What do you think?
Rate this book
Saving Jesus from the Church
Countless thoughtful people are now so disgusted with the marriage of bad theology and hypocritical behavior by the church that a new Reformation is required in which the purpose of religion itself is reimagined.Meyers takes the best of biblical scholarship and recasts these core Christian concepts to exhort the church to pursue an alternative vision of the Christian Jesus as "Teacher," not SaviorChristianity as "Compassion," not CondemnationProsperity as "Dangerous," not DivineDiscipleship as "Obedience," not ControlReligion as "Relationship," not RighteousnessThis is not a call to the church to move to the far left or to try something brand new. Rather, it is the recovery of something very old. "Saving Jesus from the Church" shows us what it means to be a Christian and how to follow Jesus' teachings today.
- GenresNonfiction
256 pages, Kindle Edition
First published February 24, 2009
1 person is currently reading
13 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
May 25, 2025
SHOULD WE ‘DEMOTE’ CHRIST IN ORDER TO ‘RECOVER’ JESUS?
Robin Rex Meyers is currently a Teaching Pastor of a Congregational Church in Oklahoma, as well as a Professor of Social Justice at Oklahoma City University.
He recounts in the Prologue of this 2009 book, “Born a minister’s son and raised in a parsonage, I spent my childhood in the conservative Church of Christ, where no musical instruments are allowed in worship. As a college student, I discovered the Congregational Church and the liberal United Church of Christ [UCC], which I was warned to avoid, and then never looked back. The UCC has been my home ever since, a brave and messy denomination that has been speaking truth to power for a long time and insisting that we make more room at the table for those who are forgotten.” (Pg. 1)
He continues, “Instead of asking, ‘How can I call myself a Christian now?’ a better question might be, ‘Why haven’t I done more to promote biblical literacy and invite others to consider an alternate way of being the church in our time?’ It is easier and much more satisfying to rail against the Right than to suggest that we go back to Genesis 1 and study together. Liberals can be just as intolerant as fundamentalists, and we have arrived at a moment in human history when intolerance and hope are mutually exclusive.
“I have never believed in the virgin birth as a biological fact, the infallibility of scripture as a test of faith, the miracles as past suspension of natural law demanding current suspension of reason, the blood atonement … as the foreordained mission of Jesus, the bodily resurrection as the only way to understand Easter, or the second coming as a necessary sequel---and I am the pastor of a church that does not define Christianity that way either. Naturally, people ask, ‘So what DO you believe?’… I say that we are not ‘believers’ at all, not in the sense of giving intellectual assent to postbiblical propositions. Rather, we are doing our best to avoid the worship of Christ and trying to get back to something much more fulfilling and transformative: following Jesus.” (Pg. 6)
He continues, “The first step, however, must be a step backward. We have been traveling down the creedal road of Christendom since the 4th century… In the beginning, the call of God was not propositional. It was experiential. It was as palpable as wine and wineskins, lost coins and frightened servants… Now we argue over the Trinity, the true identity of the beast in the book of Revelation, and the exact number of people who will make it into heaven. Students who once learned by FOLLOWING the teacher became true believers who confuse certainty with faith… Arguing over the metaphysics of Christ only divides us. But agreeing to follow the essential teachings of Jesus could unite us.” (Pg. 10)
He goes on, “If we do not go BACK to that fork in the road, we cannot go forward on the road less traveled… Our task now is not just to demythologize Jesus. It is to let the breath of the Galilean sage fall on the neck of the church again. First, we have to listen not to formulas of salvation but to a gospel that is all but forgotten. After centuries of being told that ‘Jesus saves,’ the time has come to save Jesus from the church.” (Pg. 11)
He states, “The Bible is both inspired and covered with human fingerprints---but the Bible is not what we worship. The God to which the Bible points us is what we worship, and the claim of the first followers of Jesus was not that he was God, but rather than he revealed the fulness of God at work in a human being. For our part, however, the evolution from symbol to idol is inevitable. We are always tempted to make golden calves out of the instruments of revelation, and the result is more than just the sin of idolatry. Jesus becomes the Christ, and then Jesus is lost. We stare across the abyss of adoration at a deity we can worship, but not emulate.” (Pg. 29)
