Blog

8 Jan, 2026

Blog

Moving the Goalpost

“It’s becoming increasingly common to hear people say things like, ‘It’s all about the Kingdom. The church stinks. The church is old and outdated … it’s convoluted and unnecessary. We don’t need it”.

“This is the thinking of exclusive sects who think they are the only ones REALLY doing it correctly. These kinds of arrogant and ignorant comments show that Viola sees his brand of faith as superior to that of everyone else.”  R.A. Baker, Ph.D.

” The problem with changing the rules of the game is that the meaning of the result is changed, too.”

Jeremy Hobbs, New York Times.

_________________

In the previous blog we examined two ideas, 1) Viola’s teachings that much (if not all) of what happens in church is based on paganism, and 2) the uniquely human tendency to look down on others who we believe are inferior. This week we’ll examine the arrogance of Viola’s followers and next week we’ll see if their arrogance is based on anything other than historical ignorance.

Moving the Goalpost

What’s remarkable about Viola new christian movement is that he has managed to move the goalpost for what used to be considered acceptable christian behavior. For the longest time good christians from all denominations have attended church on Sundays (mostly). Viola has convinced his followers that the idea of “church” is not only unbiblical but also based on paganism and not worthy of “true christians”.

He teaches that modern day christians should model the behavior of first century christians. They didn’t attend church. They gathered together in someone’s house. So, in order to be a true follower of Jesus, modern day christians must follow suit. So now, (according to Viola) true christians should no longer attend church, but rather they should meet in someone’s home. Church going christians are viewed as “hapless victims” who are practicing a pagan form of christianity and thus are not real members of God’s kingdom. How’s that for arrogance?

Taking Piety to a New Level

Viola has created a new splinter of christianity that (as it turns out) is even more pious than its predecessors. They have placed themselves on top of the religious totem pole and not only do they get to look down on non-believers and apostates like me, but they also get to look down on church going christians. And thus, they have taken the “holier than thou” attitude to new heights. It’s remarkable if you really think about it. Christians looking down on other christians for… (wait for it) … attending church.

Who’s looking down on whom?

Near my house there is a Baptist church. They call themselves, Tri-City Baptist. In their mission statement they make this proclamation.

“We believe Christians are to be personally separated from all worldly practices that hinder spiritual growth and stability. We will be separated from all forms of apostasy and religious inclusiveness.”

What an amazing thing to say. Not only are “worldly practices” dangerous to spiritual growth, but so is religious inclusiveness. For this congregation, it’s dangerous to believe that people of all faiths (or no faith) can be respected, valued, and accommodated. There must be no open dialogue, no understanding, and there can be no harmony with people who believe differently. Tri-City is on top of their religious totem pole. Their message is, “We are an elite group of church going christians and other christians (with differing beliefs) are a danger to our religious purity and we must protect ourselves from interaction with them.”

No longer on top.

The message from Viola’s followers is, “We (not you) are the only ones doing christianity correctly, and thus we are ‘the true church’ and therefore more pleasing to God.” (Sounds a bit familiar to me, perhaps it does to you too.)

Sorry TriCity Baptist, you’re no longer on top of the religious totem pole. This is the most extraordinary and ironic part of Viola’s teachings. While Tri-City Baptist is looking down from their ivory tower and feeling very confident in their “church” and secure in their disdain for other christians, Viola’s followers are looking down on them simply because they are an “organized church” with a pastoral staff who delivers a message each week, and with a choir that sings from time to time during the service.

Pastors, and sermons, and choirs. Oh my! Pastors, and sermons, and choirs. Oh my!

From Where I Stand.

Like I said before, this feud between differing christian sects is really none of my concern. I left the church decades ago, but not for the reasons Frank Viola gives. I didn’t leave because the church had pastors, or sermons or a choir, nor because the pews had cushions (all of which are unbiblical according to Viola).

I left when I realized that the message from the pulpit was faulty and that christian dogma was mostly based on falsehoods.

Daring souls

Viola says that those people who have left organized church to become part of a home church are “daring souls who have taken the terrifying step of leaving the safe camp of institutional Christianity.” But I don’t see it that way. They’re christians living in a christian nation, criticizing other christians who they believe are below them. That’s not daring. It’s more daring, in a christian nation like ours, to confess that you left the church because you no longer believe in christian dogma. It’s also more courageous to be that rare congregation that embraces diversity and actually welcomes others with different beliefs. They’re the ones showing true courage. Needless to say, I am not impressed with Viola’s “daring souls” who have placed themselves on top of the religious totem pole.

Jeremiah 5

I’m not really into quoting scripture, because I no longer believe it has authority over me. But I’m pretty sure Viola’s followers do believe in the authority of scripture. With that in mind, these verses from Jeremiah 5 seem to fit nicely here.

“An appalling and horrible thing has happened in the land.”

Oh no! What could it be? Gay marriage? Liberalism? Secular Humanism? Turns out, it’s none of those.

“The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests rule on their own authority…”

Wait, what? Someone who claims to be speaking for God, actually isn’t? What a surprise!  And added to that, what they are teaching is based on falsehoods. Hmmm, where have we heard that before?

Viola’s followers have taken piety to a whole new “holier than thou” level. They are even more pious than Tri-City Baptist. And here’s the kicker (still from Jeremiah 5). Why have Viola’s followers enthusiastically embraced such an overly pious attitude?

“And my people love it so!”

There you have it! Christians love feeling superior to others, especially other christians. So what, if it’s based mostly on falsehoods, it feels good being on top of the religious totem pole. Funny thing is, their religion also teaches “The last will be first, and the first will be last.” Not quite sure how they sidestep that little nugget. Anyway, Jeremiah 5 is not done yet. There is one more line to end the chapter.

“But what will you do at the end of it?”

How does this end? Has Viola really created a better form of christianity? Does it matter that it’s based mostly on ignorance and arrogance? Why have none of Viola’s followers taken the time to ask the right questions? Was the first century church really the perfect model for modern day Christianity? Are they really emulating first century beliefs or are they just pretending? Are they really the only ones doing christianity correctly? Is what they are doing really based on historical and biblical accuracy?

This willful naiveté of Viola’s followers is a simple case of “ignorance is bliss.” As we’ve addressed in a previous blog Viola targets their emotions rather than their intellect.

“And my people love it so!”

 

 

From Where I Stand

Jan. 8, 2026

Dale Crum

<Previous Post / Next Post >

1 Jan, 2026

Blog

Holier Than Thou

Taking piety to a whole new level.

“It’s becoming increasingly common to hear people say things like, ‘It’s all about the Kingdom. The church stinks. The church is old and outdated … it’s convoluted and unnecessary. We don’t need it”. 

“Viola presents the “church” of the first century as ideal – it was not. This premise is what his entire movement is based upon: ‘we do things the way the early Christians did it.’ This is the thinking of exclusive sects who think they are the only ones REALLY doing it correctly. These kinds of arrogant and ignorant comments shows that Viola sees his brand of faith as superior to that of everyone else.” R.A Baker Ph.D.

__________________________

In a previous blog we explored the emotive language of christian influencer Frank Viola. From where I stand, he perfectly embodies the definition of a charlatan. He claims to be privy to what God’s plan for humanity has been since the beginning of time. His (made up) stories of God’s eternal plan remind me of another such religious man who made similar claims. All that’s missing from Viola’s teachings are the golden plates.

Even though I no longer call myself a christian, I could easily see through Viola’s “special knowledge” and was not moved by his emotive language. This blog was initially intended to expose Viola’s faulty theology and historical inaccuracies (of which there are many). However, while researching the topic I discovered a number of blogs written by christians (some of them with Ph.Ds.) who were also questioning Viola. Seems I wasn’t the only one who was concerned about Viola’s causal (and many times faulty) relationship with theology, history, and scholarship.

After reading their reviews, I realized that Viola’s ability to hoodwink christians is a family affair. As an apostate, who is no longer aligned with christianity, this is not my battle. It’s not my job as an outsider to expose the falsehoods of a charlatan like Viola. What christian would listen to me anyway? The only people with any chance of effectively refuting Viola’s falsehoods are other christians.

Of the many books that Viola has authored the one that has drawn the most attention is a book entitled Pegan Christianity. Let’s see what christians are saying about that book.

___________________

“It appears that the major theme and conclusion of the book is that current churches are unbiblical. The author has concluded that the church cannot adopt any form of worship that is not specifically stated in scripture. His message is that the church is currently shallow, hollow, and dead. This has occurred because we are following pagan customs in our churches.” neverthirsty.org

“If you’ve never heard of the book, I’ll warn you right now that it is one of the most controversial, I have come across in quite a while, and for good reason. The book makes some very bold accusations and statements that need to be inspected and evaluated very carefully.”

“The premise of the book is that much of the way we ‘do church’ today (according to Viola) was not birthed from logical interpretation of the scripture but was borrowed from pagan religions and culture. Viola mentions that nearly everything associated with church today… we are doing wrong. What’s more, he claims that things have been wrong for at least a thousand years.” Brandon Collins.

___________________

So, let’s see what some of those “wrong” things are.

The “church building”: Its use of light, color, and excessive height cause people to regard it as a “sacred space.” Gothic cathedrals foster a sense of mystery, transcendence, and awe and sends a message that God is “transcendent and unreachable.” Chairs and pile carpets have no biblical support.

