"Help, LORD; for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men. They speak vanity every one with his neighbour: with flattering lips and with a double heart do they speak. The LORD shall cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaketh proud things:" Psalm 12:1-3

There is a growing organization in Tempe, Arizona that follows the leadership of Steven Anderson, the founder and pastor over "Faithful Word Baptist Church." In all the articles we have in our "Wolves in Costume" series, Steven Anderson is one of the most difficult wolves to discern, and so I have to warn readers that they will need to open their Bibles and turn up their discernment dials to high. Mainstream preachers like Billy Graham and Rick Warren are easy to discern because they are so worldly, but the hardest false preachers to discern are those who seem to be close to the truth, but deceive and manipulate more subtly. (Gen 3:1) Although some Christians have taken a softer, questionable stance on Anderson, in our teaching, I will be exposing his false doctrines, showing you the Bible in comparison to Anderson's words, and demonstrate why I firmly believe he is NOT a Christian.

Of course, Andersonites everywhere (i.e. those who blindly follow Steven Anderson) will immediately condemn me based on some of the teachings he's done, in which he says:
"That whosoever believeth in him [Jesus] shall not perish—it's not of works. It's not by works of righteousness we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost."
-Steven L. Anderson, "The Correct Definition of Repentance," Elliot Ray, Feb 26, 2016, retrieved Feb 20, 2018, [https://youtu.be/q87s090Agpk]

That sure sounds good doesn't it?
As we'll find out later, Anderson doesn't actually believe that, and his numerous false doctrines, along with his railing, hateful, warmongering demeanor, will clearly expose his wicked heart. He is not of Christ, and he is deceiving listeners worldwide. Again, this is not hearsay; I will provide all the videos and documented sources you need to prove conclusively from the Word of God that Steven L. Anderson is a man playing a pastor, and playing the "churchianity" traditions and doctrines of men, but he is not born again in Christ. Thus, our ministry will not only sanctify (i.e. set apart) ourselves away from Anderson, but because of the danger of this man's leaven, we will also sanctify ourselves away from all those who choose to follow him instead of the Lord Jesus Christ.

A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
-Galatians 5:9

It is not uncommon for Andersonites to raise contention and strife over this matter, but I would remind them that we have no such tradition in the church:

But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
-1 Corinthians 11:16

Many will respond to me in similar viciousness that they learned from Anderson, without even reading this article. I would encourage them to read this and hear me out before answering the matter, to avoid foolishness and shame:

He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.
-Proverbs 18:13

We ought to be of one mind on these matters, and if there are people that want to follow after Anderson's cult, they are free to do so, but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. (Jos 24:15) I would pray that all those who follow Anderson would read this teaching and have their eyes opened.

On the other hand, there are many false converts in Anderson's church, and I'll explain why later in this teaching. I care enough about them that I want to tell them the truth, but if you are reading this and have no love of the truth (2Th 2:10), and you are blindly dedicated to Anderson, along with his deception, hatred, lies, false doctrines, railing, heresies, etc, then I would suggest you close this article and not waste your time.

It is the duty of the saints of Christ to sanctify themselves away from the unfruitful works of darkness and expose them, and that's why I'm exposing Anderson:

And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
-Ephesians 5:11

As I investigated a number of reports on Steven Anderson and his church building, it occurred to me that I need to make a disclaimer and warn Christians that he often gets falsely accused on a number of issues, which is partially how he keeps up his facade. (i.e. They think he's of the truth because he's been lied about by so many sources.) For example, he's accused of having his business mixed with his church under incorporated status in 2009, but as far as I can tell from past records, Anderson's never had 501c3 status (although he believes 501c3 corporate church buildings are Biblically sound; we'll cover more on that later), and based on what I found in my research, those were just some rumors started by some media sources, which is why his church building has never been prosecuted in a court of law, or in other words, they're not doing anything illegal.

To give another example, there's an incident in 2009 where Anderson was tasered and arrested, and it was made to look like he was resisting police arrest. This is not the case. Anderson was traveling through an internal border patrol, which is a checkpoint where they demand to see your proof of citizenship. Checkpoints like this, which demand personal papers in an unlawful stop, are a violation of the fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, or in other words, internal border patrols on U.S. soil are constitutionally unlawful. Anderson refused to hand over his papers, and asked if he was free to go (which was lawful procedure for a U.S. citizen), but they refused to let him go, held him for 90 minutes, argued with him the whole time, then a drug-sniffing dog allegedly (i.e. no evidence was ever given to verify it was true) took interest in Anderson's vehicle, so they broke his car windows, tasered him, and arrested him.

(As we will see later, Anderson hypocritically states that he would never war against the government over such a thing, nor would he be willing to go to jail over such a trivial matter, but does not both to mention that fact that he did exactly that.)

Anderson suffered physical wounds that needed stitches, the police found that his papers were in order, and no illegal materials were found in his car. A jury unanimously found him NOT guilty during his trial in 2010, because the jury understood the fourth Amendment states that U.S. citizens have the right to NOT have their persons and papers searched and seized without an official court warrant.
(See James Gilbert, "Pastor acquitted in Interstate 8 checkpoint incident," Yuma Sun, Aug 13, 2010, retrieved Nov 28, 2017, [http://bit.ly/2zxFVro]; See also U.S. Constitution, "Fourth Amendment," Legal Information Institute, retrieved Nov 28, 2017, [law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment])

These are just a couple of examples, but the point I am making is that Anderson has been falsely accused of breaking the law on many matters in which he has not done anything unlawful, even though I would argue that he protested needlessly in some cases, and I believe we born again Christians have no need to cause that much of a fuss over the matter because His kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36). There was really no Biblical reasoning for Anderson to do what he did, and it did not glorify the Lord Jesus Christ in any way; however, that being said, I do not want to falsely accuse any man of anything that he is not guilty of doing, even if he is a cultist like Anderson who lies and deceives people in what he teaches, so we are not going to handle things like the world (and Anderson himself) does by attempting to paint a false picture. We are simply going to look at the doctrines he teaches, and show the contradictions with Scripture, which is what the Lord Jesus Christ instructed His disciples to do:

Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees... Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
-Matthew 16:6-12

NOTE: Some of Anderson's Teachings Have Been Removed From Youtube I want to alert readers to the fact that if you go check out some of the references (in gray text) that I provide in this article, occasionally, you will find a video has been removed from Youtube. There are many reasons that could have happened (I will not speculate), but I documented everything word-for-word as I found it while I worked on this teaching during late 2017 to early 2018. If any readers find a new or updated URL for any links that got removed, and you want to send me those, I might update the references (depending on its accuracy).

Based on the information I found on his Faithful Word Baptist Church website, Steven Anderson has claimed to have over 140 chapters of the Bible memorized word-for-word, and all from the King James Bible. This is why he can feel intimidating for some Christians, and why other Christians are fooled into thinking that he is born again in Christ, but I need to remind readers that I have seen Mormons who have many chapters of Scripture memorized from the King James Bible, but that does not make them born again because they believe in false doctrine and teach the commandments of men without understanding.
(See Steven Anderson, "Our Pastor," Faithful Word Baptist Church, retrieved Nov 28, 2017, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/page2.html])

This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
-Matthew 15:8-9

In order to gain full understanding of the doctrines of Scripture, it takes both study AND the Spirit of God, and though Anderson has lots of study, he does not have the Spirit of God, and therefore, he is ever learning, but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.

Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.
-2 Timothy 3:7-8

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
-1 Corinthians 2:14

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
-2 Timothy 2:15

Please do not misunderstand; many men have faith (e.g. even Satanists and witches have faith), but they resist the truth in their corrupt hearts and minds, and so the question we have to consider is: What is the foundation of their faith? Do they have true faith in Christ, or do they have a fake faith they He warned us about?

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
-Matthew 7:15

Of course, Anderson will tell you his faith is on the Word of God, and many men in positions of authority throughout the "Baptist" denomination (as well as all the other corrupt denominations) claim the exact same thing. The phrase "reprobate concerning the faith" in 2nd Timothy means those who are abandoned to error concerning the faith in Christ, which describes the chief priests, Pharisees, scribes, Sadducees, and elders of that day, and those lofty positions of authority today are commonly referred to as a "pastor."

Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the LORD.
-Jeremiah 23:1

Multitudes of churchgoers and preachers claim their foundation is on the Word of God, but most of them are quickly found to be liars when we see what they do and teach, and Steven Anderson is no exception; they are all what I typically call "false converts," and the Lord Jesus Christ spent a lot of time warning us about them.
(Read "False Converts & Eternal Security" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

The first doctrine that needs to be addressed is on repentance, and as we'll see, this is a core problem with Steven Anderson. In order to understand why Anderson is so far from the Lord God, we need to firmly understand the doctrine of repentance in Scripture, and if any readers are unfamiliar with that, then I highly suggest stopping here and reading our article, "Is Repentance Part of Salvation?" because all those who preach against repentance concerning salvation, as well as most of those who preach in favor of repentance, are in very serious error.

In our teaching on repentance, we show how men like Anderson are deceiving people to believe that the word 'repent' only means "to turn" or "to change one's mind" in every instance all throughout Scripture. Both sides typically teach this, and both sides are in error. That is false doctrine. In fact, in every instance throughout Scripture, the word 'repent' means "grief and sorrow."

Let's start by taking a look at what Anderson teaches on this subject, and that will not only expose his false doctrine, but also give us insight on how he deceives his listeners:

ANDERSON: "We need to make sure we use the right words when we talk about salvation, or else people will become confused. When we start saying, 'Make a commitment to Christ,' 'Give your life unto Christ,' or this term, that has brought confusion than anything into Baptist circles, 'Repent of your sins to be saved.' And nobody even knows what it means. You talk to ten different people you get ten different definitions."

That's not true; I've talked with MANY people about the definition of repentance, and I typically get one of two answers. They say it means 'to turn' or 'to change one's mind,' or both, but in the context of the salvation of Christ, those are incorrect definitions of repentance. The point is, you don't get "ten different definitions," Anderson is just exaggerating in attempt to make his argument look more extreme. Most people I've spoken with go the route that Anderson takes, that 'repent' means "to turn," because that's what they learned from false preachers like Anderson (among thousands of others), and the wicked lexicons and concordances they typically seek out instead of looking at Scripture.
(Read "The Dangers of Using Lexicons & Concordances" here at creationliberty.com for more details; Popular lexicons and concordances in our day, like Thayer, Strong, and Vine, were authored by men who denied the Gospel of Christ.)

ANDERSON: "But here's the thing about that phrase 'repent of your sins,' it's never found in the Bible."

It's interesting to note that the phrase "make a commitment to Christ," or "give your life unto Christ," is never found in the Bible. Anderson hides that point from his listeners, but the phrase "repent of your sins" IS found in Scripture, and he actually mentions it during his teaching without realizing it.

Before we get to that, we need to preface the fact that Steven Anderson is either ignorant of how to read the Bible, or he knows how, and simply ignores it when it allows him to avoid rebuke and correction. It's important we mention this first because this error will come up repeatedly from Anderson as you read through this article. God instructs us on how His Word is to be read:

For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:
-Isaiah 28:10

When it says "precept must be upon precept," it means each commandment must be taken in correlation to one another. The phrase "line upon line" means to read it in its context, and "here a little and there a little" means that the Bible will not list out every doctrine in subsequent order with nice, neat bullet points and color-coded tabs for every subject. We will often have to take multiple passages and correlate them together in order to understand the fullness of a given doctrine.

A lot of people who read this verse often wonder why God set up His Word like this, and a few verses later, He tells us:

But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.
-Isaiah 28:13

God designed His Word exclusively for the faithful, having the Spirit of God in them, so that they see doctrines that the rest of the world can't see. Certainly, false preachers will get some things right, but there are many doctrines they will not be able to understand because they don't have the Spirit of God. The reason this is significant is because there are many men in this world who spend a lot of time studying the Bible as a whole, but are not born again in Christ and do not have the Spirit of God, and so they end up teaching false doctrines, believing falsely that they have understanding.

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
-1 Corinthians 2:14

But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.
-Matthew 13:23

God set up His Word in that way so those of us born again in the Spirit of God can easily spot the wolves who are looking to consume us. We can tell they are false when they teach something other than what the Bible teaches and have no repentance of it (i.e. grief and sorrow of wrongdoing). The Lord God said He gave us His preserved Word to protect the poor and needy against men like Steven Anderson, and if you listen to his teachings enough, you can clearly see that he believes he can speak no wrong and is beyond correction.

Correction is grievous unto him that forsaketh the way: and he that hateth reproof shall die.
-Proverbs 15:10

For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the LORD; I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him. The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
-Psalm 12:5-7

With that understanding, Anderson claims that the phrase "repent of your sins" is not found in the Bible. However, he's only speaking of that particular phrase, which more encourges people to do keyword searches rather than study the Scriptures, and we can see an example of this when he continues to say the following:

ANDERSON: "But nowhere does the Bible teach that you have to repent of your sins to be saved. ['amens' from audience] The Bible tells Christians to repent of their sins. It never uses the term 'repent of your sins'. He tells them, you know, repent of being lukewarm, repent of wickedness, or whatever."

The phrase "or whatever" shows us Anderson's lackadaisical (i.e. careless, lazy) attitude towards this very important doctrine because "repent of wickedness" means to repent of sin! The word "wicked" is the adjective form of the noun "sin."

sin (n): any voluntary transgression of the divine law, or violation of a divine command; a wicked act
wicked (adj): evil in principle or practice; deviating from the divine law; addicted to vice; sinful; immoral
(See 'sin', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Oct 26, 2017,[webstersdictionary1828.com])

These two words are used interchangeably throughout Scripture:

There is none greater in this house than I; neither hath he kept back any thing from me but thee, because thou art his wife: how then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?
-Genesis 39:9

Remember thy servants, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; look not unto the stubbornness of this people, nor to their wickedness, nor to their sin:
-Deuteronomy 9:27

If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
-2 Chronicles 7:14

Wicked ways is sin. What Anderson is implying to his audience is that wickedness is not sin, which is absurd to anyone who has understanding of God's Word. In the quote, Anderson is referring to Acts 8:

Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.
-Acts 8:22

If you go back and read Acts 8, you'll find that Peter said this unto a man who was a sorcerer, that thought he could purchase God's power with money. He was a false convert who did not have repentance in his heart, which is why Peter told him:

Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God.
-Acts 8:21

In order for his heart to be right in the sight of God, he needed to repent. Steven Anderson told us that "the Bible doesn't teach repent of your sin; it teaches repent of your wickedness," so what Anderson actually said was "the Bible doesn't teach repent of your sin; it teaches repent of your sin," which is a contradiction, but he doesn't see this because he doesn't understand the doctrine.

Anderson seems to be another product of typical new-age preachers that use keyword searches to impress people, falsely believing they have studied the Bible with the Spirit of God. They are not studying doctrine as much as they're just looking up key words and phrases, but as we read from Isaiah 28, God set up His Word in such a way that we can discern who has understanding and who is doing keyword searches to impress people. If men don't have the Spirit of God and study the Word as instructed, they will be snared, broken, taken, and fall backward; thereby making them easy to mark.

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
-Romans 16:17-18

In Anderson's false teaching on repentance, he argues that because the book of John never uses the word "repent," therefore, repentance has nothing to do with the salvation of the Lord Jesus Christ:

ANDERSON: "The book of John mentions some form of the word 'believe' 101 times! That's an average of approximately five times per chapter! Chapter 1: 'Believe, believe, believe, believe, believe!' Chapter 2: 'Believe, believe, believe, believe, believe!' Chapter 3: 'Believe, believe, believe, believe, believe!' I mean, an average of five times per chapter, God's saying 'BELIEVE!' 'BELIEVE!' 'BELIEVE!' 'BELIEVE!' 'BELIEVE!'"