He suggests, “Forget for a moment that we no longer believe in the idea of blood atonement. Think what this view says about God. First, God must not be all-powerful and all-loving, or God would not require such a sacrifice in order to be restored to his own creation. Second, if this ‘had to happen,’ then we are dealing with a deity who not only must play by our rules but is, at best, capable or being bribed or, at worst, guilty of divine child abuse.” (Pg. 69)
He continues, “to say that ‘Jesus is the sacrifice for our sin’ was to deny the temple’s claim to have a monopoly on forgiveness and access to God… Using the metaphor of sacrifice, it subverted the sacrificial system. It meant: God in Jesus has already provided the sacrifice and has thus taken care of whatever you think separated you from God. This is why the first followers of Jesus ceased the practice of sacrifice.” (Pg. 70) Later, he adds, “To raise Jesus is … freeing [the gospel] from precisely the obligatory rituals that have always been confused with righteousness.” (Pg. 93)
He asserts, “Salvation meant originally not that we are saved FROM, but that we are saved TO… In the New Testament, salvation is about transformation in this life, not a change of destination in the next.” (Pg. 109)
He acknowledges, “I’ve heard it many times myself: ‘Reverend, just deal with ‘spiritual’ issues, and leave politics out of the pulpit.’ At one level, I am sympathetic to this argument; on another adamantly opposed. First of all, this complaint is almost always directed at a ‘liberal’ preacher by a conservative layperson, even though the Christian right wrote the book on how to mix religion and politics. A more honest version of the complaint might sound like this: don’t mix religion and politics in ways I don’t agree with.” (Pg.`135)
He explains, “Salvation theology … is a zero-sum game that cuts us off from the unsaved and often causes us to be arrogant and judgmental… Human beings draw circles because we want to be inside them. Jesus kept expanding the circle to include more and more of us. A Christian covenant is therefore, by definition, a covenant of INCLUSIVENESS---or it is not Christian.” (Pg. 166)
He proposes, “Faith itself is better understood as trust… In the future liturgies of the church, the word ‘trust’ should replace the word ‘faith’ as often as possible. The word ‘wisdom’ should replace the word ‘salvation.’ ‘Blood’ should disappear altogether---along with all military metaphors and images. Bloody liturgies in church only encourage and sanctify the bloodletting of the battlefield. Please, for God’s sake---no more ‘Onward Christian Soldiers.’” (Pg. 179)
He argues, “Strange as it sounds, we must DEMOTE Christ now and recover him as Jesus once more, if we are to enter and survive the new age that is upon us…. The church meant well by its promotion, of course, but unwittingly sowed the seeds of separation between that which is human and all that is divine. In so doing, we have REVERSED the message of Jesus, who was trying to arrange an unlikely marriage and then keep us together.” (Pg. 207)
He concludes, “the gospel is ‘good news’ not for adherents but rather for practitioners. And the practice of Christianity is made possible not by intellectual ascent to propositions but by an existential embrace of worthiness… It is a call not to accept a formula for salvation but to act on an unearned inheritance: that we are CREATED by God, CHILDREN of God, BELOVED of God, and ACCEPTED by God.” (Pg. 220-221)
This book will be of great interest to progressive/‘liberal’ Christians.
Robin Rex Meyers is currently a Teaching Pastor of a Congregational Church in Oklahoma, as well as a Professor of Social Justice at Oklahoma City University.
He recounts in the Prologue of this 2009 book, “Born a minister’s son and raised in a parsonage, I spent my childhood in the conservative Church of Christ, where no musical instruments are allowed in worship. As a college student, I discovered the Congregational Church and the liberal United Church of Christ [UCC], which I was warned to avoid, and then never looked back. The UCC has been my home ever since, a brave and messy denomination that has been speaking truth to power for a long time and insisting that we make more room at the table for those who are forgotten.” (Pg. 1)
He continues, “Instead of asking, ‘How can I call myself a Christian now?’ a better question might be, ‘Why haven’t I done more to promote biblical literacy and invite others to consider an alternate way of being the church in our time?’ It is easier and much more satisfying to rail against the Right than to suggest that we go back to Genesis 1 and study together. Liberals can be just as intolerant as fundamentalists, and we have arrived at a moment in human history when intolerance and hope are mutually exclusive.