The order of institutional church services: Sunday morning services are shamefully boring, without variety or spontaneity and they do not lead to spiritual growth.

Sermons: They discourage active participation and interruptions by the audience, and also “creates an excessive and pathological dependence on the clergy.

Pastors and other trained clergy: Far too many of them are either insufficiently educated or take on too much work or both. Having pastors divides the congregation into first- and second-class christians where parishioners become muted spectators. A specially attired clergy is an affront to the spiritual principles that govern the house of God, because it separates God’s people into two classes: professional and nonprofessional.

Dressing up in your Sunday best for church: Dressing up for church is a leftover from paganism and hypocritical for Christians. Yet, if you can dress well with pure motives, you ought to do so.

Church choirs: Everybody should be allowed to sing, not just a special group, and parishioners should write their own songs and bring them in.

Tithing: Is completely unbiblical and now serves to prop up the unbiblical institutionalized church and the salaries of unbiblical clergy.

The Sacraments: Baptism and the Lord’s Supper have been coopted by pagan mysticism.

Christian education: Sunday School is ineffective. As are Bible colleges and seminaries. Seminary graduates have no real-life experience to handle a church. In addition, highly educated christian who study scripture methodically and logically are seen as above other christians. Logic is a secular construct and is not from God.

It’s Just Human Nature

Before we get into what makes Viola’s ideas so remarkable and extraordinary, we need to spend a minute talking about human nature. Stay with me here. It is a basic human trait to look down our noses at people who we feel are inferior to us. This feeling of superiority seems to be a uniquely human trait. We don’t see other members of the animal kingdom practicing such behavior, (with the possible exception of French Poodles and cats).

You could probably come up with tons of examples on your own, but I’ll give you some anyway. Nationalities look down on other nationalities. As do people of differing races. Economics seems to be a big reason to look down on others. There’s always somebody worse off or better off than we are who deserves our contempt. Generational gaps give good reasons for people to feel a sense of superiority. Us baby boomers feel a bit of superiority to the generations that followed us. We didn’t spend our lives attached to some device like they do now. We went outdoors and actually lived our lives. When we were growing up, the whole neighborhood would play hide-and-go-seek together. That doesn’t happen anymore. My children, who are millennials, look down on Gen Xers. Gen Xers look down on those from Gen Y and all of them look down on those entitled Gen Zers. (By the way, what comes next? Do we start over again at Gen A? Maybe the next generation will be called Gen A-eye.)

The point is that seeing others as inferior is a common human trait. Although they might want to think that they are exempt from this, christians have not escaped this practice. In fact, Christians like (love) to look down on other people. Most christians have no qualms about looking down on non-believers, especially apostates like me. But it doesn’t stop there.

Even though they are supposedly part of the same Body of Christ (as they would say) the different denominations don’t really like each other very much. Catholics look down on Protestants. Protestants look down on Catholics. Most christians look down Mormonism. Mormons believe that Joseph Smith created the one true church, so it’s only right that they look down on non-LDS christians. Jehovah Witnesses look down on everyone who is not JW. Evangelicals, (especially Baptists) look down on other denominations because they’re too liberal. Fundamental evangelicals look down other evangelicals, for the same reason.

This kind of christian piety will certainly never end, and as we shall see, Viola has taken it to a whole new level.

Coming Next:

We’ll explore the real reason why Viola’s ideas are so extraordinary. Remarkably, he has managed to move the goalpost for what used to be considered acceptable christian behavior. Going to church is no longer the christian thing to do. Viola’s followers have placed themselves on top of the christian totem pole by saying that they, and they only, are doing christianity right.

 

From Where I Stand

Jan. 1, 2026

Dale Crum

<Previous Post / Next Post >

25 Dec, 2025

Blog

All You Need Is Love

But what kind of Love?

Christmas Day, 2025

“The truth is, ‘All you need is love’ was NOT Jesus’ central message. That belongs to another person whose first name begins with a ‘J’.”  Frank Viola

“All you need is love. All you need is love. All you need is love, love. Love is all you need.” John Lennon

Love according to christian influencer Frank Viola.

“Jesus’ teaching about love was given (only) to those who already submitted to His absolute lordship and who became part of His kingdom. Love – the way Jesus defined it (which isn’t the same way the world understands it) is how the kingdom of God operates.”

“The concept that Jesus came to teach humans on Planet Earth to be nicer, kinder, and more loving toward each other sounds good to twenty-first century ears, but it makes Jesus out to be someone he was not. Love always requires losing your life, laying it down, denying self.”

“However, a person cannot love in the biblical sense unless they first forsake all (repent), entrust their lives to Jesus (faith), and receive His own divine life into their beings (the new birth). Why? Because the nature of divine life is love, and one cannot receive this kind of divine love outside of receiving Christ and having His Spirit indwell them. Sure, they (non-believers) can be nice, kind, pleasant, and even giving. But they are incapable of the divine love (agape) that the New Testament talks so much about.”

According to John Lennon

Love, love, love
Love, love, love
Love, love, love

There’s nothing you can do that can’t be done
Nothing you can sing that can’t be sung
Nothing you can say, but you can learn
How to play the game
It’s easy

Nothing you can make that can’t be made
No one you can save that can’t be saved
Nothing you can do, but you can learn
How to feel in time.
It’s easy.

Nothing you can know that isn’t known.
Nothing you can see that isn’t shown.
Nowhere you can be that isn’t where
You’re meant to be.
It’s easy.

All you need is love (all together now!)
All you need is love (everybody!)
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need.

Love is all you need.
Love is all you need.
Love is all you need.
Love is all you need.

According to The Jackson Five

Why don’t you give love on Christmas Day?

People making lists, buying special gifts.
It’s time to be kind to one and all.
It’s that time of year when good friends are near.
And you wish you could give more than just presents from a store.

Why don’t you give love on Christmas Day?
Even the man who has everything
Would be so happy if you would bring…
Give love on Christmas Day.
No greater gift is there than love.

People you don’t know, smile and nod hello.
Everywhere there’s an air of Christmas joy.
It’s that once a year when the world’s sincere.
And you’d like to find a way to show the things that words can’t say.

Why don’t you give love on Christmas Day?
The man on the street and the couple upstairs
All need to know there’s someone who cares.
Give love on Christmas Day.
No greater gift is there than love.

What the world needs is love.
Yes, the world needs your love.

Why don’t you give love on Christmas Day?
Every little child on Santa’s knee
Has room for your love underneath his tree.
Give love on Christmas Day.
No greater gift is there than love.

What the world needs is love.
Yes, the world needs your love.

Why not give love on Christmas day?
Tom, Dick, and Harry, and Susie too
Need love everyday as much as you.

Give love on Christmas Day. No greater gift is there than love.

According to Burt Bacharach

What the world needs now is love, sweet love.
It’s the only thing that there’s just too little of.
What the world needs now is love, sweet love.
No, not just for some but for everyone.

Lord, we don’t need another mountain.
There are mountains and hillsides enough to climb.
There are oceans and rivers enough to cross.
Enough to last until the end of time.

Lord, we don’t need another meadow.
There are corn fields and wheat fields enough to grow.
There are sunbeams and moonbeams enough to shine.
Oh, listen Lord, if You want to know.

What the world needs now is love, sweet love.
It’s the only thing that there’s just too little of.
What the world needs now is love, sweet love.
No, not just for some but for everyone.

According to James Taylor

You can play the game
You can act out the part
Though you know it wasn’t written for you.
Tell me, how do you stand there
With your broken heart
Ashamed to playin’ a fool?

One thing can be to another.
It doesn’t take any sacrifice.
Oh, Father and Mother
And sister and brother
If it feels nice
Don’t think twice.

Shower the people you love with love.
Show them the way that you feel.
Things are gonna be just fine
If we only will.
What I really mean say is…

Shower the people you love with love.
Show them the way that you feel.
Things are gonna be much better,
If we only will.

You can run but you cannot hide
This is widely known.
And what you plan to do with your foolish pride
When you’re all by yourself alone?

Once you tell somebody
The way that you feel
You can feel it beginning to ease.
I think it’s true what they say
About the squeaky wheel
Always getting the grease.

Better to
Shower the people you love with love.
Show them the way that you feel.
Things are gonna turn out right
If we only will, if we only will now…

Shower the people you love with love.
You gotta show them the way that you feel.
Things are gonna be much better, if we only will…

Shower the people you love with love.
Show them the way you feel.
Shower the people you love with love.
Show them the way that you feel.

According to Jackie DeShannon

Think of your fellow man
Lend him a helping hand
Put a little love in your heart
You see it’s getting late
Oh, please don’t hesitate
Put a little love in your heart

[Chorus]
And the world will be a better place
And the world will be a better place
For you and me
You just wait and see

Another day goes by
Still the children cry
Put a little love in your heart
If you want the world to know
We won’t let hatred grow
Put a little love in your heart

[Chorus]

Take a good look around
And if you’re looking down
Put a little love in your heart
I hope when you decide
Kindness will be your guide
Put a little love in your heart

[Chorus]

People now
Put a little love in your heart
Each and every day
Put a little love in your heart
There’s no other way
Put a little love in your heart
It’s up to you
Put a little love in your heart
C’mon and
Put a little love in your heart

And the world will be a better place
And the world will be a better place
For you and me
You just wait and see

_________________________

It’s Christmas day, and you get to decide what kind of LOVE the world needs now, (actually you can do it any day). Does the world need Viola’s highly conditional kind of love that is reserved only for an elite group of christians? Or does the world need the kind of LOVE that is “not just for some, but for everyone”?

