Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 3 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Question 3
Dean claims that for “far too long, the teachings of Jesus have taken a back seat…to empire-building, denominationalism and vain traditions of men”; where have you personally seen loyalty to nation, party, tradition, or “what works” quietly outrank loyalty to Jesus’ words—and what would repentance actually look like in those areas?
Another way to ask: Where have you seen loyalty to country, politics, tradition, or “what works” become more important than Jesus’ words? What would real repentance look like in those areas?

Direct Answer Dean’s point is that competing loyalties subtly replace obedience to Jesus, so repentance would look like returning Jesus’ words to first place, even when it costs comfort, tradition, or social belonging. The transcript doesn’t map every modern example, but it repeatedly contrasts “comfort” and “human traditions” with costly obedience.

Support from Transcript:

  • Dean says Jesus’ teachings have taken “a back seat” to “empire-building…denominationalism and vain traditions of men.”
  • He frames just-war and Christians killing enemies as rooted in “human traditions…unbiblical philosophies…a natural desire to save our skin.”
  • Their peers embodied “what works” thinking: coworkers told Dean, “you’re asking questions that Christians shouldn’t be asking,” and one said, “I’m comfortable.”
  • Their Baptist church hosted “special meetings lifting up the place of Christians in warfare,” showing institutional reinforcement of a position.
  • When they pressed their pastor for help, he ended with, “Perhaps you'd be more comfortable worshiping elsewhere,” implying loyalty to the system over wrestling with Jesus’ commands.
Discussion Follow-ups Where do you feel pressure to stay “comfortable” rather than honest with Jesus’ words? What would a visible act of repentance be—changing speech, spending, conflict habits, or political identity?