“I have never believed in the virgin birth as a biological fact, the infallibility of scripture as a test of faith, the miracles as past suspension of natural law demanding current suspension of reason, the blood atonement … as the foreordained mission of Jesus, the bodily resurrection as the only way to understand Easter, or the second coming as a necessary sequel---and I am the pastor of a church that does not define Christianity that way either. Naturally, people ask, ‘So what DO you believe?’… I say that we are not ‘believers’ at all, not in the sense of giving intellectual assent to postbiblical propositions. Rather, we are doing our best to avoid the worship of Christ and trying to get back to something much more fulfilling and transformative: following Jesus.” (Pg. 6)
He continues, “The first step, however, must be a step backward. We have been traveling down the creedal road of Christendom since the 4th century… In the beginning, the call of God was not propositional. It was experiential. It was as palpable as wine and wineskins, lost coins and frightened servants… Now we argue over the Trinity, the true identity of the beast in the book of Revelation, and the exact number of people who will make it into heaven. Students who once learned by FOLLOWING the teacher became true believers who confuse certainty with faith… Arguing over the metaphysics of Christ only divides us. But agreeing to follow the essential teachings of Jesus could unite us.” (Pg. 10)
He goes on, “If we do not go BACK to that fork in the road, we cannot go forward on the road less traveled… Our task now is not just to demythologize Jesus. It is to let the breath of the Galilean sage fall on the neck of the church again. First, we have to listen not to formulas of salvation but to a gospel that is all but forgotten. After centuries of being told that ‘Jesus saves,’ the time has come to save Jesus from the church.” (Pg. 11)
He states, “The Bible is both inspired and covered with human fingerprints---but the Bible is not what we worship. The God to which the Bible points us is what we worship, and the claim of the first followers of Jesus was not that he was God, but rather than he revealed the fulness of God at work in a human being. For our part, however, the evolution from symbol to idol is inevitable. We are always tempted to make golden calves out of the instruments of revelation, and the result is more than just the sin of idolatry. Jesus becomes the Christ, and then Jesus is lost. We stare across the abyss of adoration at a deity we can worship, but not emulate.” (Pg. 29)
He suggests, “Forget for a moment that we no longer believe in the idea of blood atonement. Think what this view says about God. First, God must not be all-powerful and all-loving, or God would not require such a sacrifice in order to be restored to his own creation. Second, if this ‘had to happen,’ then we are dealing with a deity who not only must play by our rules but is, at best, capable or being bribed or, at worst, guilty of divine child abuse.” (Pg. 69)
He continues, “to say that ‘Jesus is the sacrifice for our sin’ was to deny the temple’s claim to have a monopoly on forgiveness and access to God… Using the metaphor of sacrifice, it subverted the sacrificial system. It meant: God in Jesus has already provided the sacrifice and has thus taken care of whatever you think separated you from God. This is why the first followers of Jesus ceased the practice of sacrifice.” (Pg. 70) Later, he adds, “To raise Jesus is … freeing [the gospel] from precisely the obligatory rituals that have always been confused with righteousness.” (Pg. 93)
He asserts, “Salvation meant originally not that we are saved FROM, but that we are saved TO… In the New Testament, salvation is about transformation in this life, not a change of destination in the next.” (Pg. 109)
He acknowledges, “I’ve heard it many times myself: ‘Reverend, just deal with ‘spiritual’ issues, and leave politics out of the pulpit.’ At one level, I am sympathetic to this argument; on another adamantly opposed. First of all, this complaint is almost always directed at a ‘liberal’ preacher by a conservative layperson, even though the Christian right wrote the book on how to mix religion and politics. A more honest version of the complaint might sound like this: don’t mix religion and politics in ways I don’t agree with.” (Pg.`135)
He explains, “Salvation theology … is a zero-sum game that cuts us off from the unsaved and often causes us to be arrogant and judgmental… Human beings draw circles because we want to be inside them. Jesus kept expanding the circle to include more and more of us. A Christian covenant is therefore, by definition, a covenant of INCLUSIVENESS---or it is not Christian.” (Pg. 166)
He proposes, “Faith itself is better understood as trust… In the future liturgies of the church, the word ‘trust’ should replace the word ‘faith’ as often as possible. The word ‘wisdom’ should replace the word ‘salvation.’ ‘Blood’ should disappear altogether---along with all military metaphors and images. Bloody liturgies in church only encourage and sanctify the bloodletting of the battlefield. Please, for God’s sake---no more ‘Onward Christian Soldiers.’” (Pg. 179)
He argues, “Strange as it sounds, we must DEMOTE Christ now and recover him as Jesus once more, if we are to enter and survive the new age that is upon us…. The church meant well by its promotion, of course, but unwittingly sowed the seeds of separation between that which is human and all that is divine. In so doing, we have REVERSED the message of Jesus, who was trying to arrange an unlikely marriage and then keep us together.” (Pg. 207)
He concludes, “the gospel is ‘good news’ not for adherents but rather for practitioners. And the practice of Christianity is made possible not by intellectual ascent to propositions but by an existential embrace of worthiness… It is a call not to accept a formula for salvation but to act on an unearned inheritance: that we are CREATED by God, CHILDREN of God, BELOVED of God, and ACCEPTED by God.” (Pg. 220-221)
This book will be of great interest to progressive/‘liberal’ Christians.