To borrow a verse from my former church going days (with a few changes),

“But if practicing unconditional love seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day what kind of love the world needs. But as for me and my household, we will choose a love that is nicer, kinder, and available to all.”

Viola is correct when he says that even us non-believers and apostates can be nice, kind, pleasant, and giving. But he is mistaken to teach that we are incapable of a selfless, unconditional, sacrificial, agape kind of love.

This kind of LOVE seeks the well-being of others without expecting anything in return. It teaches us to focus on kindness, patience, and service to others. This is the kind of love the world needs now. This is the kind of love that will make the world a better place, not just for christians, but for all of us. So why not choose to give love this Christmas?

Turns out, John Lennon was right, “All you need is love.”

 

 

From Where I Stand

Dec 25, 2025

Dale Crum

<Previous Post / Next Post >

 

 

24 Nov, 2025

Blog

Rudderless

 

“The gospel of the kingdom includes a radical call to forsake the present world system – its values, its ways, its philosophy, its language and style of speech, its pleasures – and even one’s own life.”

“When I started preaching the gospel of the kingdom, I refused to lay down any rules. I didn’t give a list of ‘dos’ and ‘don’ts’ or ‘thou shalts’ and ‘thou shalt nots.’ That sort of thinking belongs to the old covenant dispensation.”  Frank Viola

In the previous blog we explored the emotive language of christian influencer Frank Viola. We saw that he exclusively used emotive language to convince his audience that he had discovered a better form of Christianity; one that required them to turn their lives up-side-down. In order to enter into his “gospel of the kingdom” they needed to completely change their lives. It’s one thing to have an emotional upheaval, and quite another to translate that experience into the real world. In this blog we’ll see how (and if) Viola equips them with the cognitive tools they will need to deal with the emotional upheaval they had just experienced.

In his book Insurgence, Viola says that when his audience left that conference they were all fired up to become members of the “kingdom of God” and he called them to “severe their ties to the world system”. That seems like a pretty tall order. Did they know exactly what it meant, because I don’t. Read what Viola actually expected from his new converts.

They were called to “forsake the present world system” –

  • its values,
  • its ways,
  • its philosophy,
  • its language and style of speech,
  • its pleasures –
  • and even one’s own life”.

WOW!!! Did any his new followers have the slightest idea exactly what that might entail? I seriously doubt it. More than likely not one of them actually thought through what that means. Remember, Viloa had turned their lives upside-down and instructed them to forsake their life, to follow Jesus, and to live for his kingdom. Those first century apostles “left all to follow Jesus and live for his kingdom”. Could anything less be expected of Viola’s followers? And like those first century apostles they must be “resolutely, totally, and utterly” devoted to Viola’s newly created gospel of the kingdom.

To become part of Viola’s “gospel of the kingdom” thinking was not required. But what he was asking them to do would undoubtedly require quite a bit of thinking.

How exactly does someone forsake the present world system?

Do they stop paying their mortgage? Do they quit their jobs? Do they stop watching TV? Do they have to start speaking differently? Do they stop celebrating holidays? (That sounds vaguely familiar.) Even religious holidays? Remember, all religious holidays nowadays have been taken over by “this world’s systems of entanglements, distractions, and counterfeits”. Do they deny themselves all kinds of pleasure? No more morning cups of coffee? No chocolate, chocolate chip ice cream? No more sports? No more supporting the home team? How exactly are they supposed to forsake their own life? Perhaps the answers to those questions didn’t matter to Viola’s new converts. They believed that they were becoming truer and better christians, just like those early apostles, and for that they would be willing to pay any price.

When I started preaching the gospel of the kingdom in 1998, I refused to lay down any rules. I didn’t give a list of “dos” and “don’ts” or “thou shalts” and “thou shalt nots.” That sort of thinking belongs to the old covenant dispensation.

Let’s see how Viola helps them navigate this separation from “the world’s systems”. He writes,

“For those who have left the old world behind and stepped into the kingdom of God, there are certain things that should be taken care of at the very outset. I will give you the general principles on what those things are. However, I refuse to be specific. The reason is simple. When preachers and teachers get specific on what God’s people should and shouldn’t do, they have moved into legalism.”

Viola has turned keeping God’s rules, regulations, laws, and expectations into a thing that lesser christians do to please God. He would have nothing to do with such legalism. It was something lukewarm christians did, and Viola told his followers that the world already had enough lukewarm and halfhearted Christians.

Take a minute to grasp the gravity of what Viola is asking of his followers. Not only is he asking them to forsake everything that has to do with the “world systems”, but he is also asking them to forsake any ties they might have had with traditional church hierarchy and leadership. It’s as if he has set them adrift in a rudderless life raft and instructed them to untether themselves from anything that might have given them some sense of stability.

World systems? BAD. Church leadership? Bad. Now what?

“Under the new covenant, we have been given the Spirit of God who teaches us what is according to Christ and what is not. And the leading of the Spirit will always conform to the general principles of Scripture. Those who are completely devoted to the Lord will know within their hearts where they need to make adjustments, what to let go, when to make a change, and so forth. Their spiritual instincts will lead them in the Lord’s direction. They don’t need to be told by a human. Devotion to Christ does away with legalism and legality. Spiritual people are those who live by the Lord’s life that indwells them. They know by instinct what the will of God is.”

Under Viola’s new covenant, they will get their direction solely from the spirit of God. No more dealing with those pesky commandments and creeds that were so important to Martin Luther. No more church leadership. No more elders, bishops, and deacons. No more Westminster Confession of Faith. Those were all under an outdated covenant dispensation. Viola is offering a new and better covenant. It’s not all that surprising when you realize that we’ve seen this happen before.

When the above-mentioned Martin Luther made his break from Rome, he believed he was establishing a better form of Christianity. So much so, that he even suggested that the Pope be excommunicated. Calvin was so convinced that his version of christianity was correct that he had a fellow reformer burned at the stake for disagreeing with him. LDS lore tells that Joseph Smith once asked God which christian sect was the true one. The answer from God (obviously) was that none of them were the true church and that he, Joseph Smith was to create a new one. Jehovah Witnesses are so convinced that their religion is the only true religion, that they are willing to come ring your doorbell or stand on the street corners just to share it with you. Now we have Viola, whose new and improved christianity is based solely on “spiritual instincts”.

 

 

“Warning! Warning! Danger Will Robinson!”

 

 

 

However, this idea of the spirit always conforming to scripture, doesn’t happen to be the case with Viola. His followers might think that he is being led by the “Spirit of God”, but much of what he teaches does not conform to the general principles of scripture. In a future blog we’ll explore Viola’s questionable theology. Much of what he says (and his followers believe) is not at all based on scripture. He might be a very charismatic and motivational speaker, but his theology is questionable at best, and heretical at worst. It surprises me how Viola can be so popular in certain religious circles when his theology is so faulty. But that’s a topic for another time.

No longer under the law?

“A person who lives by the indwelling life of Christ through the Holy Spirit is a person who is under a law. But it is not the Law of Moses. Nor is it a law that some preacher created from his own personal standards. No, the law I’m referring to is “the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus”. This law is like the law of gravity; it’s a constant force or power.”

You’ll notice that he never actually says what the law is. Nevertheless, it’s a constant force of power and is as sure as the law of gravity. How incredibly silly. But remember, thinking is not required to be a part of Viola’s new covenant. Just look what he says next about this law.

“The Law of God has been written in our hearts. (We) know by instinct what the will of God is. The external Law, then, is no longer an outward thing full of dead letters and cold commands. It has been transferred into the indwelling life of Christ.”

Wow! Is Viola really saying that the bible is just a collection of “dead letters and cold commands”? Excuse me for a minute while I grab my 50-year-old, leather bound, marked up collection of “dead letters and cold commands” and toss it directly into the trash. Won’t need that anymore. Anything christians need to know about God, humanity and life has already been written on their hearts. No reason to waste time memorizing scripture. They already know everything they need to know about the general principles of scripture because it’s written in their hearts.

I asked the AI gods to give me a summary about the importance of the bible for christians. This was the reply.

“The Bible is important to Christians because it is considered the inspired word of God, serving as a guide for their faith and life. It provides a foundation for understanding who God is, his character, and his plan for humanity. For Christians, the Bible is used to gain knowledge of their faith, grow in their relationship with God, and be transformed by its teachings.”

Toss that all out the window. Viola has found a better way. Untether yourself from the world. Untether yourself from your church. Untether yourself from scripture. You don’t need any of those, because you will instinctively know the will of God.

“When the Spirit leads them, they yield to it (for the most part)—no matter what the cost. And life and peace are the results.”

From where I stand:

Viola’s teachings are a recipe for disaster. If you’re a follower of Viola, it might be time to put your emotions in check and start using your God-given brain. Look carefully at what he is saying and actually think about it. You have been set adrift without anything but instinct as a rudder to guide you. I might be wrong, but this does not sound like the way to “life and peace”.

I don’t put much confidence into what the gospel writers tell us that Jesus said in his lifetime. All four of them were written decades later by people who never actually met Jesus in person. However, I know that christians do consider the gospels to be inspired by God and every word attributed to Jesus is 100% accurate. With that in mind, forget what Viola has been telling you about your place in the Kingdom and heed this verse from Matthew.

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven.  Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’  And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you.” Matthew 7

Let’s change it just a bit.

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven.  Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not forsake the present world’s systems, did we not cast out legalism and the scriptures that are full of dead letters and cold commands, and did we not follow our hearts and know by instinct what your will was?’  And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you.”

Coming next: At the age of 17 Viola made a conscious decision not to attend bible school or seminary… and it shows in his theology.

Endnotes:

Become a Kingdom Citizen

I googled the expression “Kingdom of God’ and found an interesting array of websites. One in particular is a mega-church in the Philippines whose leader is currently being indicted for having sex with underage girls, (something none of his followers seem to have a problem with). On their website they provide a link where you can apply for Kingdom Citizenship so “you can begin your spiritual journey to become a bonafide son or daughter of the Father Almighty”. All you have to do is complete the on-line form and a Kingdom Minister will reach out to you as soon as possible.

On a whimsical note:

I have in my possession the “smallest Bible in the world”. All 1245 pages of the bible can be found on this incredibly small microfiche. Perhaps I could find a cardiologist who would surgically implant it near my heart so I could literally say that I have the Bible written on my heart.  It would be more accurate than what Viola is suggesting.

 

 

___________

 

From Where I Stand

Nov 24, 2025

Dale Crum

<Previous Post / Next Post >

16 Nov, 2025

Blog

Thick as a Brick

The Emotive Language of Frank Viola

“I may make you feel, but I can’t make you think.” Thick as a Brick, Jethro Tull.

“Emotive language is word choice intended to provoke an emotional response in the audience, making them feel a certain way, in order to influence their perspective or create a stronger connection to the topic.”

Unlike the highly educated authors of Answering the Music Man, who base their religious convictions on philosophy and higher thinking, it’s clear that in Viola’s book Insurgence, he isn’t trying to make his readers think. Instead, what he writes, and even the way he writes, is intended to invoke emotions, not thought. Viola’s use of emotive language is dramatic, evocative and, in a sense, somewhat dangerous.

Viola’s exclusive use of emotive language makes me wonder, “why doesn’t he want his audience to think?” Perhaps, it’s because he wants them to feel so deeply that they are willing to make drastic changes in their life that they would never make if they stopped to actually think about the consequences? So, let’s look at portions of his book Insurgence to see if we can determine what he wants his readers to feel, and why he doesn’t want them to think.

What is the insurgence? “During the conference, I did my dead-level best to unleash the titanic, explosive, cataclysmic, earth-shaking, life-altering gospel of the kingdom that was preached by all the apostles in the first century and that turned the world into a mad rage.”

Wow! That’s a lot of emotive language in one sentence. First off, it’s important to note that Viola is not talking about the traditional gospel and its message that salvation is a free gift from God through faith in Jesus. This traditional gospel has been the core of christianity for millennia, but Viola has created a new gospel that he calls the “gospel of the kingdom”. According to him this version of the gospel isn’t just about salvation from eternal judgement, it’s more about (in his words) “the joining together of heaven and earth and establishing God’s kingdom on earth”. Let’s see what he says about his new gospel of the kingdom.

According to that one sentence it’s…

  • Titanic – of exceptional strength, size, or power.
  • Explosive – able or likely to shatter violently or burst apart, as when a bomb explodes.
  • Cataclysmic – a momentous and violent event marked by overwhelming upheaval and demolition.
  • Earth-shaking – of great importance.
  • Life-altering – having an effect powerful enough to fundamentally change a person’s life, for better or worse.

And it sent people into a…

  • Mad rage – extreme, violent, and uncontrolled anger, a state of frenzied wrath that can lead to aggressive actions.

Now, how’s that for emotive language? No thinking required. Didn’t anyone at the conference take the time to ask an obvious question. Did the first century apostles actually turn the world into a mad rage?

Not surprisingly, his emotive language had the effect on his audience that he was hoping for.

“The second night of the conference, something incredible happened. A number of people pulled me aside after the meeting and said things like, “I’ve not been so shaken by the Lord through a message.” Another said, “What took place was electric. Something very special happened in that room that I can’t fully describe.” Others said they were deeply stirred and rocked by what took place.”

Notice that Viola didn’t report that people said he had really made them think. That wasn’t his goal anyway. His goal was to make them feel, and he was successful at that. So much so, that a number of already baptized christians expressed a desire to be re-baptized into Viola’s new gospel.

“We didn’t plan this nor foresee it, but the next morning, a number of people expressed their desire to be baptized. So, I asked a brother and a sister in Christ to baptize anyone who wanted to respond to the gospel of the kingdom. Those who responded were baptized in the hotel pool where the conference was held. Each person being baptized gave a moving testimonial about making their entrance into the glorious kingdom of God. More than half the conference attendees came out to witness the baptisms and rejoice. Many who attended wrote me testimonials of how their lives were turned upside down.”

“Turned upside down – inverted, overturned, capsized, flipped, upended, reversed, topsy-turvy, disordered, chaotic, messed up, confused, and jumbled.”

One of the newly re-baptized followers wrote this,

“By my baptism today, I publicly declare my intentions to…  forsake all that gets in the way of me fully coming into the kingdom of God—into the Lord Jesus Himself. I sever my ties to a mixture of lies and half-truth, which resulted in a lack of seeing the power of the pure gospel’s effect in my life.”

It’s funny that I’ve been saying that very same thing for years; “christianity is a mixture of lies and half-truths”. Every blog I’ve ever published has focused on exposing those lies and half-truths.

Like Viola’s rebaptized follower, I also chose to severe my ties to the “mixture of lies and half-truths” of christianity. However, I replaced them with Secularism. Conversely, Viola’s followers, after having discarded the falsehoods of traditional christianity, chose to replace them with Viola’s falsehoods about the “gospel of the kingdom”. Why would they do that?

We’ll come back to that but first let’s examine some more of Viola’s emotive language.

 None of his new converts thought to question Viola’s falsehoods.

Recovering a High-Octane Gospel “With rare exception, the gospel that was preached in the first century doesn’t exist today. The gospel that John the Baptist, Jesus, Paul, Peter, and the rest of the apostles unleashed on the world was…

  • so titanic,
  • so overwhelming,
  • so radical, and
  • so utterly uncompromising
  • that it made the strongest of men quake.”

Did it really make the strongest of men quake? OMG! He’s boarding on downright silliness now. And it continues.

“The early apostles ripped the earth apart by the seams bare-handed, by the power of the gospel they preached and lived. They were firebrands, rare breeds, unlike anything that most of us have ever encountered. They left all to follow Jesus Christ and live for His kingdom. Their devotion was resolute, total, and utter.”

Did the early apostles actually “bear-handedly rip the earth apart by the seams”? Of course not! But it appears that none of his new converts thought to question that fiction. Remember, they weren’t thinking at all. That was not Viola’s objective. But here’s where it gets dangerously cult-like. Viola reminds them that those first century apostles “left all to follow Jesus Christ and live for his kingdom”.

Viola writes,

“The gospel of the kingdom includes a radical call to forsake the present world system – its values, its ways, its philosophy, its language and style of speech, its pleasures – and even one’s own life. And to surrender that life to Jesus of Nazareth, this world’s true Lord. Then to live out this kingdom life with others who have embraced the gospel of the kingdom.”

From where I stand.

After having been “deeply stirred” by his emotive language, these converts to Viola’s new gospel, were then sent home (to the real world) with a conviction to “severe their ties to the world system”. It’s one thing to have an emotional upheaval, and quite another to translate that experience into everyday life without any cognitive tools to deal with what they had just experienced. How exactly would they do that? Perhaps, now we might be able to understand why Viola doesn’t want his converts to think. Look at what he’s asking them to do.

 

 

Just because something is “Titanic” doesn’t mean it’s foolproof.

 

 

Cataclysmic isn’t always for the good!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coming next:

As we’ll see in the next blog, Viola doesn’t give his converts much guidance about how to “forsake the present world system”. He was all too eager to turn their lives upside down with his emotive language, but they’ll need more than emotions if they choose to follow his radical “gospel of the kingdom”. Plus, we’ll explore what kind of person might be attracted to the idea of forsaking traditional christianity and embracing Viola’s new gospel of the kingdom.

“I may make you feel, but I can’t make you think.”

 

From Where I Stand

Nov 16, 2025

Dale Crum

<Previous Post / Next Post >

13 Oct, 2025

Blog

An Unexpected Email

An introduction to the teachings of Frank Viola.

Recently, I was surprised to receive an email from my former pastor. We hadn’t had any contact for many years. There was no personal greeting indicating that he had sent it specifically for me, (which for some strange reason, disappointed me). The subject line simply said, “Viola”. My former pastor’s first name coincidently is the same as mine, so to avoid any confusion, we’ll call him Pastor Dale.

This is his email in its entirety.

Why did Paul and the other apostles risk their lives and suffer untold horrors to bring the gospel to world?

The common evangelical answer is to save individuals from hell.

There’s no question that the gospel brings life to individual souls, eternal life both in the present age and in the age to come.

However, as I argued in From Eternity to Here, the mission of God goes far beyond the salvation of individual souls from eternal judgment.

God has an eternal purpose that reaches before humans fell, before they were ever in need of salvation.

God’s timeless purpose is to secure a body for the Son, a house for the Father, a bride for the Son, and a family for the Father. All through the Holy Spirit.