-Steven L. Anderson, "False Repentance Doctrine Exposed," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Aug 20, 2012, retrieved Feb 23, 2018, [https://youtu.be/FVSxeENosmQ]

I'll address Anderson's verbal machine-gun argument in just a moment, but I think we should take a quick look at another teaching that Anderson does to see how he contradicts himself. On the one hand, in "False Repentance Doctrine Exposed," Anderson argues that the book of John is the only book you need to understand the doctrine of salvation, and on the other hand, in "Why There Are 4 Gospels," Anderson argues that all the Gospels must correlate together, and that different details are taken from each one to understand them as a whole.

ANDERSON: "The Gospels are actually a perfect eye-witness testimony, giving different details, appearing to contradict on the surface only to the unlearned; only to those who haven't studied, and then once you do study it out, you see that they corroborate... Why are there four gospels? Well, it's four corroborating testimonies, and it is also that we might learn different things, and have different things emphasized unto us."

-Steven L. Anderson, "Why There Are 4 Gospels," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Feb 28, 2016, retrieved Feb 23, 2018, [https://youtu.be/CS3mzeMSatU]

Corroborate means to strengthen, confirm, and to make certain. I agree with the statement that the Gospels have different details that are to be taken in correlation to one another, which is what Anderson is teaching, but then he abandons that teaching and throws out the other three Gospels when it comes to the doctrine of repentance, and this is something he learned from a very wicked false preacher. (We'll cover more on that later.)

ANDERSON: "And then look at it [the book of John], and there's no repent there; that tells me that believing is enough!"

-Steven L. Anderson, "False Repentance Doctrine Exposed," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Aug 20, 2012, retrieved Feb 23, 2018, [https://youtu.be/FVSxeENosmQ]

It should be noted that the book of Acts NEVER mentions the word "love" one time. If we were to approach the Bible the way that Steven Anderson does, then we would conclude that the church does NOT need to love one another, which is absolutely absurd because we can read the rest of Scripture in corroboration with Acts, and know that doctrine would be false.

Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:
-1 Peter 1:22

The New Testament uses a phrase called the "remission of sins," and remission means to "forgive or pardon" and release from punishment. Thus, the remission of sins described in Matthew, Mark, and Luke is speaking of the forgiveness of sin concerning salvation in Christ; however, the book of John NEVER mentions the phrase "remission of sins" one time. If we were to approach the Bible the way that Steven Anderson teaches, then we would conclude that the church does NOT gain remission of sins when we are saved, which is absolutely absurd because we can read the rest of Scripture in corroboration with John, and know that doctrine would be false.

And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
-Luke 24:47

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
-Acts 2:38

For example, there is a common concern amongst churchgoers that they just have to forgive anyone, anywhere, under any circumstance no matter what, because they read in Matthew:

Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.
-Matthew 18:21-22

The Lord Jesus Christ then goes on to tell them a parable, which He says is like unto "the kingdom of heaven," and he describes a servant that owed a king more money than he could ever hope to pay back. The king forgave the servant all his debt in his mercy, but the wicked servant went to others who owed him small amounts of money and forced them to pay back. The king then pointed out the wickedness of that servant, made him pay all that he owed, handed him over to the tormenters, and then Christ said:

So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.
-Matthew 18:35

Remember that God does not give His grace to someone unless someone has been humbled to repentance, which also means He does not forgive those who have not been humbled to repentance:

But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.
-James 4:6

So on the surface, just from reading Matthew 18, it would seem that God is asking us to do more than He is willing to do, but that's not the case. If we go to the same section in Luke, and look for the correlating Scripture, we get more details:

Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him.
-Luke 17:3-4

So now we learn that we are supposed to rebuke him, and he is supposed to repent (i.e. have grief and sorrow in his heart of wrongdoing). If he doesn't repent, then we have no obligation to forgive him. For example, if a pedophile rapist assaulted your daughter, but then came to your home on his knees in tears begging for your forgiveness of his sin, then we can forgive him and get him some help because he came in repentance, but if he doesn't repent, we have no obligation to forgive him, and we ought to turn him over to the law to handle the matter (Mat 5:26), so that we can protect our neighbors and family from his wickedness. (It's important that we show an open willingness to forgive when someone repents, that they may see an example of our Heavenly Father openly forgiving when we repent.)

Put in another way, if the rapist showed up a year later at your doorstep, and you were enraged to see him, remembering what he had done to your daughter, and he said, "Hey man, that was like, a year ago; you need to calm down. Just let it go, okay?" Would the proper response be, "Ya know, Jesus said to forgive, so all is well, come on in?" That's absurd! If the rapist has no repentance in his heart, then he is dangerous, and you need to protect your family, call the police, and warn your neighbors.

The reason the new-age church buildings all over the world are teaching forgiveness without repentance is because they have not come to repentance. They want God to forgive them without them having to be humbled to the grief, pain, and sorrow for their sins, just as Steven Anderson doesn't want anything to do with repentance either, and brings in numerous heresies to his cult.

If we don't take all the Gospels together, and learn from each of them as a whole, we will miss key doctrines. It is because many false preachers have missed these key doctrines that they are snared, taken back, and fall, and like Anderson, they end up teaching in error.

Anderson makes the argument that the word 'repent' is never used in John, but it's also interesting to note that there are many instances in Scripture that repentance is described without ever using the word "repent." For example, in Acts 16, the jailor that knelt before Paul was in a state of humble repentance, even though the word 'repent' was never used, and so if we study Scripture, we'll find the grief and sorrow of repentance all over the place, but without ever seeing the word "repent" in print. However, Steven Anderson doesn't know this because he uses keyword searches as a replacement for the Spirit of God, and if you want to see more examples of where repentance is described in Scripture without the use of the word, I once again recommend reading our article "Is Repentance Part of Salvation?" to get more details.

Anderson believes and teaches that repentance is only for the church, but not for unbelievers. (Although I have seen him flip-flip on that subject.) Again, he directly opposes the Word of God on this doctrine because the Bible tells us that repentance was to be preached, starting at Jerusalem, and spread throughout the world:

And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
-Luke 24:46-47

I've watched a few videos in which Steven Anderson taught on repentance, and I only saw one time that he even attempted to address the definition of grief and sorrow, but when he did, he just mocked it. He didn't respond to it; he just openly and loudly mocked it. However, it was interesting to hear Anderson contradict himself and lie to his audience before he mocked the grief and sorrow of repentance, concerning a verse in 1 Samuel 15:

And Samuel came no more to see Saul until the day of his death: nevertheless Samuel mourned for Saul: and the LORD repented that he had made Saul king over Israel.
-1 Samuel 15:35

"Now that's a pretty clear statement: 'The Lord repented that he had made Saul king over Israel'. Now what do you think that means? It's pretty clear from the context. He's basically saying he changed his mind about it. I mean, he wanted to make him king, then he saw, you know, what he did with it, and he said, 'You know what? I wish I hadn't have done that.' You know, and he said, 'I've changed my mind about that'."... And here's the thing: You open up the Webster's—Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary, it'll tell you that to repent means to be sorry for your sins."
-Steven L. Anderson, "The True Definition of Repentance," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Jan 13, 2010, retrieved Mar 2, 2018, [https://youtu.be/jusl3qL0rGs]; See also Steven L. Anderson, "The True Definition of Repentance," IMDb, Jan 13, 2010, retrieved Apr 13, 2018, [imdb.com/title/tt4081346]; See also mirrored video, Steven L. Anderson, "The True Definition of Repentance Pastor Steven L Anderson," May 4, 2015, retrieved Apr 13, 2018, [https://youtu.be/DbJTD2PLAtk]

I just accused him of lying and contradicting himself, so let me show you each one; starting first with the lie. As you have already seen, I've used Noah Webster's 1828 Dictionary of the English Language to help us define a few terms, so now let's look under the listing for 'repent':

repent (v): to feel pain, sorrow or regret for something done or spoken
(See 'repent', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Mar 2, 2018,[webstersdictionary1828.com])

I provide the references for all my information, and I encourage Christians to go look this up for themselves. He told them that Webster's dictionary said to be "sorry for your sins." That's not what it says; feeling pain or sorrow for something does not necessarily equate to being "sorry for your sins," just as Samuel mourned (i.e. repented) for Saul, even though Samuel did nothing wrong in that situation. Anderson flat-out lied about the definition in that dictionary to cover up the truth about repentance so he can cling to his false doctrine and not have to confess his error; after all, he's been supposedly "converting" people to his church without repentance, and admitting the truth of repentance would also mean he would have to admit that he's brought in a high percentage of false converts. (This is not to say that all those who currently follow Anderson are unsaved, but those born again in Christ sanctify themselves when they learn the truth.)