January 19, 2018
If you want to look at your church from a different perspective this is the book for you.
July 1, 2018
Outstanding!!
December 31, 2015
… two conflicting stories of Jesus’ birth… the virgin birth is a biological reality…Jesus suffering and dying for the sins of humanity…. a bodily reappearance of Jesus as the only way to understand Easter…the sheep separated from the goats – God’s chosen vs God’s despised…loving Jesus and killing for the faith…nine crusades over 200 years, killing thousands of Jews, Muslims, and Christians… loving Jesus by hating Darwin and homosexuals … a direct correlation between high church attendance and negative social statistics, such as teen pregnancy, divorce, physical and sexual abuse, and chemical dependency… loving Jesus but destroying the planet…TV preachers promising wealth to the congregation if they will only give to his ministry…knowledge and reason are a threat to faith…The Holy Bible is the inerrant Word of God, despite its errors and contradictions.
In “Saving Jesus from the Church: How to Stop Worshiping Christ and Start Following Jesus”, Robin R. Meyers discusses these and other issues, saying several times, “…if this is Christianity and these are Christians, I must not be one”. In an era of declining membership in mainline churches, Dr. Meyers points out that it is time to consider following Jesus, rather than focusing on church teachings. There is a need for knowledge and wisdom - biblical illiteracy is a major problem within the church. An honest understanding of the teachings of Jesus will be needed to prevent the continued decline the church.
To save the church and Christianity, Dr. Meyers describes a potential new reformation, “What if we could pull off a modern-day miracle and persuade a whole community of human beings that faith is characterized by what I have called from the pulpit, ‘the end of striving’ ” ? … “to live beyond angst, be delivered from self-pity, escape the prison of self, grow old gracefully, master the ego, live in harmony with the natural world, and break the chains of fear itself, especially the fear of death”? “What if we followed Jesus, instead of just worshiping Christ?”
Dr. Meyers dreams that the future church will be committed to non-violence - millionaires will sit next to the homeless - no human being will be considered an alien - no one will have to chose between knowledge and religion - churches will be completely honest in their teachings of the scriptures – sexual orientation will be an identity, not a curse – gays and lesbians are a constituent of creation, not freaks of nature – parishioners will focus more on love and less on the conventional concept of faith. Then he adds, “…if this is Christianity and these are Jesus followers, I want to be one”.
Dr. Meyers presents a well research and well written account of pertinent history and theology. His writing tends to agree with number of current scholars - that Christianity will have to make some major changes or pass out of existence. One who is interested in such topics will find this writing a pleasure to read. However, as I said in a previous review, be prepared to think.
In “Saving Jesus from the Church: How to Stop Worshiping Christ and Start Following Jesus”, Robin R. Meyers discusses these and other issues, saying several times, “…if this is Christianity and these are Christians, I must not be one”. In an era of declining membership in mainline churches, Dr. Meyers points out that it is time to consider following Jesus, rather than focusing on church teachings. There is a need for knowledge and wisdom - biblical illiteracy is a major problem within the church. An honest understanding of the teachings of Jesus will be needed to prevent the continued decline the church.
To save the church and Christianity, Dr. Meyers describes a potential new reformation, “What if we could pull off a modern-day miracle and persuade a whole community of human beings that faith is characterized by what I have called from the pulpit, ‘the end of striving’ ” ? … “to live beyond angst, be delivered from self-pity, escape the prison of self, grow old gracefully, master the ego, live in harmony with the natural world, and break the chains of fear itself, especially the fear of death”? “What if we followed Jesus, instead of just worshiping Christ?”
