How I Got Kicked Out

 

Background: I’m a charismatic at heart. After all, I was “born again” during the Jesus Movement in 1971. When I relocated to Williamsport in 1979 as cameraman for WBRE-TV’s Central PA News Bureau, I joined the Door Fellowship since that was where many “Jesus Freaks” attended.

    Two years later The Door, under Pastor Wayne Holcomb’s guidance, started promoting the scortched-earth policy of “disfellowshipping.” Anyone who disagreed with the church, anyone whom the church deemed a threat to their operation, was told to leave and not come back unless they repented of their ways.

    In a last-minute attempt to be a spokesman for many who had already left, I wrote the following letter to Pastor Wayne. Here’s what I said:

Story:

Introduction

    When Paul was teaching on marriage in the seventh chapter of 1st Corinthians, he had the wisdom to distinguish between his own opinion and direct commands from the Lord. So should it be with any follower of Christ. Whatever we say or write should be tempered by the concurrent revelation of the source of our information. Is it a direct command from the Father Himself as recorded in the Bible? Or is it only our personal perception of things based on our current understanding of, and relationship with, the Lord?

    Most of what comes out of the mouths of christians is just that–their own opinion. If we could keep that in mind we wouldn’t take each other as seriously as we do and we would avoid many fruitless arguments, bruised egos and severed relationships.

    We Christians like to impress others with the weight of our words. We want our listeners to think that we have a connection with God that’s better than anyone else’s. Yet the undeniable fact is all of us rely on the same two sources of information. The first source is the Holy Spirit, who speaks to us in a still, small voice we rarely chose to listen to. The second source is the small mass of gray matter inside our skull that knows so little. Clearly, our words fade in importance and punch when we take ourselves into account.

    As men and women of an infinitely complex heavenly Father, we should swallow our pride and admit that we now see through a glass darkly. Anything we say is imperfect compared to the perfect words of our Lord as recorded in the bible.

    Let us lay down our pride, put away our guns and say along with Paul...“in my opinion.”


Unity

    In my opinion, the central issue at the Door Fellowship is not submission or prophecy or Pentecostal traditions but rather, the Door’s definition of unity. They would probably define unity as everyone thinking and acting as one. In other words, everyone doing the same thing. If achieving that sort of unity is their goal, then their task is threefold. First, boil down the complexities of Christianity into simplified, neatly packaged doctrines. Second, present these doctrines in a manner that only allows that one particular point of view to be heard. And three, eliminate any dissenting views or differing opinions.

    The fact is God never intended unity among the brethren to mean similarity among the brethren. When Jesus prayed that the church would be one, he gave as an analogy of unity the relationship between Himself and the Father. It should be obvious to us that these two spiritual entities are similar in their purpose but not similar in their function and composition.

Our own definition of unity should therefore mesh with this example. Christians are in unity when their purpose–to glorify the Lord–is similar. However, their function in the body can be different (for example, “are all apostles?”) and their composition (that is, their opinions, personalities, ways of thinking) can be different. Variety is obviously part of God’s plan. If you don’t believe it, just look at the world He created. Therefore, difference of opinion within the body of Christ should be welcomed rather than smothered.

    In fact, there are specific reasons for a variety to exist. In Genesis, we see a world that is dark, void and without form. Everything is the same. All is conformity. Yet God sees the need for diversity, for things to balance each other by their differences. In His unfathomable wisdom, God creates differences. Lightness and darkness. Land and water. Plants and air. Animals and humans. Clearly, life as God designed it is made up of opposing and differing forces.

    Without variety there can be no balance. The very notion of achieving balance implies that you have opposing forces on the same see-saw. If you eliminate one force because you don’t agree with it, or because it acts or thinks or talks differently, you immediately have an imbalance.

    Variety is what the real world is all about. Variety makes for complexities. Although some people would have us believe that life consists of black and white issues, problems and solutions, it is just not that way. Life consists of different shades of gray. So it is with Biblical principles. Only those principles stated by Jesus and recorded in His Holy Word can be said to be black and white issues. There is no room for compromise there. Everything else is gray, meaning that we have only rough guidelines. We can suggest certain interpretations and offer advice and insight, but we cannot dictate, mandate. legislate or insist on one and only one interpretation.

