phil has painted for over 30 years and actively exhibited in the past eight years.
He studied at the Ilam School of Fine Art in Christchurch, New Zealand, in the early seventies.
In 2000 the Government of Australia awarded him the Order of Australia Medal for service to the community and he has earned a Doctorate in Biblical Philosophy.
Dr Pringle has authored more than ten books and is a sought after international motivational speaker.
His favourite medium is oils, using bright, bold impasto brush strokes; he paints the things he loves, sailing, surfing, beach scenes and flowers.
For the past six years, Phil’s exhibitions in Singapore and USA have been sell-outs. His art is consistently in demand in Australia and currently paintings by Phil Pringle are held in collections in Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, USA, Singapore, Saudi Arabia, Philippines, Europe and United Kingdom.”
By the way – “Dr.” Pringle? And Dr. Pringle is a “sought after international motivational speaker”? A small mention of his having a doctorate in biblical philosophy. Is he worried his work wouldn’t sell if it was clearly advertised that he is a senior pastor of a Pentecostal church? If they were marketed as “anointed” would they sell?
Rather strange bio.
The number you text your bid to is his daughters number?
Having his art in all these overseas ‘collections’ [ not galleries, you notice] sounds impressive until you suddenly realise that the collections are mostly C3 ‘churches’, offices and cafe’s. “His favourite medium is oils” …perhaps phil needs some ‘Fresh Oil’?
All three videos are now “unavailable” – obviously C3 has a lot to hide. No doubt Phil is *extremely* embarrassed that his “prophecies” regarding Kong Hee turned out to be utter tripe, and that Kong is at this very moment cooling his heels in Changi gaol.
The truth of the matter is that if someone prophecies falsely, they are a false prophet. This is exactly what Pringle has done – there is simply no escaping the fact that his public pronouncement concerning supposed future outcomes was wrong. Although C3 have tried to cover this up by removing damning evidence from public view, there are many witnesses who were present at the time Pringle “prophesied”, and many more who have since viewed the relevant videos during the time that they were on the Internet. Therefore, if anyone henceforth calls Pringle a false prophet, Pringle will be unable to sue, since he would be compelled to either admit – under oath in a court of law – that he had indeed prophesied falsely, or, alternatively, to perjure himself by denying facts that are widely known and that would be attested to by numerous witnesses. This is why C3 have made legal threats against opponents in the past, but haven’t subsequently followed through: they have such a lengthy record of false teaching and egregious conduct that their “case” would be torn to very small shreds, with the details no doubt being splashed all over the media.
Of course, this is all part of a pattern whereby C3, as with all cults, have a pathological aversion to public scrutiny of any sort. It brings to mind the words of Jesus:
“Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.”
So if Phil Pringle doesn’t want to look like an utter fraud, he should put the videos back so that people can view them and make informed judgements. How about it, Phil – you’re not too gutless to do that, are you?