Dr. Meyers dreams that the future church will be committed to non-violence - millionaires will sit next to the homeless - no human being will be considered an alien - no one will have to chose between knowledge and religion - churches will be completely honest in their teachings of the scriptures – sexual orientation will be an identity, not a curse – gays and lesbians are a constituent of creation, not freaks of nature – parishioners will focus more on love and less on the conventional concept of faith. Then he adds, “…if this is Christianity and these are Jesus followers, I want to be one”.
Dr. Meyers presents a well research and well written account of pertinent history and theology. His writing tends to agree with number of current scholars - that Christianity will have to make some major changes or pass out of existence. One who is interested in such topics will find this writing a pleasure to read. However, as I said in a previous review, be prepared to think.
March 28, 2016
I was very intrigued with the subtitle of this book when I saw it at the Sunstone Symposium last summer: "Saving Jesus from the Church: How to Stop Worshipping Christ and Start Following Jesus." Being that I'm trying to figure out how to follow Jesus and become more like him, I decided to purchase the book. However, it sat on my bookshelf for months before I finally got the motivation to actually read it. I'm SO glad I did! However, I need to forewarn potential readers that the book may not be for you if you believe the Bible to be the literal words of God or if you believe that dogma or adherence to doctrine will save you. The author, Robin R. Meyers, has been a pastor of Mayflower Congregational for over 20 years. It is a progressive and a liberal United Church of Christ congregation. Meyers was part of the original Jesus Seminar, which was composed of scholars who studied first century christianity. Their task was to separate the true words of Jesus from those that were added later.
To tell the truth, the first four chapters were difficult for me to read at times. I was so disheartened by the end of the fourth chapter that I almost gave up. I'm very glad I didn't! But for those heading into it, be prepared to be challenged at every turn regarding the literalness of Jesus' parentage, birth, death and resurrection. Frankly, I was a little depressed by it. I am not by any means a literalist when it comes to the Bible, but I still cling to some of it. I'm glad I hung in there in spite of my cognitive dissonance! The rest of the book was inspiring...I hated to put it down! Every time I went back to it, I was filled with hope and the desire to be a better follower of Jesus. Here are the chapter headings to the last 6 chapters: Original Blessing, Not Original Sin; Christianity as Compassion, Not Condemnation; Discipleship as Obedience, Not Observance; Justice as Covenant, Not Control; Prosperity as Dangerous, Not Divine; and Religion as Relationship, Not Righteousness. At the end of the book, Meyers states: "The operative question for the new age is not, 'Do you love Jesus?' but, 'Has Jesus ever been a radically disturbing and transforming presence in your life?'" Meyers calls all Christians to put relationships before doctrine, to make worship services 'covenantal rather than creedal,' and to spend our efforts in learning to follow Jesus' transformative path rather than simply kneeling down and being in awe of his majesty. Following is much harder than worshipping. I hope to choose the harder path.
To tell the truth, the first four chapters were difficult for me to read at times. I was so disheartened by the end of the fourth chapter that I almost gave up. I'm very glad I didn't! But for those heading into it, be prepared to be challenged at every turn regarding the literalness of Jesus' parentage, birth, death and resurrection. Frankly, I was a little depressed by it. I am not by any means a literalist when it comes to the Bible, but I still cling to some of it. I'm glad I hung in there in spite of my cognitive dissonance! The rest of the book was inspiring...I hated to put it down! Every time I went back to it, I was filled with hope and the desire to be a better follower of Jesus. Here are the chapter headings to the last 6 chapters: Original Blessing, Not Original Sin; Christianity as Compassion, Not Condemnation; Discipleship as Obedience, Not Observance; Justice as Covenant, Not Control; Prosperity as Dangerous, Not Divine; and Religion as Relationship, Not Righteousness. At the end of the book, Meyers states: "The operative question for the new age is not, 'Do you love Jesus?' but, 'Has Jesus ever been a radically disturbing and transforming presence in your life?'" Meyers calls all Christians to put relationships before doctrine, to make worship services 'covenantal rather than creedal,' and to spend our efforts in learning to follow Jesus' transformative path rather than simply kneeling down and being in awe of his majesty. Following is much harder than worshipping. I hope to choose the harder path.