    Consequently, we must respect each person’s own personal relationship with God and trust that God will speak to them also. This is very difficult to do, especially if one is a leader in charger of a flock. The temptation is to set himself up as a mouthpiece of God. He is under the illusion that unity will be achieved when one and only one voice is heard. He may see himself as the leader of a spiritual army where no one questions the general. He may believe that the battle call will be indistinct and nobody will be ready if more than one bugle is heard. He may feel that if something worked for him, then that same thing will work for his entire flock. Whatever his reason, he sets himself up as the authority to be submitted to.

    When he does so, he violates his listener’s “personal spiritual space.” The listener will feel threatened. The listener instinctively knows when his territorial boundaries–that realm where he and the Lord have a very personal and unique relationship–have been violated.

    There are two possible reactions at this point. One, the listener will ignore his gut-level feelings, repressing them in the name of “rebellion,” “flesh,” insubordination,” “lack of proper respect to authority,” or whatever. If this repression continues long enough, the listener will eventually yield his mind over to the leader and let him dictate his thoughts and behavior.

The other reaction is to escape from the control of “the voice.” This may consist of mentally turning off one’s attentiveness. More drastically, the person may feel compelled or obligated to leave.

    This is why we have hundreds of denominations today. Each denomination is a pathetic monument of sorts to some person who believed he was right and everyone else was wrong. Someone set themselves up as the voice of God and tried to impose his knowledge onto his followers. Some submitted and thus the denomination was sustained. Others resisted, broke away and formed a new denomination.

    There is a very real threat of this happening at the Door Fellowship. People feel as though their own “spiritual space” is being violated. They are being told to think and act in certain ways and to believe certain things. In essence, they are being told that their own intimate relationship with God–the gentle, still voice they’ve learned to listen to and obey–is no longer worth listening to. After all, there is only one way to think on any issue if you want to fellowship at the Door.

    Naturally, the people are feeling threatened. It’s an uneasiness mixed with confusion. For they often hear one thing and see another thing. They hear, for example, how important it is for a husband and wife who are in disagreement to sit down and talk things out. Yet as body members of an ailing church they are being told not to talk about the very problem confronting them!

    On the one hand we are told that we should love our brothers and sisters to the point of laying our lives down for their sake. On the other hand we’ve heard it said over and over again, “If you don’t agree, go somewhere else.”

    We are told that there is real freedom in the Spirit at the Door Fellowship. Yet we see a real fear among the people to act differently or to rock the status quo. We’ve also seen what happens to those who do think differently.

    We’ve heard it said laughingly that there is certainly no dictator in office. Yet we’ve seen those in positions of authority who disagree with the leadership being told to resign.

    We’ve been taught from Matthew 18 that the good shepherd leaves all 99 of his sheep to search for the one sheep that is lost. But we don’t see that principle put into practice at the Door. Instead we see the reigns pulled in tighter around the 99 sheep. Speakers are brought in from outside to suggest that we not even associate with the sheep who have strayed. We don’t see any evidence of the shepherd trusting the 99 sheep enough to leave them alone so he can search.

    Is there any uncertainty as to why confusion reigns? Or why the people who feel threatened are leaving?


Communication

    The people who have questions, the people who feel threatened, the people who have been offended must be able to communicate with the church leadership. The freedom and the willingness to talk things out must be evident. Without communication there is darkness. Where darkness is, so is confusion.

    At the present time, those who speak out do so at a very high risk. We have been told that it is wrong to talk about certain issues. We have been admonished to rebuke people who did speak out. We have seen prophecies squelched and persons screamed at because they tried to communicate. We have seen concerned members who wanted to talk but actually feared the consequences. So they held back and said nothing.

    It is a repressive environment. There can be no walking in the Light when such conditions exist. Look at the example Jesus set. His disciples could ask him anything, without fear of disfellowship, being asked to resign or looked upon as unspiritual. In the same vein, Jesus communicated honestly and openly with his disciples. He was so frank he even told them he was going to be killed. Now that is what communication is all about–a free exchange of information, with the freedom to be yourself and to express your innermost thoughts and fears, without fear of punishment.

    When a part of our physical body does not or cannot communicate with our brain, we call that area paralyzed and say the body is sick. All efforts are directed towards restoring the lines of communication which, interestingly enough, consists not only of information flowing from the brain to the affected area but also from the affected area to the brain. You see, health cannot exist without communication in both directions.

