A recent mainstream media investigation has sparked renewed debate over widely publicized healing claims made during a mega crusade led by Prophet David Owuor in Nakuru.
The report questioned the authenticity of medical documents that were presented as evidence of recovery from HIV/AIDS during the highly attended religious gathering.
According to the outlet, a review of patient records displayed at the crusade revealed alleged irregularities, with investigators claiming that some of the documents could not be independently verified and may have been falsified.
The investigation further alleged that several individuals who testified about being healed did not have confirmed HIV/AIDS diagnoses prior to the crusade.
Additionally, the report claimed that some participants may have been paid to give testimonies — assertions that have not been independently verified.
In response, the ministry defended the crusade, maintaining that qualified medical professionals were present and confirmed some of the healings.
The ministry’s statement has fueled public debate, drawing mixed reactions from sections of government officials, healthcare professionals, and members of the public.
The controversy has also highlighted the human dimension behind faith-based healing claims. One woman from Laikipia County, identified under a pseudonym as Mary Njoroge, told journalists that she sought healing for her daughter through the ministry. She alleged that despite repeated declarations of healing, her daughter’s health deteriorated.
According to her account, reliance on faith-based healing led her to discontinue conventional medical treatment — a decision she now says she deeply regrets. She later left the church, describing her experience as painful and disillusioning.
The unfolding debate has reignited broader discussions about the regulation of miracle claims, medical verification standards, and ethical responsibility in religious gatherings.
While critics are calling for greater scrutiny and oversight, supporters of the ministry continue to defend the crusade testimonies as genuine acts of faith.
As the matter continues to generate public attention, calls for clarity and independent verification remain central to the ongoing discourse.