March 22, 2017
Presupposing infant baptism to become a member of a Lutheran congregation one must attend 2-3 years of religious instruction, make a public profession of faith, and be confirmed or in more recent parlance re-affirm one’s baptism. To remain a member in good standing one must either attend communion once a year—Christmas or Easter will do--OR contribute of record—that offering may be mailed in or submitted electronically. Beyond that one is not required to do anything to maintain one’s membership. The Credo’s of the church describe what one must believe, they don’t actually require any action on a member’s part.
The thesis of this book is that the church has institutionalized the Christ and divorced itself from the revolutionary Jesus who demanded that his followers feed the hungry, clothe the naked, house the poor, cure the sick, restore sight to the blind. Belief and adoration/worship do not require that one do anything save maybe show up at church on the occasional Sunday. Confession of sin and the forgiveness that follows requires that the sinner repent and turn away from the lifestyle that led to a need for reconciliation. Justice is not retributive—punishing the disobedient; but distributive—ensuring that all have an equal share in the earth’s resources.
Fundamentalists have arrived at a certain set of truths they believe and cling to against all odds finding anything that challenges or contradicts them threatening. Having become comfortable with a certain belief system they accept it as the norm and do not consider the fact that it may be selective and represent a certain bias as to biblical interpretation. For example:
God zapped the world into existence in 6 days
The world is c. 6000 years old
The world is flat and heaven’s up there, hell down there
The earth is the centre of the universe
A snake introduced sin into the world
Sex is sinful
Sex that does not lead to procreation is sinful and punishable by death, gay and lesbian relationships are sinful
Woman must me silent in the church and may not be leaders
Woman are subservient to men
Slavery was ordained by god
Noah spent 40 days in the ark with two of every animal
Jonah was swallowed by a whale
The earth stood still so the Israelites could slay their enemies
Joshua fit the battle of Jericho and the walls came tumblin down
Jesus died for our sins
An alternate view:
The world was created good, it is the uses to which it is put that brings evil into the equation
Sin is not about punishment for wrongs committed/laws broken, but the guilt that separates us from the love of God.
Jesus died because of our sin, not for it.
Jesus exhorts us to love one another as I have loved you.
Any law that would diminish that prime directive takes second place.
Judge not that you be not judged.
The author vilifies televangelists by name.
In common with my study group I’d like to have read more about what the author would like to build up to take the place of all he so nonchalantly tears down.
In his epilogue the author indulges in considerable self-congratulation.
The thesis of this book is that the church has institutionalized the Christ and divorced itself from the revolutionary Jesus who demanded that his followers feed the hungry, clothe the naked, house the poor, cure the sick, restore sight to the blind. Belief and adoration/worship do not require that one do anything save maybe show up at church on the occasional Sunday. Confession of sin and the forgiveness that follows requires that the sinner repent and turn away from the lifestyle that led to a need for reconciliation. Justice is not retributive—punishing the disobedient; but distributive—ensuring that all have an equal share in the earth’s resources.
Fundamentalists have arrived at a certain set of truths they believe and cling to against all odds finding anything that challenges or contradicts them threatening. Having become comfortable with a certain belief system they accept it as the norm and do not consider the fact that it may be selective and represent a certain bias as to biblical interpretation. For example:
God zapped the world into existence in 6 days
The world is c. 6000 years old
The world is flat and heaven’s up there, hell down there
The earth is the centre of the universe
A snake introduced sin into the world
Sex is sinful
Sex that does not lead to procreation is sinful and punishable by death, gay and lesbian relationships are sinful
Woman must me silent in the church and may not be leaders
Woman are subservient to men
Slavery was ordained by god
Noah spent 40 days in the ark with two of every animal
Jonah was swallowed by a whale
The earth stood still so the Israelites could slay their enemies
Joshua fit the battle of Jericho and the walls came tumblin down
Jesus died for our sins
An alternate view:
The world was created good, it is the uses to which it is put that brings evil into the equation
Sin is not about punishment for wrongs committed/laws broken, but the guilt that separates us from the love of God.
Jesus died because of our sin, not for it.
Jesus exhorts us to love one another as I have loved you.
Any law that would diminish that prime directive takes second place.
Judge not that you be not judged.
The author vilifies televangelists by name.
In common with my study group I’d like to have read more about what the author would like to build up to take the place of all he so nonchalantly tears down.
In his epilogue the author indulges in considerable self-congratulation.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews