An Epilepsy “Cure” by Peter Popoff

Shortly after the television exposure of evangelist healer Popoff, I appeared on the Sally Jessy Raphael show in St. Louis, with Garry McColman, who was defending the claims of his boss, Popoff. He produced a videotape that Popoff had prepared for him to show. It concerned a small girl, Amanda Bril, who he said had been healed of epilepsy at one of his meetings in Sacramento, California. When Popoff originally broadcast this videotape as part of one of his regular Sunday programs, he had lambasted skeptics who doubted his healing abilities:When we’ve produced doctors’ verified evidence, they’re not satisfied. We’ve had doctors actually come on our program and verify divine healing. And what is their answer? Do they accept this evidence? No! The so-called magician produced another letter that said in rare instances these symptoms would simply subside. In this particular case, it was a case of epilepsy that had miraculously disappeared. And the doctor verified it.... And friends, the thing that really hurts is that so many people have begun to side with the magician. Side with the Devil! Why, the Devil must be laughing with joy!

What “letter” the reverend was referring to, I do not know, but the facts of this case and the “evidence” Popoff presented make it quite clear just how he operates. And I think I know who he means when he refers to the “so-called magician.” At a live Popoff appearance in San Francisco, previous to this claim, I’d photographed a very enthusiastic woman who I noticed was going around forcing herself on people, telling everyone that the Popoff miracles were “all real” because her daughter had been healed of epilepsy. She looked to us at first like a hired flack, though it is now evident that she was only an overenthusiastic disciple. She is the mother of that same small girl whose case Popoff offered as his “proof” on that St. Louis TV program. On his carefully edited videotape, Popoff showed a doctor who said about the little girl:She did, however, respond fairly well to medication. We would expect the seizures to return once the medications had stopped.

Asked if he had seen any further evidence of epilepsy in the girl, he replied: “None at all. None whatsoever.” But when Ross Becker, a reporter for Los Angeles TV station KCBS, interviewed the physician, he told Becker that he and his wife were charismatic Christians and thus believed in faith-healing. Such a witness is hardly unbiased. In fact, says Becker, the doctor told him that he is convinced, because of his religious beliefs, that the healing is “a miracle.” As a medical person, however, he told Becker that that variety of childhood epilepsy often goes into temporary or permanent remission spontaneously! That part of his medical opinion was not presented on the videotape by the Reverend Popoff. Now, months later, one wonders what has happened to that child, and whether Popoff or the mother has managed a rationalization—if the affliction is once again active. But the mother will not discuss the matter now, nor will the doctor. In two three-minute telephone conversations with the doctor’s wife, David Alexander was unable to get by her to speak with the doctor. Later, the woman told another caller that Alexander had tried, in those calls, to convert her to satanism! If the pursuit of truth and the asking of simple questions amounts to satanism, there is a larger population of satanists in this world than anyone has suspected. Every philosopher, student, scientist, and investigator must belong in that category. And, in fact, that is just what many of the evangelists would have their flocks believe! Asking questions leads to doubt. Doubt leads to loss of faith. Loss of faith leads to loss of paradise. Thus, curiosity is a tool of Satan. It is well to note that Popoff’s original broadcast of that miraculous “healing” had superimposed on the screen the phrase “A True Word of Knowledge” as the preacher was calling out the information relayed to him by his secret electronic “ear.” The evidence we developed against this claim was not seen by that TV audience, nor are they likely ever to know of it. How many times can we come up with evidence that proves the case against him? And how many times must we do it before someone in authority acts to stop it?