    The lesson is obvious. The leadership at the Door Fellowship has to be willing to listen to the Body, just as the Body has to be willing to listen to the leadership. A healthy Body of Christ means that each member can be him/herself. When he is in pain he can speak out and be heard.

    A spirit of cooperation has to be present, too. Each side must be willing to listen with open ears and an open heart. To do otherwise is to be hypocritical. You put on the appearance of wanting to communicate but inside you have a heart of stone.


Practical Applications

    Keeping these two concepts, unity and communication in mind, we now look at some specific problems at the Door Fellowship.


  1. (1) One Man Rule–As we mentioned before, an imbalance is created when differing viewpoints are eliminated. That is precisely the current situation at the Door Fellowship. The only people allowed to voice their opinion from the pulpit, or to participate in any decision-making process, are those who meet the pastor’s approval. That is, they must agree with him, think like him and it certainly wouldn’t hurt if you act like him, talk like him and dress like him. It’s a one-man show.

  2.     Let’s look at a few verses from the third chapter of 1st Corinthians. God obviously had us in mind when he wrote it. Verse three points the finger right at us. “For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?” (KJV)

  3.     It’s rather humbling to realize that we’re still fighting the carnal man inside us, after all these years of walking with the Lord. It should make us realize that, as a fellowship, we don’t have a corner on anyone else. Charismatic or non-charismatic, Protestant or Catholic, we’re all in the same fellowship. We’re all struggling to follow Jesus. Verse 4 drives the point home. “For while one saith, I am of Paul (~Wayne); and another, I am of Apollos (~Dave), are ye not carnal?”

  4.     Verse 5 thought 9 states that Paul and Apollos are minsters with different functions. Paul plants, Apollos waters. Their thoughts and style and ways of operating are different. But their purpose is the same–to lead people to a belief in Christ. Verse 8 and verse 9 say it so well. “Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one...”

  5.     And look what verse is sandwiched between those two gems!

  6.     “...and every may shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.” Do you realize what this says? We have blown this concept of “leadership” way out of proportion. Church leadership is not like a general leading an army, or a president heading a corporation. In those situations, every man shall receive his own reward according to the leadership’s labour. Make note of this: an army can’t win a battle without the general making the decisions and implementing the orders. A corporation can’t be successful without a shrewd president directing every move of his business.

  7.     But’s that not what the verse says. It says, “and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.” In other words, we must respect each person’s unique and personal relationship with the Lord, for it is their own responsibility to work out how they can best follow Jesus. So the leadership is not really a commandeering position at all. It’s only a position which advises, teaches, encourages. All it can do is lay the foundation,. “But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.” (v.10)

  8.     Church leadership could be thought of as buoys in the ocean, placed there to help us navigate through the uncertain waters. Now the responsibility of sailing rests with us. If we have questions as to positions of rocks or reefs we look for a buoy. We then correct our course.

  9.     Realize that there are buoys on all sides of a channel. One buoy alone spells certain disaster. Likewise, a number of buoys places in the same position are useless. In the process of navigating we follow a zig-zag course, going from one buoy to the next.

  10. As Paul says, “we are laborers together with God.” Don’t you see we need men (plural) in leadership of different function and composition and opinion to help guide us? The only requirement is that they all point us to Christ. “He that planteth and he that watereth are one.” It doesn’t matter that they are doing things differently. In God’s sight, they are in unity.

  11. (2) Pentecostal Traditions–This is a subject that demands utter honesty in communication because so little has ever been said and so much has been repressed. Traditions by their very nature are not questioned. Because they represent a link with the past, there is often an irrational and highly emotional element that bares its fangs when prodded too much.

  12.     Despite the consequences, the time has come to pull the traditions out of the drawer, dust them off and see if they hold up to scriptural analysis. We may be shocked by what we find. Fraud and manipulation run rampant in the realm of tradition. What started out as a valid, godly experience at one time may now be totally of the flesh.

  13.     The first Pentecostal tradition to be examined is that of being “slain in the Spirit.” To begin with, the word “slain” is King James English meaning “killed.” Therefore we are talking about being “killed in the Spirit.”

  14.     A brief check in the concordance under “slain” in all its forms come up empty-handed. If it’s not in the bible, what more can be said about it? Unfortunately, a lot. Nearly every charismatic christian I ever talked to who was familiar with this experience could tell me story after story of slaying deception.

  15.     The scenario is generally a highly emotional meeting. Almost always there is an audience watching. In the process of being prayed for by laying on of hands, the person is pushed. If he’s nervous as well as suggestible, he topples like a tree. However, if he’s in control of himself, sometimes he just won’t fall over. Either a harder push or a locking of the knees will do the trick.

  16.     In all fairness, we have to ask how being “slain” or killed in the Spirit came to have the importance it has today in certain Pentecostal circles. There is no doubt some people have been so overcome with the Lord’s presence that they lost control of their voluntary muscles and fell to the floor. Naturally it was seen as a very spiritual experience in and of itself. It was given a label. It became a useful measure of how good a meeting was. The more people, “slain,” the better the meeting. The flow shifted from worshipping God and doing his will to how many people got “slain,” how some folks floated on their way down, and even how some would hit their head and not be hurt.

  17.     The phenomenon became such a regular fixture that certain people were designated certain duties. For example, there would be a man with a cloth to place over a lady’s skirt when they fell. There might also be a catcher, someone to stand behind the one “slain” and help ease him or her to the floor.

  18.     The question to be asked is based on the principles expressed in 1st Corinthians 14. Does it edify others? We should consider that whenever we are in a gathering of believers. As Paul says in verse 12, “since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church.” (RSV)

  19.     The same question should be asked about being “drunk in the Spirit.” Does it edify the church?

  20.     The other tradition I want to mention here is the style of preaching associated with Pentecostals. The “hell, fire and brimstone” shouting-types. Why is all that noise and arm-waving necessary? If he’s truly trying to instruct and inform his listeners, whey doesn’t he do it in the normal, more effective manner? I search the scriptures and cannot find a justification for such behavior. Paul, who should be every preacher’s model, confessed that he was unskilled in speaking (2nd Corinthians 11:6). So why do we think we have to be a showman when we get behind the pulpit? Please, just talk to us in a normal voice.

  21. (3) No Control Exercised Over Prophecy–So much emphasis has been put on the act of prophesying, virtually any utterance sounding spiritual passes as authentic. There is no apparent testing of prophecy, other than indirectly thought the passage of time. Those who embrace true unity and communication would welcome an examination of prophecy.

  22. (4) The Extremes In Teaching–Because there is little or no integration of scriptural principles, the pendulum swings from one extreme to another. A hypothetical example might be teaching on healing. We would probably be told that sickness is not of God, that by his stripes we are healed, and therefore if we are ever sick, to just claim a victory.

  23. So everyone leaves the meeting all excited. Sickness will never get them down again.                       

  24.      They soon find out that there are lots of situations where the healing will not take place. But they weren’t told that healing is really a very complex subject, with many sticky questions needing to be hashed out. The lesson on healing wasn’t integrated with teaching on the purpose of suffering, or knowing God’s will in a specific situation. In an effort to simplify the matter and to motivate the audience, the teaching unfortunately presented only one side of the issue.

  25.     Over the past couple of years this has been the case not only for healing but prophecy, demons, marriage and singleness, and many other subjects.

  26.     A fellowship that embraces unity and communication would desire a presentation of all sides of an issue, and could accept several viewpoints on a subject. They would be encouraged to think for themselves and to work out an opinion that harmonizes with their own personal relationship with God.

  27. (5) Anti-intellectual Spirit–There seems to be a suspicion towards those with degrees of any sort, as if one can’t be intelligent and spiritual at the same time. The same feeling seems to exist towards those who prepare notes before they speak. (Recall the prophecy telling Wayne that he will abandon his notes and walk the aisles preaching.)

  28.     It is my humble observation that we can’t learn enough. To try and understand the Infinitely complex God we serve, we need every intellectual resource we can acquire. Again quoting Paul, “Even if I am unskilled in speaking, I am not in knowledge; in every way we have made this plain to you in all things.” (2nd Corinthians 11:6)

  29.     It is true. The more we know, the less we know. But the more we know, the more tolerant we will be of others, the better we will understand who we are as Christians and how we got here, and the more wisdom we will have.

  30. (6) Singleness Seen As An Incomplete State–There is so much emphasis given to marriage that a single person soon sees himself as incomplete. Marriage is described as the ultimate and inevitable goal of all christian men and women. Subtle pressure is put on single people to find a wife or husband or to at least be actively looking for one.

  31.     How can 1st Corinthians 7 be ignored? Paul feels that “in view of the impending distress it is well for a person to remain as he is.” In case there is any doubt as to what he means, he states plainly, “Do not seek marriage.”

  32.     Paul is saying that singleness is actually more desirable than marriage. This certainly bucks up against American culture. Most Kingdom principles do. I feel it’s time the church recognized the importance of “undivided devotion” to the Lord. Minsters should promote singleness and its virtues. Marriage should be seen as second-best, not as the ultimate goal of a christian. “So that he who married his betrothed does well; and he who refrains from marriage will do better.” (RSV)

  33. (7) Disfellowship–First of all, the term “disfellowship” is not found in the bible. So what are people referring to when they speak of someone being “disfellowshipped?” They are talking about one instance in the bible where a man was kicked out of a fellowship because of his sin. There is no evidence of this ever happening before 1st Corinthians 5 was written, nor is there any evidence in the scripture of a fellowship removing a believer from their midst after the Corinthians event.

  34.     “Disfellowship” is not a tool to be used in the hands of spiritual leaders. To prove my point, look at verse 11. Paul tells us “not to associate with anyone one who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber–not even to eat with such a one.” (RSV)

  35.     Who among us does not daily commit a sin which fits into at least one of these categories? If we took “disfellowship” at face value, this would mean we couldn’t associate with our wife, or our family, let alone our christian brothers and sisters. The only way we could embrace the “disfellowship” concept is to “disfellowship” ourselves from everyone.

  36.     Obviously we cannot think of “disfellowship” in such narrow terms. Under the New Covenant, we are called to a higher spiritual plane that this. Remember all that Paul went through for the sake of his sheep before he made this decision to remove the sinner. “...countless beatings, and often near death. Five times I have received at the hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one. Three times I have been beaten with rods; once I was stoned. Three times I have been shipwrecked; a night and a day I have been adrift at sea; on frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, danger from robbers, danger from my own people, danger form Gentiles, danger in the city, danger in the wilderness, danger at sea, danger from false brethren; in toil and hardship, through many a sleepless night, in hunger and thirst, often without food, in cold and exposure.” (2nd Corinthians 11:23-27)

  37.     After we’ve gone though this sort of sacrifice for our sheep’s welfare, maybe we can then judge a person to be disfellowshipped. After we’ve prayed unceasingly, after we’ve spent 14 years meditating in the desert, after we’ve accumulated much knowledge, after we’ve been caught up to the third heaven, then maybe, just maybe we could wisely “disfellowship” a believer.

  38.     Until we reach that state of maturity, we are called by none other than Jesus to “love one another as I have loved you.” How did Jesus love us? He laid down his life for us. We are to do the same for our brothers and our sisters. We are to love them to death.

  39.     We disfellowship on such petty grounds. Maybe somebody’s disagreed with us, or has said something against us. They’ve hurt our feelings and damaged our reputation. We’ll pray about it for a while. Maybe we’ll talk with the person quite a few times. We may try to reason with the person for a few months or even a year or so. But if things still haven’t worked out the way we think they should (i.e., to our liking), we’ll reach the end of our rope and disfellowship the trouble-maker.

  40.     Listen, love is patient and kind. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things! It’s easy to disfellowship somebody. The difficult path, the one Jesus calls us to take, is to love that person to death.


  41. Concluding Remarks

  42.     The church is like a family, with the pastor in the parental role and the congregation as the children. At the Door, Wayne Holcomb could be likened to a spiritual father. Now, when a family crisis arises where disagreements exist, the wisest course of action is for everyone to sit down and talk it out. Often, though, the two parties aren’t completely honest with each other until a third unbiased party, an arbitrator if you will, is there to listen to both sides separately and then together.

  43.     What I propose as a practical solution to the very serious problem at the Door is for dissenting parties to agree to sit down for however many talks it takes to come to an understanding. I propose having a third party serve as a judge who can weigh the remarks of both sides and make some recommendations.

  44.     This third party should be a godly man who is spiritually mature. He should not have any ties with either side. It would be understood that only recommendations would be made and not absolute commandments. There is nothing to lose. At the very least, both sides might come to a better understanding of the other and an atmosphere conducive to change might result.