The part where Anderson contradicts himself is when he describes God repenting as "changing his mind," but then also describes God repenting as "I wish I hadn't done that." The problem is that "I wish I hadn't done that" is REGRET which is the definition of repentance that is listed out by Noah Webster, and regret means grief and sorrow:

regret (v): grief; sorrow; pain of mind
(See 'regret', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Mar 2, 2018,[webstersdictionary1828.com])

When I read Anderson's explanation of what God said, claiming a casual, "You know what? I wish I hadn't done that... I've changed my mind about that," it really seemed like a smack in the face against the omniscience (i.e. the all-knowing nature) of God. God made Saul king on the request of the Jews, not because He wanted Saul to be king. If you go back to 1 Samuel 8, God had Samuel warn Israel that they should not have a king, but God gave them what they cried out to Him for, knowing full-well, in advance, that they would desire a king, He would give them one, and what would happen with Saul. God mourned (repented) over the wickedness that had been done, but God is also all-knowing, so He didn't sit back in some revelation and think, "Hmm... maybe I shouldn't have done that." (i.e. That's heresy against the omniscience of God.)

The Lord God saw his beloved servant Samuel mourning, grieving in his heart, for Saul, and thus, the Lord God also grieved, which Anderson alludes to with his "regret" comment, and this is VERY important because it helps demonstrate that Steven Anderson, by the context of Scripture, knows in his heart that repentance is grief and sorrow. However, instead of humbling himself to embrace it, which would lead him to repentance, instead he constructs a fortress of pride in his heart, sticks with the doctrines of men that he learned in his seminary college, and mocks all those who teach the truth.

Anderson repeats over and over, trying to brainwash his audience to believe that 'repent' means "to turn/change" in every instance throughout the Bible:

ANDERSON: "Now, of course, the Bible talks a lot about repentance, but repentance in the Bible is simply 'turning' or 'changing', and it has to do with the context; what's changing. For example, when God repents, he's not repenting of his sin because God doesn't have any sin. God is perfect in every way. Yet, the Bible records God repenting more than anyone else in the whole Bible. He frequently repents in the Bible. What is he changing? Is he changing who he is? No. Is he changing his character, his nature? No. God said 'I change not', but what he does change is his course of action."

With this quote, we can now see more clearly how Anderson deceives his listeners; specifically on how he preaches "context," but then ignores context. Let's take a look at the first time the word "repent" is used in Scripture, and it is used by God about Himself:

And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
-Genesis 6:6

The King James Bible has a built-in dictionary, and it often defines certain words by using two different words that have the same (or similar) meanings. So for example, in Genesis 6, God is defining repentance as grief, and that His repentance was Him grieving in his heart.

grief (n): the pain of mind produced by loss, misfortune, injury or evils of any kind; sorrow; regret
(See 'grief', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Dec 12, 2017,[webstersdictionary1828.com])

As we can see, the definition of the first use of repentance in Scripture is "grief/sorrow," but Anderson is blind to this, and he continues to preach "turn/change." Certainly, there are places in the Bible where God changes His course of action, so I don't want readers to think I'm arguing against that; on the contrary, I have taught that when the context calls for it, but there is nowhere in the Bible where 'repent' means "to turn," and the primary definition of the word "repent" is "grief and sorrow." The definition of the words should be understood by the context, not by Anderson's presuppositions. The foundation of grief and sorrow of wrongdoing in one's heart will lead them to turn and change (i.e. conversion), and the willingly ignorant church buildings of America desperately need to understand this doctrine, but sadly, Anderson is playing his role in keeping them blind.

In short, repent never means "to turn," nor "to change," but in all instances, it means grief and sorrow, and the Lord God was grieving in His heart that He had made mankind because of all the wickedness (i.e. sin) that they did against Him. Just as God repented/grieved at the sins of man, so God also calls us to repent/grieve of our sins:

I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
-Luke 13:3

The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
-2 Peter 3:9

God calls us to repentance because it brings a man's heart to humility before the Holy Living God, and, as we read earlier, unless a man has that humility of repentance, God will not grant him grace. (Jms 4:6) The grace of God is a free gift (Eph 2:8), but He doesn't just give it to anyone. The Christian God of the Bible resists those who are proud of heart, like Steven Anderson, and they will not enter His Heavenly Kingdom without that humility of repentance, which the Lord Jesus Christ described as becoming as little children:

Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
-Mark 10:15

Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
-1 Corinthians 14:20

Thus, for a man to "repent of his sin" means that he has grief and sorrow over the wrongdoings he has done against God, and regrets his actions. This doesn't mean he needs to know every sin he's ever committed, but rather that he acknowledges the truth that he is guilty before the Lord God.

For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
-James 2:10

Wicked preachers like Steven Anderson always mock this doctrine, saying, "What sins? Are we to know every sin we've ever committed?" The Bible says that offense one point is offense on all points; thus, the answer to what sins is all of them.

Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
-Romans 3:19

Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
-Galatians 3:24

This is what brings a man to his knees at the foot of the cross. It is the same thing as a teary-eyed child coming to his dad after he has done something bad, begging mercy for his wrong, knowing his offense against his dad, and that is exactly what the Lord Jesus Christ described when he told us who would come to the father justified and who would not:

And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
-Luke 18:9-14

The publican had repentance in his heart, even though the word 'repent' or the phrase "repent of your sins" was never used in that parable, and it is the humble man who repents, and believes on the Lord Jesus Christ, that is justified in the eyes of God, but Anderson, as we'll see evidence of later, is like the Pharisee who trusts in his own perceived righteousness and despises others. The reason Anderson is blind to that repentant humility is because Anderson has never been brought low to that repentance, having that grief and sorrow of wrongdoing, and he is blinded by the pride of his heart.

It is quite common for men like Anderson, and most churchgoers, to read the word 'call' as simply "inviting or speaking" when the Bible says:

For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
-Romans 10:13

What they don't understand is that "call" has many different meanings, and in this context concerning salvation, the word 'call' means to cry out while weeping. In fact, if we go back to that 1828 dictionary, it's listed out under "intransitive verb," which is a verb that is used without referencing to a specific object, and that's how the word 'call' is used in Romans 10:

call (v): to utter a loud sound, or to address by name; to bawl, a popular use of the phrase
bawl (v): to weep, to wail; to cry with vehemence [passion], in pain or exultation
(See 'call' & 'bawl', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Mar 9, 2018,[webstersdictionary1828.com])

It is those who, through the grief and sorrow of repentance, call on the name of the Lord that will be saved. The Bible says they call out to Him with a pure heart:

Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.
-2 Timothy 2:22

As we'll see later, Anderson believes one simply "accepts Jesus" and is born again, which is exactly what most pseudo-Christian cults around the world teach, and it's what most false converts also believe. The Lord Jesus Christ has already told us that many people on the Day of Judgment will "accept" and believe on Jesus (i.e. they will call him "Lord"), but they will NOT enter heaven.

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
-Matthew 7:21-23

Anderson continues with more fallacies:

ANDERSON: "So God will change his course or direction based upon man. He's going to destroy Ninevah, but then when they turn unto the Lord, he says, 'Okay, I'm going to repent from that, I'm not going to destroy Ninevah any longer.' Okay? All throughout the Bible, people are told to repent. Unsaved people are told to repent; saved people are told to repent. The church at Laodecia was told to repent of being lukewarm. He said 'Be zealous and repent, get excited, don't be lukewarm, don't be dead!'—over and over again. So in order to know what is being repented of, you must know the context."