Put another way, the ageless purpose of God is to expand the fellowship and communion of the triune God.

This epic idea is wrapped up in the phrase the kingdom of God, which was the central message of Jesus Christ.

The kingdom of God is the joining together of heaven and earth just as it was in the beginning (and as it will be in the end). That God’s perfect will be done on heaven as it is in earth.

Paul and the other apostles sought to bring the gospel message to all who never heard it.

That gospel wasn’t just about salvation from eternal judgment. It was primarily about fulfilling God’s eternal purpose, which in a fallen world, begins (and not ends) with salvation.

The apostolic mission, therefore, was to establish kingdom communities throughout the Roman Empire which would express God’s eternal purpose.

Those kingdom communities – ekklesias, as the New Testament calls them – were a colony of heaven on earth. Through them, God was reclaiming the nation that had fallen under the grip of evil powers.

God’s intention, as it was in the beginning, was and is to recover the earth from the power of His enemy and establish His reign throughout the world, so that His good creation will reflect Him perfectly in the world and that God and humans may joined together in perfect union.

As one philosopher famously said, “He who has a why to live, can bear almost any how.” (Nietzsche said that, a man who I don’t often agree with, so calm down. The quote is fitting.)”

In future blogs we will more closely examine Frank Viola’s emotive ideas, but for now let me share with you my initial response to Pastor Dale.

Dear Pastor Dale,

I was surprised to see that I had received an email from you. It didn’t take long to realize that it was not a personal email to me, but that you had just cut and pasted someone else’s words as your message. I was disappointed, to say the least, but I was even more disappointed when I read what Frank Viola had to say.

I don’t know if you know yet, but several years ago I simply let go of Christianity. It was an awaking experience for me. So, I read the words of Viola with eyes wide open and, not surprisingly, found his ideas ridiculous (at best) and dangerous (at worst).

Here are a few examples.

I did some research on Viola and found this statement in some of his other writings.

Viola: “The kingdom of God knows no injustice, no racism, no inequality, and no cruelty. And the gospel of the kingdom produces a community of people who PUT ON DISPLAY what it looks like when God is in charge. This is one of the many things that the Insurgence has to offer this broken, lost, hostile world.”

I have come to know quite a few Atheists and must say that we also would like a world with no injustice, no racism, no inequality, and no cruelty. If Christians are the one who are going to usher in the Kingdom of God, shouldn’t they be the ones who already practice such qualities? But to be honest, that’s not what we see within Christian circles. There seems to be plenty of injustice, inequality, and cruelty among those who profess to be followers of Christ. Why is that?

When he says that the gospel of the kingdom produces a community of people who “PUT ON DISPLAY” (all in caps) what it looks like when God is in charge, it’s pretty scary. We only need to look at the Old Testament to find out what it looks like when God is in charge. Atheists have a different view of what it looks like when God is in charge. Atheist Richard Dawkins, in his book, The God Delusion, addresses just how appalling biblical ethics really are. He writes,

“The book of numbers tells how God incited Moses to attack the Midianites. His armies made short work of slaying all the men, and they burned all the Midianite cities, but they did not kill the women and children. This merciful restraint by his soldiers infuriated Moses, and he gave orders that all boy children should be killed, and all the women who were not virgins. ‘But all the women children, that have not known a man by laying with him, keep alive for yourselves’ Numbers 31:18.

Do the people who hold up the bible as an inspiration to moral rectitude have the slightest notion of what is actually written in it? What makes my jaw drop is that people today should base their lives on such an appalling role model as Yahweh – even worse, that they should bossily try to force the same evil monster (whether fact or fiction) on the rest of us.” (Dawkins)

So, why does the Bible tell us to repent because the Kingdom of God is at hand?

The christian answer is, “Because when the kingdom that we all pray to come “Thy Kingdom come” actually does come, it will first wipe out all evil and wrong doers from the face of the earth. So, to survive this we must start to go on the path of righteousness meaning we must abide with the standards of God that are stated in the bible.”

Is that what you believe? Is that what happens when God is in charge? Did you know that there are Christians out there who still advocate for the death penalty for homosexuals? Is that what we’ll get in Viola’s Kingdom of God? How can any moral person support such behavior?

In some of Viola’s other writings he says that “love” is not the real message of the gospel. From where I stand, “love” would do a lot to heal this broken, lost, hostile world. It’s really a pity that Christians aren’t the ones who actually show that kind of love. For a recent project, I evaluated the mission statements of Evangelical churches. I did a word search to see just how many times the word “love” actually appeared in Evangelical mission statements. I wrote a blog about this topic.  I wasn’t surprised to find that “love” was rarely mentioned, if at all. I also did this for South Fellowship (Pastor Dale’s former church) and found that the word “love” was mentioned only once. Try it for yourself. (On a side note, the congregation that took over the old church building, mentions “God’s love” eight times in their mission statement.) It’s what the world needs now.

Therefore, I have concluded that Viola’s Kingdom of God, has nothing to offer this broken, lost, hostile world. So, no thanks. I’ll pass on the ridiculous ideas of Frank Viola.

Sincerely, Dale Crum

 

From Where I Stand

Oct 13, 2025

Dale Crum

<Previous Post / Next Post >

14 Sep, 2025

Blog

A Tale of Two Churches 2/2

Trinity Lutheran -vs- Bethany Lutheran

Will the real Lutheran Church please stand up.

“Almost every church claims to believe the Bible or practice Jesus’s ways. Our Lutheran Church boils down what God teaches… and everything Christians believe and do.”

“We are committed to working with people of other religions and worldviews toward mutual understanding and for the common good.”

In the previous blog we explored the mission statements of two Lutheran churches that are on opposite ends of the christian spectrum. Both churches call themselves Lutheran, but given their striking differences, I found myself asking, “Which one has actually based their church on the teachings of Martin Luther?”

In this blog we’ll compare both of their mission statements with the writings of Martin Luther himself. For me, the church that most closely aligns itself with the teachings of Martin Luther, shall be deemed a true Lutheran church. Let the games begin.

Excessive wordiness

Excessive wordiness was one of Luther’s special gifts. Here are several examples of just how verbose Luther tended to be. When Luther visited his parishes, he was very concerned with what he found to be a pitiable ignorance about Christian doctrine. He wrote this about what he found.

“The deplorable, miserable conditions which I recently observed when visiting the parishes… how pitiable, so help me God, were the things I saw: the common man, especially in the villages, knows practically nothing of Christian doctrine, and many of the pastors are almost entirely incompetent and unable to teach. (These) deplorable conditions have constrained and pressed me to put this catechism of Christian doctrine into this brief, plain, and simple form.”

Let’s see how brief, plain, and simple Luther’s catechism really is.

The first christian doctrine Luther addresses are The Ten Commandments, which contain a mere 127 words in total. Luther’s (brief) explanation exceeded 23,000 words. The First Commandment alone, which uses only eight words; “Thou shall have no other gods before me,” required a 3,000-word explanation.

Next, Luther tackled The Creed, which he calls “The Articles of Our Faith.” The entire Creed contains 120 words. Luther’s (brief) explanation of the Creed contains 4,545 words.

Luther’s attempt to simplify the 73-word Lord’s Prayer is an impressive show of verbosity. His (brief?) explanation contains a whopping 8,485 words. It took Luther 2,589 words to explain the first six words of the prayer, “Our Father which art in heaven.” How’s that for brief, plain, and simple?

In his 6,656-word commentary about the book of Romans, (which itself has just over 7,000 words) Luther explains that in order to understand what Paul meant in Romans his readers must first understand the meaning of seven important words. He writes,

“In the first place, we must acquaint ourselves with matters of language and understand what Paul means by these words: law, sin, grace, faith, righteousness, flesh, Spirit; otherwise, we shall derive no benefit from reading this epistle.”

In typical Luther fashion, he used 2,800 words to explain these seven words. That’s an average of 400 words to explain each one of the seven. Our first comparison, therefore, will be to see which mission statement contains the most words, making them more like Luther.

Bethany’s mission statement contains a mere 2150 words. It’s clear, brief and to the point. That is not in true Lutheran fashion. On the other hand, Trinity’s mission statement contains a whopping 8,500 words, not counting the links to other website where you could find even more information about what they believe. Trinity is hands down the clear winner on the point of wordiness as being more Luther-like.

Score: Trinity 1 / Bethany 0.

Lutheranism is the only true religion.

In the above-mentioned commentary of Romans, Luther warns his followers to beware of anyone who teaches contrary to his writings. He writes,

“Beware of all teachers who employ these (7) words (mentioned above) in a different sense, no matter who they are, even if they should happen to be Jerome, Augustine, Ambrose, Origen, and men like them or still higher than they.”

In this quote Luther references what can only be thought of as the Mt. Rushmore of early christian scholars and thinkers, who, in their times were considered the ultimate authority on all matters of theology. According to Luther, these great scholars were wrong, and (of course) he was right.

Trinity Lutheran

Trinity begins their mission statement with this paragraph.

“Almost every church claims to believe the Bible or practice Jesus’s ways. How can you tell the difference between what God teaches and what people have made up? Our Lutheran Church boils down what God teaches into a brief (5,100 words) form called the Small Catechism which summarizes everything Christians believe and do.”

And ends with this statement,

“Christianity is the only true religion you can rely on…”

For Trinity, other denominations are making up what God teaches but Luther’s Large and Small Catechism summarize “everything” christians believe and do. It seems clear that Trinity believes that Lutherans believe and do the right stuff, but all other forms of christianity practice a made-up religion and therefore are suspect.

Bethany:

On the other hand, Bethany is accepting of other religions. Their mission statement says this,

“In our multireligious world, the ELCA is committed to working with people of other religions and worldviews toward mutual understanding and for the common good.”

This is definitely not a concept Luther would have embraced. In fact, his philosophy was nearly the exact opposite. He wrote,

“But those who refuse to learn (i.e. don’t believe as we believe) are to be told that they are denying Christ and do not belong to Him. They are not to be admitted to the Sacrament, accepted as sponsors at Baptism, or allowed to exercise Christian liberty in any way. They should instead be simply directed back to the pope and his functionaries, yes, even to Satan himself. Moreover, their parents and superiors should refuse them food and drink, telling them that the prince is of a mind to expel such rude persons from his realm, and so on.”

Dissenters should be ostracized and refused food and drink? Now that’s more like Luther. Trinity wins another round.

Score: Trinity 2 / Bethany 0.

God’s Love

Bethany mentions God’s love 16 times, saying that God’s Love is limitless, unconditional, never ending, and for everyone.

Trinity only mentions Love twice. “The Bible has two big commands that God gives us: to love Him with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength and to love our neighbors as ourselves.”  It’s really no surprise that God’s love for humanity is not mentioned in Trinity’s mission statement. The only reason love got mentioned at all, is because it’s part of the great commandment, and Luther loved commandments and thus, so do Lutherans.

In Luther’s Large and Small Catechisms, he instructs his followers to love (and fear) God, to love God’s laws and commandments, to love their parents, to love their spouse and to love their enemies. However, there is no mention of God’s love for humanity anywhere in Luther’s writings (at least that I could find). That makes Trinty’s lack of love more Luther-like.

Score: Trinity 3 / Bethany 0.

The Jews & their Lies.

Martin Luther’s anti-Judaic writings

At the beginning of his career, Martin Luther was sympathetic to the Jews, probably because, like him, they were resistance to the Catholic Church. However, when he expected them to convert to his purified version of Christianity and they did not, he turned violently against them. In a vitriol essay entitled “The Jews and their lies” Luther wrote,

“Therefore, the blind Jews are truly stupid fools. Now just behold these miserable, blind, and senseless people … their blindness and arrogance are as solid as an iron mountain.”

“Therefore, be on your guard against the Jews, knowing that wherever they have their synagogues, nothing is found but a den of devils in which sheer self-glory, conceit, lies, blasphemy, and defaming of God and men are practiced most maliciously and veheming (sic) his eyes on them.”

“Moreover, they are nothing but thieves and robbers who daily eat no morsel and wear no thread of clothing which they have not stolen and pilfered from us by means of their accursed usury.”

“(We) should toss out these lazy rogues by the seat of their pants… and then eject them forever from this country.”

Bethany:

“The ELCA has repudiated Martin Luther’s anti-Judaic writings and is committed to Jewish relations and combating anti-Semitism.”

Trinity:

No mention of Luther’s anti-Judaic writings.

For Bethany to disassociated themselves from the teaching of their honored patriarch is a bold move. It is absolutely the right thing to do but cannot be considered the Lutheran thing to do. Trinity’s silence on the matter, while not being PC, can be considered as more like Luther.

Score: Trinity 4 / Bethany 0.

So, Trinity Lutheran wins the contest. They are without a doubt, more Lutheran than Bethany. Yet, I’m not saying that it’s necessarily a good thing. Lutheranism as practiced by Trinity Lutheran definitely has its flaws and personally, I would not choose to attend a church like that. On the other hand, I would be more inclined to visit Bethany Lutheran, because I like their acceptance of others.

They write,

“(We) are continually working toward reconciliation and to share our fundamental belief that God’s love and grace are limitless and for everyone.‍ At Bethany Lutheran Church we value people of diverse race, sexual identity, ethnicity, and political affiliation.”

Definitely not Lutheran-like, but maybe Christ-like. But how would I know?

I’ll end this blog with a quote from renown historian Will Durant.

“He (Luther) freed his followers from an infallible pope but subjected them to an infallible book; and it has been easier to change the popes than the book. He retained the most cruel and incredible dogmas of medieval religion, while allowing almost all its beauty to be stamped out in its legends and its art, and bequeathed to Germany a Christianity no truer than the old one, yet far less joyous and comforting. He became almost as intolerant as the Inquisition.” 

Endnote:

I have included this because it would be almost unbelievable to some people that Luther actually said these inflammatory statements. But he did, and here are his 7 steps to deal with the “lying Jews”.

  • First, set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians.
  • Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed.
  • Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them.
  • Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb.
  • Fifth, I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the countryside.
  • Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping.
  • Seventh, I commend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow, as was imposed on the children of Adam.

 

 

From Where I Stand

Sept. 14, 2025

Dale Crum

<Previous Post / Next Post >

1 Sep, 2025

Blog

A Tale of Two Churches

Trinity Lutheran and Bethany Lutheran

His Law always accuses us and cannot save us since we’re sinners. Trinity

We believe all people are created in God’s image and loved by God. Bethany

In January of 2025, I wrote a blog about Trinity Lutheran Church in Denver, CO. Trinity calls themselves a confessional church, meaning their mission statement clearly states what they believe. “At Trinity what you see is what you get.” I have no problem with that. I’d rather that a church be upfront about their beliefs than see them luring people in under false pretense. My problem, however, is that I just don’t like their brand of christianity (i.e. Lutheranism). We’ll explore that topic in a future blog.

I assumed that all Lutheran churches were the same, and then I discovered Bethany Lutheran, (also in Denver). Aside from the fact that Bethany is also a “what you see is what you get” kind of church, it was hard to believe that they both call themselves Lutheran. Trinity’s mission statement is clear that there are certain kinds of people, (including other christians) who are not welcome at their church. Bethany’s website, on the other hand, clearly states that everyone one is welcome, saying,

“Bethany Lutheran Church values people of diverse race, sexual identity, ethnicity, and political affiliation.”

That one difference really surprised me, so I took a deeper dive into these two Lutheran Churches and found out that they have very little in common. Here’s a snapshot of their differences.

Love

Trinity: “The Bible has two big commands that God gives us: to love Him with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength and to love our neighbors as ourselves. Everything else boils down to those.”

Notice that these two mentions of Love are commands. Christians are commanded to Love God and love their neighbors. There is no mention of God’s love for mankind anywhere in Trinity’s mission statement.

Bethany:

  1. As Christians, we believe all people are created in God’s image and loved by God.
  2. God’s love for humanity.
  3. We are led by the Holy Spirit to love and work for justice and peace.
  4. Serving everyone, suffering everything for the love and praise of God.
  5. To love and serve neighbors.
  6. God in Christ loves us.
  7. God’s love for us.
  8. God’s unconditional love.
  9. In response to that love, we are set free to live gratefully and lovingly.
  10. God’s never-ending love
  11. God’s love
  12. Frees us to love others.
  13. God’s unconditional love for us.
  14. God’s love is unfathomable.
  15. God’s infinite love.
  16. God’s love
  17. God’s love for us is limitless and persistent.
  18. Cannot separate us from the love of God.
  19. Compelling message to love & care for one another
  20. Do justice and love mercy

Sin

Trinity: By “sin” we mean every word, thought, and deed against God’s Law.

  1. The law cannot save sinners.
  2. God’s holy law always accuses sinners.
  3. There is no hope for sinful men except in Jesus Christ.
  4. Only the gospel can save us from the punishment of sin in Hell.
  5. This gospel is to save sinners from death and Hell.
  6. His Law always accuses us since we’re sinners.
  7. Can be boiled down to sin and death.
  8. The first sin of our parents Adam and Eve has passed on to us a defect called original sin.
  9. Along the way to death, we commit sins.
  10. Those sins… lead us to death.
  11. Death is not natural except for sinners.
  12. If sin could be taken away from us, then we could be saved from death.
  13. The law curbs sin so that it doesn’t destroy everything.
  14. The Law shows us our sin.
  15. God saves us from our sin and death.
  16. Made an atonement for our sins.
  17. Salvation from sin, shame, and death.

Bethany: What is sin?

  1. Jesus took upon himself the sin.
  2. We live in the tension of still being sinful.
  3. Sin is a complicated thing to talk about because it comes in many forms.
  4. Sins can be individual as well as communal.
  5. Sin is separation from God.
  6. It’s difficult to admit our sins.
  7. God promises to forgive our sin.
  8. When we confess our sins, we are assured of God’s forgiveness.

Grace

Trinity: (one reference)

  1. Our salvation is all grace – a free gift.

Bethany:

  1. God’s grace is a gift.
  2. We have confidence in God’s grace.
  3. God has shown such grace.
  4. Saved by God’s grace and God’s grace alone.
  5. We receive the gift of grace by faith alone.
  6. The gift of grace expresses God’s unconditional love.
  7. God’s grace is limitless and for everyone.‍
  8. We respond to that grace by serving and loving our neighbor.
  9. Grace is a gift from God’s infinite love.
  10. We experience God’s grace in times of need.

Welcome

Trinity: No mention of welcome.

Bethany: “Welcome is what our church strives for. We recognize that there are groups and communities of people who have been hurt by experiences with church. They have been made to feel that they cannot be their God-given selves in church settings. Our fundamental belief is that God’s love and grace are limitless and for everyone.‍ Bethany Lutheran Church values people of diverse race, sexual identity, ethnicity, and political affiliation. We invite you to worship and encounter a God who loves us.”

Will the real Lutheran Church please stand up.

What’s obvious from this snapshot of these two churches is that even though they both call themselves Lutheran, they are on opposite ends of the christian spectrum. Bethany, clearly a progressive church, focuses more on Love and specifically God’s Love. On the other hand, Trinity, being more evangelical, emphasizes the importance of sin and death and never once mentions God’s Love.

If I were a church goer, (which I am not) I would choose to attend Bethany. Their multiple references to God’s love and their stance on acceptance of everyone would be very appealing to me. It’s still perplexing to me why anyone would choose a church that fails to mention God’s love in their mission statement. But that’s not the real issue here, is it?

Both these churches call themselves Lutheran, but given their striking differences, I found myself asking, “Which one is actually following the teachings of Martin Luther? Which one of them is faithfully following the creeds and beliefs that Luther established in his writings?”

For me, the church that most closely aligns itself with the teachings of Martin Luther, would be the true Lutheran church. In the next blog we’ll compare the mission statement of both Trinity and Bethany to see how they match up with writings of Martin Luther himself.

Will the real Lutheran Church please stand up.

 

From Where I Stand

Sept. 1, 2025

Dale Crum

<Previous Post / Next Post >

25 Aug, 2025

Blog

Surrendering Your Mind

It’s always a bad idea!

“We aren’t surrendering our minds to other people, as in cults, but to the one true God.”

“It has only been since leaving the Assembly that the fog of deception and the fear have lifted, and we have begun to see what we were involved in and how emotionally and spiritually damaging it has been.”

“The road to recovery has not been easy.”

In the previous blog we explored the thought process of a christian blogger named Scott who says that a Christian’s life can be transformed, by “surrendering their mind to the rock-solid foundation of God’s true word.” Then and only then will they begin to think like Jesus.

Obviously, as a secularist, I have some concerns with Scott’s premise of surrendering your mind to God, or for that matter, to anything. Here’s how Scott justifies his reasoning.

“It’s a risky thing to surrender your mind to God and his word. The world will tell you that it is intellectual suicide. You might think that “surrendering your mind to God’s word sounds like brainwashing – the way people get sucked into cults. It’s not. Because we aren’t surrendering our minds to other people, as in cults, but to the one true God.” (prepared to answer.org)

That paragraph really raised some red flags for me. The interesting thing about his statement is that Scott seems to believe that christians are “surrendering their minds to the one true God”, which implies that everyone has a direct connection to the one true God. Perhaps that’s what christians want to believe, but that’s not how churches actually function.

Lay christians aren’t surrendering their minds directly to “the one true God”. The average christian looks to a spiritual leader for direction. It’s hard to imagine a church where everyone has a direct connection to the one true God. Wouldn’t that be rather chaotic? The churches I’ve attended don’t function like that.

Church hierarchy functions more like an extension cord. Church members plug themselves into pastors, preachers, and other religious leaders who (they believe) are actually plugged directly into God. Scott says that it’s not like a cult, but it’s precisely what happens in cults. When people surrender their minds to charismatic religious leaders, it can get pretty ugly.

Christians are often compared with sheep, and therefore, in need of a shepherd. You can’t have sheep from the herd wondering off in any direction according to their whim. They must be guided and controlled.

Scott: “We aren’t surrendering our minds to other people, as in cults, but to the one true God.”

Despite what Scott says, this is NOT how churches really work.

There are people in authority who claim to have a direct connection to the one true god, and that person tells their followers what God demands from them. It is simply a lie to tell lay christians that they are surrendering their minds “to the one true God”. If they are part of a congregation, they are surrendering their minds to other people, and are plugging their mind into someone else, who they believe is plugged into God. Therefore, the question becomes, “is that person who says he/she is plugged into God, actually plugged into God?” A great deal of spiritual abuse happens when someone claims to know what God wants.

While researching his book Recovering from Churches that Abuse, Ronald Enroth interviewed many “survivors of cults” who shared with him stories about their painful experiences in religious cults. One such survivor, who Enroth calls Eric, said this about why he stayed in the cult for over 20 years.

“When I left the Assembly, I was very confused. I felt numb. I felt as if I had made a very big mistake. For twenty years I had set aside my concerns because I felt that Brother George’s teaching was truly God’s message from the Throne and therefore my concerns were, no doubt, of the flesh or of the enemy.”

Notice that when cult members have doubts about what they are experiencing in the cult they are indoctrinated to blame 1) their own personal weakness or 2) the Devil. The true abusive nature of the cult is never questioned. That is a prime example of surrendering your mind and letting someone else tell you what to think. “There’s nothing wrong with the church. It’s the members who are flawed.”

Eric continues,

“After all, if you are being given ‘God’s message’ from ‘God’s servant’ who has ’God’s anointing’ for ‘God’s Work’ concerning ‘God’s testimony,’ how can you really question it?”

This is exactly when you should question it. There are enough red flags in that one paragraph alone to warrant many questions. For example: What exactly is God’s message? What makes someone God’s special servant? How do you know that person has a special anointing by God? What exactly does that mean? What is God’s work? (It’s certainly not Matthew 25.) What exactly is God’s testimony? Eric continues,

“It has only been since leaving the Assembly that the fog of deception and the fear have lifted, and we have begun to see what we were involved in and how emotionally and spiritually damaging it has been. The road to recovery has not been easy.”

If Eric had actually asked the right questions about what they were involved in early on in the process, they might have avoided the years of emotional pain and trauma. But of course, that would not have been possible. Questioning church leaders is seen as betrayal and is severely punished. Eric was not up to the task.

Eric continues,

“The most important thing in my recovery has been the need to get the proper balance between the heart and the head. In the Christian life, the mind is not something to be subjected to the heart.”

What exactly does it mean that “the mind is not something to be subjected to the heart?” I spent years in evangelical circles, and I never heard that phrase. My Christianese is a bit rusty, so, I asked the AI gods what that phrase meant. According to Google “this statement suggests that reason should be the primary guide in our decisions and actions, rather than being swayed or controlled by emotions.” If that’s what the Eric is saying, it’s not just a christian thing, it’s a universal idea that predates christianity. Perhaps, I didn’t get that right. As I’ve already mentioned, I’m no longer fluent in Christianese.

Eric: “It is false to say you cannot know or understand the Word of God unless you have the proper inner attitude, or unless you surrender and submit, and that only when you get to that place will God break through and show you the way.”

Eric is contradicting what “prepared to answer” says in his blogs about thinking like Jesus, and I quote,

“If you want your life to be transformed, then you must be willing to surrender your mind to the rock-solid foundation of God’s true word. When you do, God will begin to renew your mind so that you will begin to think like Jesus.”

Eric, who spent years in a cult, knows that this is false thinking. I know this is false thinking. So, why doesn’t Scott know?

Another cult survivor who Enroth calls Tracy also experienced ambivalence about spiritual matters.

“I have had to deal with much emptiness since I left. I didn’t know how to hear God’s voice. I never had to, because I always asked somebody else.”

She had surrendered her mind to “somebody else”. After leaving the cult, Tracy has finally learned how to think for herself. She says,

“I felt guilty about leaving. The crisis point was the third year after we left. I didn’t know if there was a God, or, if there was one, why he had permitted these things to happen to us.”

As a secularist I believe it’s false thinking to blame God for “permitting these things to happen”. She fell victim to a cult because she surrendered her mind to someone else. Plain and simple!

She continues,

“I got angry frequently. Now I have figured out what I believe, and I don’t want anyone to tell me what to do or believe. I don’t want to go to church anymore, and that makes me feel guilty”

I would say to Tracy, “Don’t feel guilty about not wanting to go to church anymore. It’s doesn’t matter much what church you go to, there will always be someone who wants to tell you what to do and what to believe. It’s the nature of christianity. You have been granted grace, don’t run back into the fire.

Another survivor whom Enroth calls Peter also still struggles with spiritual confusion after leaving a religious cult. He says,

“What I am looking for in a church is a place where I can be intellectually honest. I want to ask the tough questions.”

I applaud his new desire to tackle tough questions, but good luck with that. No christian church, I know of, is comfortable when people start asking questions and especially “tough” ones. Intellectual honesty is not really valued in christian churches. If this is what Peter is looking for, he will be gravely disappointed.

He continues,

“I have questions that were never resolved when I was a young Christian. I have to find out what I believe, not what others have told me to believe. I’m not going to roll over and play dead ever again.”

Once again, good luck with that.

From where I stand:

I would say to Peter, “Asking tough questions is a great start. It’s been said that “spiritual growth is the process of replacing lies with the truth.” Do that! Ask as many questions as you need to get to the truth. Once you’ve actually committed to intellectual honesty and decided to follow reason, evidence and truth wherever they might lead, there is a good chance they will lead you away from your cherished beliefs and away from evangelical christianity. That’s okay. Don’t fear secularists like me. What you have been taught about “the world” and non-believers is based on lies. Letting go of the false teachings of christianity can be a slow and sometimes gut-wrenching process.

It might take years… but it’s worth it.

 

 

 

From Where I Stand

Aug. 25, 2025

Dale Crum

<Previous Post / Next Post >

17 Aug, 2025

Blog

True Thinking?