Comments: I gave this eight-page, single-spaced paper (along with another eight pages of xeroxed material) to Wayne Holcomb in the parking lot outside the home group meeting I was going to. Imagine my excitement, then disappointment as he leaned up against a car, flipped through the pages in a few minutes while muttering “I’ve heard this before” and then handed it back to me. He didn’t have the courtesy to take it home and read it thoughtfully!


    I had also attached a xeroxed article on unity with this preface: “This article, which was written by the editors of The Wittenburg Door, a christian magazine, led me to a better understanding of unity. Being a foundational truth, I feel we must come to grips with unity before we can discuss anything else.”


    More articles were attached with this appendix note: “I include these two articles from Christianity Today. I am not suggesting that The Door Fellowship is a cult. However, one can conclude from these articles that The Door has several qualities of a cult, especially in the area of authority in leadership.”


    One of the “famous” personalities to be kicked out was Dennis Cramer, now a well-known prophet in the Elijah list circles. HIs book “Charismatic Curses” (re-published as “Breaking Charismatic Curses”) details his bad experiences at the Door although he doesn’t mention them by name. He had been an elder at the Door.


    Ted Hayes, another Door elder whose loyal friends had stood up for him at his denunciation and paid the price by subsequently being dragged out, had been a key figure in organizing the first Jesus Music festival in 1973. Shortly after his formal “disfellowshipping,” he moved to CA where he became a prominent conservative community organizer in LA. An interview I did with Ted in 1984 is posted here.


    The Door is alive and well. Wayne and his wife are still involved, although their three sons Mark and Matt and Mike have assumed key positions in worship, youth and preaching.


    I was still around when they bought and remodeled the old Rialto Theater, the church’s current home. I’ll never forget standing knee-deep in asbestos fibers as a dozen of us volunteers tore apart the old furnace in the basement. All we had for protection were cheap rubber-banded paper masks that hardly covered our mouth and nose. Someone prayed for protection from the deadly carcinogen in Jesus’ name.

    Why did we do it? We were expected to help. It became a project for the home groups. I sold my high school class ring for its gold and gave the money to the church during one of their many high-pressure fund-raising campaigns. (“God’s telling me that five people are going to give $1000 tonight.”)


    I saved some notes I’d taken from a meeting I had with Wayne shortly before the hammer came down on me. “Wayne says he wasted his time talking to me.” “Wayne feels that what I’m doing is sin. Not learning the principle of commitment.” “The paper is an indirect way of trying to correct.”  “The sin of division, contention and confusion.” “I’m not bringing unity, edification to the church. It is Satanic.” “I spend quite a lot of time with the girls. I haven’t shared the article with the brothers.”

“Co-pastors” Margret and

Wayne Holcomb of the

Door Fellowship in Williamsport, PA.  They actively promoted the flawed “disfellowship” policy.

Elder Dave Bachman was “disfellowshipped” a year after this picture was taken. One day he scribbled a note and handed it to me. It read, “Harmony is the product of differences, not similarities.”

In June 1982 about half of the ~50 “dissidents” attended a picnic at Northway Park. Some of these “shunned” folks never set foot inside a church again.

Left to right: Steve Ream, Jim Hepler, Jim Hayner, Wes Young.

Wes Young, on left side of table, had a son who later died of leukemia. Some at The Door said it was because they had left.

Dennis Cramer (on right, with hat) and his wife Dianne (looking away from camera), Kathy Ergot (at end of table), Gail Mosteller (center right) and son Brian (tinted glasses).

Dianne Cramer (left).

Karen Derby (blond, center) did a sit-down protest on stage during a Sunday meeting!

Look Up:

Traveling to other universes

How I Got Kicked Out:
A Sort-of Cultshapeimage_3_link_0

Once Before Time:

A Story You’ll Never Forget

Entangled Up in You:

The Quantum Secret

Armpit:

My Spiritual Biography

Clothesline Theory:

The Future Hangs On It

Bible Codes and DNA:

Life is a Strand

The Perfect Church:

I Can Always Dream

Falling in Love:

God and Betty

Bubble Boy:

Free will is a joke

Jesus, this hurts!

Look! The Cross:

It’s Everywhere

Cross Shopping:

When Satan almost fooled Jesus

Communion:

Power Meal

A Quick Look at Eternity:

The Big Picture

Take Me Home:

Home Page

Contact:

Let’s Talk

Life’s a Script:

Book of Life

Moses:

The UFO Connection