I agree that in order to know what is being repented of, you have to know the context, but the deception here is that WHAT is being repented of is NOT the issue. Anderson doesn't understand this because of his willing blindness on the topic of repentance.

If you read our teaching, "Is Repentance Part of Salvation?" here at creationliberty.com, I go over this subject in great detail, namely, that sackcloth and ashes were an outward sign of godly sorrow:

So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them. For word came unto the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes. And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water: But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands.
-Jonah 3:5-8

Turning from evil is connected to repentance, but is not repentance itself. For mankind, it godly sorrow of wrongdoing:

Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing. For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.
-2 Corinthians 7:9-10

However, for God, repentance is grief of the heart, as we saw earlier in Genesis 6:6, because it is impossible for God to do wrong. So the controversy is over the last two verses in Jonah 3:

Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.
-Jonah 3:9-10

God obviously did not destroy Ninevah as He had purposed to do, but because they had come to grief and godly sorrow of their wrongdoing, the Lord God grieved in His heart of the evil He had said that he would do unto them. The following is an excerpt from "Is Repentance Part of Salvation?" to give more clarification:

"So in Jonah 3:9, Nineveh was praying that God would turn AND repent, which does not mean that God would turn and turn; it means that God would turn away from his fierce anger, and be grieved at the sight of their humility before Him. In Jonah 3:10, God repented in that He grieved at the thought of the evil that would befall Nineveh in punishment because they had come to grief and godly sorrow of their wrongdoing (i.e. when the children grieve, the father grieves, and when the father grieves, the children grieve), and in case you may not understand God's great lovingkindness of grief in this passage, let me give an example. If you had seen a dog viciously attack a young girl on the street, where he was running out and biting her throat, with blood running down her face, and his master came out and shot his dog with a shotgun, would you not think the master was doing the good and noble thing by protecting that young girl? He would be considered a hero, and we would not grief over the death of that dog because it was a violent and cruel animal. On the other hand, if you saw your neighbor's puppy, who knew he had something done wrong, and came to his master with his ears and tail down, whimpering in sadness of his wrong action, but then you saw the master take out a shotgun and blow the pup's head off, would you not be grieved and pained in your heart to see such evil done to a repentant puppy? God repented (i.e. grieved in His heart) at the thought of Nineveh's punishment because they came to him in humility, and because the Lord God is Supreme in His great mercy, He forgave them and granted them the grace He gives to the humble of heart."

Because Anderson believes that repent always means "to turn," therefore, he also believes it is works doctrine. If repent only meant "to turn," then he would be correct, that would be a false works-based doctrine, but that's not what the word means. The Lord God never defines repentance as a work, and specifically points out that He gives men repentance:

And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
-2 Timothy 2:24-26

At this point, we have no need to spend a lot of time going through the entirety of Anderson's hours of presentation on repentance, because he starts with false premises and fallacies. That means everything else he teaches will be based on those false premises. Until Anderson abandons his scorning disposition and is humbled to repentance, he will not be offered God's grace:

Surely he scorneth the scorners: but he giveth grace unto the lowly.
-Proverbs 3:34

A scorner is someone who despises others, and through the pride of his heart, considers them unworthy and beneath himself, and brings contempt against them:

scorn (n): extreme contempt; that disdain which springs from a person's opinion of the meanness of an object, and a consciousness or belief of his own superiority or worth
contempt (n): act of despising; the act of viewing or considering and treating as mean, vile and worthless
(See 'scorn' & 'contempt', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Dec 20, 2017,[webstersdictionary1828.com])

When the wicked cometh, then cometh also contempt, and with ignominy reproach.
-Proverbs 18:3

If you were able to watch the videos above, you would see that meekness/humility is something Steven Anderson lacks. In case you are reading this and were unable to view the videos, I will quote Anderson so you can read it for yourself:

ANDERSON at the pulpit: "Tonight I want to preach this sermon, and you've probably never heard a sermon like this before—actually you probably have since you've been going to church here for a while. But you know what? Here's my sermon: Why I Hate Barack Obama." ANDERSON talking to a crowd: "Shut your **** mouth and listen to me... Shut your faggoty mouth and let me say something!" ANDERSON screaming from the pulpit: "YOU BETTER READ THIS BOOK!! [slams his fist into the Bible on the pulpit] AND YOU BETTER READ THE TRACT!! AND YOU BETTER KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING!!" (This one is interesting because I've heard another teaching he did in which he says he refuses to use tracts because he claims they're worthless, which is another contradiction.) ANDERSON talking to crowd: "Dude, you're too gay, I don't want to talk to you." ANDERSON talking live to radio show host: "If you're a homosexual, I hope you get brain cancer like Ted Kennedy." ANDERSON screaming from the pulpit: "BECAUSE THE SAME KIND OF PERSON WHO'S TOO LAZY TO READ THE BACK OF THE CHURCH TRACT IS THE SAME KIND OF PERSON WHO'S TOO LAZY [kicks the side of the pulpit as hard as he can] TO READ THEIR BIBLE COVER TO COVER!!" ANDERSON at the pulpit: "And I'm going to tell you something: I hate Barack Obama! You say: Well, you mean you just don't like what he stands for. No, I hate the person! Well, you just don't like his politics. No, I HATE HIM!... I'm not going to pray for his good. I'm going to pray that he dies and goes to hell. When I go to bed tonight, that's what I'm going to pray. You say: Are you just saying that? No. When I go to bed tonight, Steven L. Anderson is going to pray for Barack Obama to die and go to hell." ANDERSON talking to crowd: "Well, it's more than this little twinkie has done. At least I have the balls to say what other pastors are afraid to say... [Anderson speaks in mocking tone] 'I didn't threaten anyone.' Queer little sissy."

These are just a few of the many raging outbursts of Steven Anderson, and as you can see, Anderson's hatred, pride, and contempt is clear as day, and I believe he picked it up from one of his original mentors, Jack Hyles. I've heard Anderson claim in a video that Jack Hyles is not his "hero or role model," but I don't trust Anderson; I trust the Lord God and the discernment He gives us to look at the evidence. Anderson did admit he has studied Hyles' teachings, and there are some striking similarities between both men, not only in presentation, but in doctrine. Part of that connection is seen on Anderson's website "Repentance Blacklist," in which he condemns anyone who claims that repentance and salvation are connected.
(See Steven Anderson, "Jack Hyles 'Is the Homosexual Sick or Sinful?'" Feb 10, 2017, retrieved Feb 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/EKUPrlha4Wk])

The Repentance Blacklist website has been changed over the years because Anderson actually took his original message about the word 'repent' from Jack Hyles of Hammond, Indiana. In fact, when I compared them both years ago, Anderson's teaching was almost verbatim (i.e. word-for-word) what Jack Hyles preached, and I'll leave a reference to his teaching below so you can go look it up for yourself. Recently (2017), Anderson removed Jack Hyles' teaching from his blacklist website. Why did he do that? I have some theories about that, even though I don't know for sure, but it's pretty clear where Anderson got his teaching from. I'd also like to add that Anderson kept his ownership of the website very secretive until recently, and in another article, I revealed the research that proved he owned and operated it, but today (as of February of 2018), he's much more forward with his ownership of the site. (See Steven Anderson, Repentance Blacklist, Faithful Word Baptist Church, retrieved Dec 13, 2017, [repentanceblacklist.com]; Click the image for a larger view; See also Jack Hyles, "Misunderstood Repentance: An Enemy of Soul Winning," retrieved Mar 2, 2018, [jackhyles.com/repent.htm])

I originally suspected all this while reading over Anderson's teaching versus Jack Hyles, but while researching Anderson, I found out that he did go to a seminary college (which I prefer to call "cemetery" colleges) called Hyles-Anderson College in northwest Indiana (Lake County) up near Chicago, which was founded by Jack Hyles and Russell Anderson. When I saw this, everything I researched about Steven Anderson started to make sense. I just want to reiterate that I did not know about Anderson's time at Hyles' college until around the time I published this article, but after reading Jack Hyles' teaching side-by-side with Anderson's teaching, I could see the connection. According to Anderson's wife, Steven left Hyles-Anderson College in 2005, a few months before graduating, and I've seen videos in which Anderson has critiqued the college for some of its unbiblical financial practices, but he finished most of his classes there, and so now it makes sense to me why Anderson teaches so much false doctrine and the traditions/commandments of men.
(See Hyles-Anderson College, retrieved Mar 2, 2018, [https://hylesanderson.edu/]; See also Zsuzsanna Anderson, "Wow, what a shock - NOT!" Steven Anderson Family Blogspot, Aug 1, 2012, retrieved Mar 2, 2018, [stevenandersonfamily.blogspot.com/2012/08/wow-what-shock-not.html])

But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
-Matthew 15:9

Hyles-Anderson College has received a lot of negative media attention and lawsuits over the many scandals that have taken place there, including those from Jack Hyles himself. Now, just because Jack Hyles does something wicked doesn't automatically make Anderson guilty of it; I would not make such an argument because Steven Anderson is only responsible for what Steven Anderson says and does, but I want to briefly point out that Jack Hyles, based on testimonies I've read, was involved in a lot of shady things. For example, I've read online testimonies about Hyles' church protecting and defending child abusers, other testimonies from men (who were formerly part of his church) that came forward and said Hyles committed adultery with their wives, and I even listened to Hyles' daughter give her public testimony that Hyles was secretly a sexual deviant who made millions of dollars from his 50,000-member church building, but when he died, he left all his wealth and property to the organization, leaving his wife and children absolutely nothing. (There's far more wickedness about Jack Hyles, but that should be left for another teaching.)
(See Linda Murphrey (Hyles' Daughter), "Linda Murphrey - April 5, 2012, retrieved Mar 2, 2018, [https://youtu.be/eJsOlLqBEyo])

That is very likely the reason Anderson backed off from promoting Hyles on his website (i.e. to avoid embarrassment), but as far as I know, he's never publically rebuked Hyles, which shows his firm dedication to a wicked preacher, and that alone ought to raise a lot of suspicion about Anderson. Christians do not need to know about all the secret things Jack Hyles did to know to stay away from him, because his false doctrines (like that on repentance) would be enough to tell us that there is corruption in him, and that we ought to sanctify ourselves, but Anderson could not discern that because he does not have the Spirit of God in him to see it, so instead, Anderson yoked with Hyles, and adopted Hyles' teachings.

Just to add a bit of evidence to this, there are internet archives that keep record of websites throughout their history on the internet, and so we can go back in time and view old versions of Anderson's "Repentance Blacklist." (See image below.) Notice specifically that on the main page of the original Repentance Blacklist site it says, "Written Articles that Teach the Truth," and there are only two men on that list: Jack Hyles first (a position of honor as a mentor), and Steven Anderson second.
(See Internet Archives copy of Steven Anderson's Repentanct Blacklist Website from Jan 9, 2016, retrieved Dec 13, 2017, [web.archive.org/web/20160109161250/http://www.repentanceblacklist.com:80]; The site was created in 2009, and that version had Anderson's claim to ownership on it; Anderson then removed his claim to ownership, and then once again openly claimed his ownership on the site in 2017.)

And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?
-Romans 2:3-4

As we progress through this teaching, we'll see more examples of Anderson following after the traditions of men that he was taught, rather than going to the Bible for his foundation. The Bible tells us clearly that the church ought not to follow after traditions set forth by men, and that those who do teach those false doctrines do so to serve themselves, seeking preeminence (i.e. fame and respect to person) and/or money to feed their grumbling bellies.

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments [i.e. first teachings] of the world, and not after Christ.
-Colossians 2:8

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
-Romans 16:17-18

Based on my research, I would say that Anderson is one of those pastors who loves to have preeminence (i.e. respect and honor) as much as he loves the financial benefit. As we'll see later, Anderson is what is known as a "media whore," meaning that he loves to be in the spotlight, and craves attention. Anderson is a man that demands people respect his person, loving to have the title of "pastor," and his hateful, railing nature keeps his followers in fear of him instead of fearing God, just like you would typically see in any cult.
(Read "Titles Are Unbiblical in the Church" here at creationliberty.com for more details; The early church in the New Testament never used titles in front of their names among one another because it's a pride and glorification of men.)

The reason I wanted to start by covering the topic of repentance is to demonstrate to those of you born again in Christ that the foundation of salvation comes from grace and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, but He only gives that grace to those who have been humbled to a grieving heart of wrongdoing, in which they have offended the Living God. Steven Anderson does not have the humility of grief in his heart because he's never repented to the Christian God of the Bible, and therefore, has never been born again, and this can be clearly seen in his pride, hate, and contempt, in which he screams at the top of his lungs while he hits, jumps on, and kicks the pulpit.

And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things.
-Luke 24:47-48

It's important to recognize that John the Baptist preceded Christ by preaching repentance:

John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.
-Mark 1:4

The first thing Jesus Christ taught when He started out in His ministry was repentance:

From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
-Matthew 4:17

The first thing Christ's disciples went out to teach in ministry was repentance:

And they went out, and preached that men should repent.
-Mark 6:12

The first thing the apostles went out to teach was repentance:

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
-Acts 2:38

Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
-Acts 3:19

The first thing the early church went out and preached was repentance:

But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.
-Acts 26:20

However, Steven Anderson teaches that repentance is the first thing you should NOT teach. So whose word will you take as truth? Should we follow Christ, John, the disciples, the apostles, and the early church? Or should we follow Steven Anderson?

It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.
-Psalm 118:8

The Bible tells us that through grief and sorrow, the heart is healed:

Sorrow is better than laughter: for by the sadness of the countenance the heart is made better.
-Ecclesiastes 7:3

Paul taught that he had continual sorrow in his heart, meaning that his heart had a foundation of faith in Christ with repentance.

I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.
-Romans 9:1-2

The word 'affliction' means "grief and pain," and thus we choose a life of continual repentance, rather than to enjoy the pleasure of sin like the world does:

Choosing rather to suffer affliction [i.e. grief] with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;
-Hebrews 11:25

Let's continue to look at more of Steven Anderson's heresies, but before I show the next video, I want make it known that the Word of God is very clear against the sin of sodomy and effeminism (i.e. cross-dressing), or in other words, homosexuals, gays, lesbians, and the so-called "transgenders." Though I have made this clear in many other teachings I've done, I need to state this directly because Anderson's cult followers, due to their nature of imitating Anderson, will falsely accuse me of being on the side of the sodomites/homosexuals. (i.e. If they can convince themselves that I support sodomy/homosexuality, then they can give themselves an excuse to speak evil of me, so they won't have to correct themselves about Anderson's false doctrines.)

The sodomites/homosexuals are an abomination in the sight of the Lord God because of their sin, and God took the matter so seriously that He commanded the Jews in the Old Testament to execute any sodomite/homosexual if they were found among children of Israel.

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
-Leviticus 20:13

Don't misunderstand, there is no commandment for Christians to put sodomites/homosexuals to death; in fact, there are NO commandments for Christians to execute any corporal punishment for crimes and sin. These commandments were specifically given to the nation of Israel to punish crime and sin because they were appointed to be a people sanctified for the Living God, but I point this out to make sure readers understand that the Lord God hates sodomy/homosexuality. The Lord God knows all the corruptions that come with that sin, to the point that He knew that executing them would be the only way to keep the nation of Israel cleansed from all the death, destruction, and disease that would come from having a homosexual population living among them.

However, if we back up for a moment, the Lord God also had adulterers put to death, and fornicators as well (depending on the situation), so don't think it was just the sodomites—God hates all sexual sins alike, and it is for that reason that we rebuke sodomites. It doesn't matter if they want to justify their so-called "sexual preferences," they're STILL GUILTY of whoremongering (addicted to sexual lust) and adultery; meaning that it doesn't matter which gender they are with while fornicating, it's still fornication no matter what.

Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
-Hebrews 13:4

Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
-1 Corinthians 7:2

I see a lot of modern-day church buildings and churchgoers preach hard and heavy on sodomy, but they don't come down as hard and heavy on fornication and adultery, which both heterosexuals and homosexuals are guilty of doing, and I believe all men need to learn to judge themselves in the humility of repentance.

For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
-1 Corinthians 11:31-32

ANDERSON: "Let me tell you something: There's a full-out war going on, on this subject right now. The bunch of filthy, sodomite perverts, and if you don't like it, get out of here! They're at war with us tonight. And you know what, if you're fearful and afraid and you don't want to stand up for the truth, just get out of here because I'm sick of looking at your cowardly face. Not going to put up with it. Let me tell you something: IT'S WAR!"

At this point in the video Anderson goes on to explain (with a lot of screaming and yelling) that the sodomites/homosexuals have taken great pains to get some of Anderson's websites and online donation accounts shut down. I wouldn't argue that the homosexuals haven't done those things, because that is the general loathing persecution and hateful hearts that are the foundation of the so-called "LGBT Community." (Like Anderson, they claim they are about "love," but they are hateful and wicked in their hearts.) The sodomites tend to only tolerate anyone that doesn't rebuke their sin, so these kinds of things are expected from them, but in his teaching, Anderson did not give any evidence that it was the sodomites/homosexuals who did it.

We have to remember that, a lot of times, companies will simply shy away from things that are politically controversial because they know it will affect their profits. Thus, with Anderson putting himself in the spotlight, calling for death and destruction of sodomites on international television (which he has done), it may just be a result of these companies avoiding any association with Anderson due to the biased reporting of the communist-leaning, sin-supporting mainstream media. So Anderson blames the sodomites, but it may just be that these companies don't want to be associated with Anderson because of his railing, hateful attitude that he unashamedly flaunts on TV.

That being said, Anderson points out that the congregation of his church building and the sodomites are at war with each other, which obviously means they're enemies. The Lord Jesus Christ gave us instruction on what we ought to do unto our enemies:

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
-Matthew 5:44

So how does Steven Anderson treat his sodomite enemies? He yells this at the top of his lungs to his church building:

ANDERSON: "They're sodomites; they're dogs! That's what the Bible calls them: Dogs! DOGS!!"

I'm not saying that "dogs" cannot apply to sodomites in a particular context, but the Bible uses the term "dogs" to refer to those who claim to be of God, or claim to be of Christ, but are false; specifically to those who are in leadership/teaching positions. Dogs and wolves are of the same kind of animal, and thus, the Lord God uses the term dogs in reference to pastors like Steven Anderson, not to sodomites.

I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep. The hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep.
-John 10:11-13

I will not leave the sheep unguarded, and will warn them and attempt to protect them when I see an evil worker like Steven Anderson prowling around the sheep.

Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision.
-Philippians 3:2

His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark; sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber.
-Isaiah 56:10

Even the prophecy of the Messiah in Psalm 22 speaks of the dogs surrounding Christ on all sides, and these were the Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, chief priests, elders, pastors, etc; who sought to kill Him.

For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.
-Psalm 22:16

Thus, Anderson calling others "dogs" actually makes him a hypocrite because he is called a dog in Scripture. A dog is a greedy shepherd that has no understanding:

Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter.
-Isaiah 56:11

The Lord Jesus Christ starts out in Matthew 7 rebuking hypocrites that judge others without first judging themselves. Christ commanded us to judge in righteous judgment, to judge others, and the things of this world, through the truth of His Word, but we ought to judge ourselves first.
(Read "Unbiblical Cop-Outs: Don't Judge Me!" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
-John 7:24

For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
-1 Corinthians 11:31

After Christ rebuked the hypocrites, he then called them dogs and told us not to pour out are pearls before them. By this, He means that if you give the wisdom of God's Word unto the dogs and pigs, those who are of lofty leadership in the church buildings, they will not only refuse to hear (i.e. you're wasting your time), but they'll also turn and attack you.

Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
-Matthew 7:6

He that reproveth a scorner getteth to himself shame: and he that rebuketh a wicked man getteth himself a blot. Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee. Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be yet wiser: teach a just man, and he will increase in learning.
-Proverbs 9:7-9

Thus, the Bible calls Anderson a dog, not the sodomites. The sodomites are called a wicked abomination that commits sin unto death, but the title of "dog" is reserved for Steven Anderson, and he is blind that he screams out his accusation of dogs against the sodomites, and remains in willful ignorance that he is hypocritically accusing them.

Anderson's lack of repentance (i.e. grief and godly sorrow in humility) can also be seen in his doctrine on sodomites and salvation. If you watch this video, you can see Anderson state clearly, on his live call-in show, his belief that homosexuals cannot be saved:

CALLER: "Is it possible for somebody that was gay to actually be saved and come to Christ?" ANDERSON: "No, I don't believe so because of the fact that—if you look at John chapter twelve, where Jesus talks about people whose hearts have been hardened, and their eyes have been blinded; in fact, I'll read it for you..."

Before I begin to address this completely hypocrisy from Steven Anderson, I would like to point out what should be plainly obvious to just about everyone reading this. In the video, I showed a clip of Anderson debating with homosexuals, as he has done on many other occassions, and so if he believes they can't be saved, then why does he bother to debate with them at all? It doesn't make any sense to waste any time discussing salvation with homosexuals when Anderson believes they can't be saved, and the only true reason he has these debates with them is because he knows people record them and the videos go on Youtube, which gains him more media attention because, as I've already said, Anderson is media whore.

Let's look at the verses he quotes in the video:

Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
-John 12:39-40

If Anderson is using these verses in context, then we should find verses rebuking sodomites either before or after John 12:40, but we don't. Here's what we find:

But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him: That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
-John 12:37-38

Thus, the people that Jesus said could not believe were those who saw the miracles He performed in front of their eyes, and they rejected Him. These were the chief priests, Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, elders, and pastors of that day (pastors like Steven Anderson), and this is reinforced in the verses after 40, that Isaiah/Esaias prophesied this would happen:

These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him. Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.
-John 12:41-43

For fear of being kicked out, they refused to do what was right. To protect their paychecks, they abandoned Christ. As we'll see from the Word of God shortly, the Bible instructs the saints to remove from the church men like Steven Anderson, but his cult followers will not follow the commandments of Christ on that matter because they fear to be the ones kicked out, and just as the Pharisees, they fear Anderson's wrath and accusations upon them more than they fear God.

In the video, I cut to a live discussion Anderson was having with a sodomite/homosexual on the street:

ANDERSON: "It's impossible for someone to turn from their wickedness when they've been given over to a reprobate mind."

When Jesus ordained Paul, He said:

But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.
-Acts 26:16-18

He did not tell him to go out to all the Gentiles, except the homosexual ones; He sent him unto all. In the end, it is not possible for us to know who specifically is given over to a reprobate mind; the Bible simply explains that there are people out there like that. The Bible doesn't specifically say who cannot be saved, and we are commanded to preach the truth unto ALL men across the world, not just the specific ones who live in sins that Anderson tolerates more than others.

Again, notice that these verses do not tell us that there are exceptions when concerning sodomites, effeminates, or any other particular sin:

And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
-Matthew 28:18-20

There are former lesbian feminists and cross-dressing homosexuals who have been humbled to repentance and born again in the Lord Jesus Christ. I've listened to numerous testimonies from born again Christians that they would not hear or understand the Word of God until someone came along and preached repentance to them, and when they repented in grief and godly sorrow, that's when Christ saved them and changed their lives.
(See "Homosexual Repents & Turns to Jesus," ONErighteousNESS, Nov 9, 2013, retrieved Feb 27, 2018, [youtube.com/watch?v=4PxZ_jVsoyA])

However, Anderson cannot see this because not only has he not been given the Spirit of God for understanding, but has been blinded through his scorning, which is evidence of the pride of his heart.