How do we know it’s true?

“All true thinking starts with what God says.”

“Spiritual growth is the process of replacing lies with truth.”

In the two previous blogs we were exploring the writings of a christian blogger named Scott, on a website called “prepared to answer”. His topic for a three-part series was “how to think like Jesus”. Both part one and part two contain statements that can only be regarded as questionable theology. Not that I really care about theology, but if you’re going to use it, it’s important to get it right. Scott does not.  I was hoping his third installment entitled “Start Thinking Like Jesus – Today!” would prove to be more productive, and less deceptive. However, as we shall see, it’s just more of the same, and starts with this statement.

“All true thinking starts with what God says.”

Now there’s a statement that needs analyzing. Unfortunately, many, if not most, christians lack the ability, and the awareness to do just that. Fortunately, some of us have learned to ask questions and to think for ourselves. So, let’s examine Scott’s opening sentence piece by piece.

All true thinking…

What exactly is “true thinking”? The google gods defined it as thinking that is honest, authentic and, of course, true.

That said, we know that there are different categories of truth.  But what Scott is proposing, however, is that there is a form of truth which is only available to christians. Which begs the question, (at least for me) how true is christian thinking?

I’ve spent the past three years attempting to answer that question. What I have concluded is that believing something (like the inerrancy of the bible) doesn’t necessarily make it true. Lots of people believe in lots of things that aren’t true, such as the legendary Sasquatch (Bigfoot), and that the world is flat despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

So, we ask the question again.

How true is christian thinking?

Just like believing in Bigfoot or a flat earth, not everything christians believe is true. Consider the following statements which are taken directly from various church mission statements. As you read these, ask yourself, “Do they reflect ‘true thinking’?

  • We believe in the full historicity of the biblical record of primeval history.
  • We believe that God created the heavens and the earth (from nothing) in six historical days.
  • We believe the creation account is factual, historical, and is the foundation of our understanding of the created universe, God’s power, and his glory.
  • We believe in the literal existence of Adam and Eve as the progenitors of all people, the literal fall in the Garden of Eden and resultant divine curse on creation.
  • We believe in the worldwide flood that destroyed the earth, animal life, and the human race, except for Noah and those he took in the ark with him.
  • We believe in the origin of the nations and languages at the tower of Babel.
  • We believe there is a real personal devil of great malevolence and power.

One might wonder how christians could actually believe these legendary stories. The mission statement of Veritas International University tells us why.

“Denial of the biblical teaching on creation, undermines many essential doctrines of the Christian Faith.”

It’s really pretty simple, all of christianity is based on these fundamental falsehoods. If christians were allowed to question Genesis, then the entire bible would come into question. And if that happens, as the saying goes, “the walls would come tumblin’ down”. So, if christians want to believe in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, they must first believe in the legends of Genesis. Is that true thinking?

…starts (defined)

To begin, commence, initiate, inaugurate, take the first step in a course, process, or operation. According to Scott all true thinking has the same origin which is…

…with what God says.

What exactly is Scott saying here? I guess we have three options.

Option one:

Christians believe that the bible is the word of God. So, is Scott stating that “everything” in the bible is God-breathed? Does that mean that every word between “In the beginning” and “The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all. Amen.” (in Revelations) is what God says and must be considered as the start of “true thinking”? This is what fundamentalists believe and defend in the face of strong evidence to the contrary. It that true thinking?

Option two:

The expression “Thus saith the Lord” appears 415 times in the Old Testament. Could he possibly mean that each of those 415 times is, what God says? If that’s the case, we would have to tell Pharaoh to “Let my people go!” Would that be the start of true thinking?

Option three:

In part one of his series Scott makes this comment. “All that’s required (to live like Jesus) is listening to and trusting what God plainly tells you.” So, the question is, how does God “tell” his followers anything? Does God verbally speak directly to them? Since Scott doesn’t back most of his statements with scripture, is he getting his revelations directly from God? Are those revelations true thinking and can they be trusted? Let’s put Scott to the test.

From Bad to Worse

He writes,

“And if we think about it, (All true thinking starts with what God says) makes perfect sense because any alternative just sounds, well…ridiculous. Just think about it. Try saying the following sentence out loud and replace ‘God’ with something else:”

  • “All true thinking starts with what God says.”
  •  “All true thinking starts with what _____________ says.”

“Does anything else sound right to you? Can you imagine anyone inserting their name into the blank, claiming that they are the source of all truth? You’d think they were out of their minds! But that’s exactly what we’re saying every single day when we don’t submit all thinking to God’s word.”

This is a prime example of how faulty Scott’s reasoning really is. He’s making the wrong comparison and as a result has come to the wrong conclusion. In order to be valid, the word “says” needs to be removed from both statements. For the comparison to have any integrity, it should read something like this.

  • All true thinking starts with God.
  •  All true thinking starts with _____________.

In order to fill in that blank, perhaps we should do exactly what Scott has suggested.

“Try saying the following sentence out loud and replace “God” with something else:”

Okay, let’s do that.

All true thinking starts with “something else”.

Okay, that works! Now, let’s see what that something else might be.

All true thinking starts with ____________.

How about with… reasoning, or investigation, or wisdom, or facts, as in “all true thinking starts with verifiable facts”? (Unless of course, you are Kellyanne Conway.)

From where I stand, Scott’s claim that christians are somehow privy to “all true thinking” is ironically an untrue statement, which by definition, is the opposite of true thinking. Therefore, it’s highly unlikely that Scott, or any of his readers, for that matter, can actually arrive at “true thinking” when their starting point is an untrue statement?

Perhaps we should look at the other side of the coin. As a secularist I would say that…

True thinking does not start with a belief in gods. Period!

Yet, Scott continues,

“Being a Christian isn’t a matter of thinking vs. not-thinking. It’s a matter of where our thinking starts from. Ultimately, there are only two places where thinking can start: either believing truth begins with God or truth begins with us. Either God’s truth is true, or mine is. These are our only two options.”

We’ll come back to that thought in a minute. For now, let’s look at more of Scott’s (questionably) true thinking.

Scott: “Learning to think like Jesus, then, begins with trusting that God is the starting point for all true knowledge. That’s why Solomon in his wisdom declared, ‘The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.’”

Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. How’s that for wisdom? Is that an example of true thinking? By the way, I’m almost there in my quest for wisdom; I only have 699 wives and 300 concubines to go to. I’d better get busy.

Scott: “As the Son of God, Jesus was the most brilliant man to ever live. When he walked the earth, he never took a blind leap of faith in anything. Nor does he ask us to. Rather, he based every thought, and therefore every action, on what he knew to be true, namely ‘every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.’”

Wow, that paragraph is quite the collection of outlandish falsehoods.  So, as a skeptic, I have to ask, “Are those four sentences God’s truths or Scott’s truths? Remember, according to Scott those are the only two options. “Either God’s truth is true, or mine is.” So, which is it?  Let’s take a look.

If Jesus really was the most brilliant man to ever live, how would we know? Could we tell how brilliant he was through his writings? Brilliant people all throughout history have shared their brilliance with humanity through their writings. Take for example the writings of Aristotle, Plato, Thomas Aquinas, Marcus Aurelius, Maimonides, Martin Luther and the 13th century major Jewish thinker, Levi Ben Gerson.

So, why not Jesus?

The truth is that we know nothing about Jesus’ brilliance from his own writings. In fact, what we do know about the historical Jesus was given to us many decades after his death by people who never actually met him. Would believing that Jesus was the most brilliant man to ever live be considered “true thinking”? Scott seems to think so, but I certainly don’t.

Let’s look at the rest of that paragraph. Is anything in it verifiable? Can Scott prove that Jesus never took a blind leap of faith or that he based every thought, and action, on whatever proceeded from the mouth of God? Does God even have a mouth?

“If you want your life to be transformed, then you must be willing to surrender your mind to the rock-solid foundation of God’s true word. When you do, God will begin to renew your mind so that you will begin to think like Jesus.” (1)

So, there you have it. After three blogs, Scott has finally come to the point of what it means to “think like Jesus”, and here’s the secret. “You must surrender your mind.” Period.

It doesn’t matter what you surrender your mind to; it’s still a bad idea.  Let’s see how he defends this folly.

  • “It’s a risky thing to surrender your mind to God.”

Yes, it is.

  • “The world will tell you that it is intellectual suicide.”

Because it is.

  • You might think that “surrendering your mind to God’s word sounds like brainwashing…

Anytime you surrender your mind to someone or something else, they are controlling your thoughts; not you. That, by definition, is the beginning of brainwashing.

  •  …the way people get sucked into cults.

When people stop thinking for themselves that is exactly how they get sucked into cults. (2)

  • We are surrendering our minds to the one true God.

And that makes it okay? It does not as we shall see in future blogs.

Coming next:

“From Where I Stand” will explore spiritually abusive churches. We’ll look at why people are drawn to such churches and why it’s so difficult to leave.

End Notes

  1. “It is false to say you cannot know or understand the Word of God unless you have the proper inner attitude, or unless you surrender and submit, and that only when you get to that place will God break through and show you the way. Instead, the gospel is clear and easy to understand. It is not a puzzle that we have to put together.” Recovering From Churches That Abuse, by Ronald Enroth.
  2. The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse, by David Johnson and Jeff Van Vonderen.

 

From Where I Stand

Aug. 17, 2025

Dale Crum

<Previous Post / Next Post >