How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?
-Proverbs 1:22

scorn (n): extreme contempt; that disdain which springs from a person's opinion of the meanness of an object, and a consciousness or belief of his own superiority or worth
(See 'scorn', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Feb 6, 2018,[webstersdictionary1828.com])

In his video, Anderson continues to say:

ANDERSON: "The reason why a man would lust after another man, which is pretty hard to explain, you know, when you think about the fact that 90-some [percent of] people think its revolting and disgusting. Ya know, what would actually get a person to desire that? Well, you know, the Bible explains how they got there. God gave them over to vile affections. God gave them over to a reprobate mind to do those things which are not convenient."

First, I'd like to point out that he's arguing a logical fallacy called "majority opinion." (ad populem) The majority have been wrong most of the time, even in Scripture, and so the majority's opinion on a matter is irrelevant concerning good versus evil. This is the same kind of fallacious argument atheists use when attempting to figure out right and wrong; they run in circles because majority opinion can never determine absolute truth; we have to make the Word of God our foundation, or we'll end up in hopeless circular reasoning.
(Read "Everything You Need to Know About Atheism" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

I have no argument that there are some people who God has given up on, and that they cannot be saved because they refuse to be humbled and receive the repentance He gives them. (The Bible tells us that God gives men repentance 2Ti 2:25, which means grief and godly sorrow of wrongdoing is not works.) However, the Bible does NOT tell us specifically who it is that cannot be saved, or who it is that is completely given over to sin, because if Anderson would be consistent with his belief, that what is described in Romans 1 are all people who cannot be saved, then that would mean that no atheist can be saved (Rom 1:20), no evolutionist can be saved (Rom 1:23), no fornicator can be saved (Rom 1:24), no environmentalist can be saved (Rom 1:25), no lesbian or feminist can be saved (Rom 1:26), no murderer can be saved (Rom 1:29), no disobedient child can be saved (Rom 1:30), and the list could potentially go on for a very long time because of all the very specific sinful descriptions in Romans 1.

The problem here is with Steven Anderson, and how he does not read the Bible line upon line, here a little and there a little. These reprobates are also talked about in Titus 1, and both Romans and Titus were penned by Paul through the inspiration of God, so let's look there and see what it says:

They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.
-Titus 1:16

However, if we go back a few verses, we find that the Bible tells us we should firmly rebuke their sin for the purpose of them understanding and coming to faith in Christ:

This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;
-Titus 1:13

This means those who are reprobate concerning the good works of God can be born again in Christ, but I want to point out that in Romans 1, the reprobates include those who are prideful, malicious (i.e. extreme hatred and ill will), and unmerciful, which means that if Steven Anderson's teaching was true, then Steven Anderson himself would not be eligible for salvation either. Before any of us were born again, we had all been guilty of at least one of the things listed out in Romans 1, and it is by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ that we are washed clean, as we'll see if we continue to read two chapters later:

But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
-Romans 3:21-24

Steven Anderson does not understand this mercy because he has not yet received this mercy from the Lord Jesus Christ, and that's because he has no repentance in his heart. Even Paul pointed out that those who do not have Christ are reprobates:

Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?
-2 Corinthians 13:5

If we take Anderson's doctrine seriously, that would mean no one can be saved! Then who is it that can be saved? Thankfully, Jesus answers that too:

And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. And they that heard it said, Who then can be saved? And he said, The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.
-Luke 18:24-27

I pray that Anderson would be saved before the Day of Judgment and God's Wrath, but the pride of his heart is blinding him to the truth, and the clock's ticking:

And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
-Hebrews 9:27

To understand Anderson's hatefulness and pride of heart more clearly, let's look at another video in which he talks about Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner, a well-known former Olympian, who had surgeries that mutilated his genitals so he could pretend to be a woman. (i.e. effeminate) Anderson screams the following with viciousness:
(This video was removed from YouTube and flagged for "Hate Speech," even though video was made to expose and rebuke Steven Anderson. I re-uploaded it to Internet Archive instead.)

ANDERSON: "People are like, 'Oh, we need to pray for him that he finds Jesus.' *Anderson makes a scoffing face* I'm going to pray that he dies and goes to hell. Are you serious? Look, I have nothing but hate—when I see a man, dressed up as a woman, who has mutilated his body... I hope—hey, listen to me. I hate him with a perfect hatred. I have no love—NO LOVE—FOR THIS BRUCE FREAK! I hope he dies today! I hope he dies and goes to hell!... *Anderson uses a mocking tone* 'Oh pray for him, oh we need to love him and pray for him that he finds Jesus', that guy will never find Jesus!"

Anderson does not know if Jenner will be humbled to repentance or not, and he has no love for the lost of this world because he has not been forgiven.

Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.
-Luke 7:47

The Lord Jesus Christ told us it is insanely difficult for such a rich man like Jenner to enter the Kingdom of God:

And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
-Matthew 19:24

And I will quote this doctrine one more time for emphasis:

When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.
-Matthew 19:25-26

Thus, it is even possible that a prideful, hateful, warmongering false preacher like Steven Anderson can be saved, and I would pray the Lord Jesus Christ would open his eyes to the truth and bring him to repentance (i.e. grief and godly sorrow of wrongdoing), as the Lord God has done so for all the saints. I would not pray that Jenner or Anderson would die and go to hell, nor would I pray that either would have to suffer the Day of God's Wrath that is to come, and give praise to God for His longsuffering with us, that we would have ample opportunity to repent.

The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
-2 Peter 3:9

And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
-Acts 17:30

Later in his rant, Anderson goes on to say that he was going to pray a prayer out of Psalm 69 against the sodomites/homosexuals, thinking that this justified him to pray for their death and destruction. In his ignorance, Anderson does not realize that Psalm 69 is a prophecy of the Lord Jesus Christ being tortured, mocked, and crucified; those verses are not meant as a justification for a revenge war between Steven Anderson and Bruce Jenner.

Anderson also makes it abundantly clear in his teaching that Bruce Jenner is his enemy who he hates, and Anderson states he would not pray that Jenner would be come to repentance and be saved. This is because Anderson believes in false doctrine that homosexuals cannot be saved, but Jesus told us:

Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
-Matthew 5:43-48

As Anderson stated, he has nothing but hate for these people. I am also disgusted when I see sodomites and effeminates, but we Christians preach to them repentance, just as Christ did; not wish for their death and destruction. In fact, look closely at what Paul wrote to the Corinthian church:

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
-1 Corinthians 6:9-11

Some of those in the church in Corinth used to be effeminate, and they used to be "absuers of themselves with mankind," meaning that they were homosexuals, but now, as he said, they have been washed clean. They came to the grief and godly sorrow of repentance and believed on the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, and they were saved. Anderson is not teaching the doctrine of Christ, but rather, he's teaching the doctrine of his own hatred and wrath, which are the works of the flesh, and the Bible says that they which do such things (without repentance of them) shall not enter the Kingdom of God:

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
-Galatians 5:19-21

It is a fearful thing to consider that Steven Anderson, because of the pride and hatred of his heart, will end up in the same hell where most sodomites/homosexuals will end up. After reading/listening to Anderson's words, and reading Galatians 5, it is easy to see that he works in the flesh, and not in the fruit of the Spirit of God:

Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
-Matthew 11:29

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
-Galatians 5:22-23

Let's define these words to make sure we understand this matter:

gentle (adj): mild, soft, meek, tempered
temperance (n): calmness, moderate of passion
meek (adj): mild of temper, soft, gentle, not easily provoked or irritated (See 'gentle', 'temperance' & 'meek' American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Dec 14, 2017,[webstersdictionary1828.com])

After watching Anderson scream, rail, kick, and hit his way through his messages, one would have to be blind and deaf to think that he's gentle, meek, and tempered. However, one would have to be spiritually blind and deaf to think that he has fruits of the Spirit of God in him.

Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
-Matthew 7:20

We can see more evidence here:

ANDERSON: "I don't want to hang around with a bunch of fag-hags! [congregation laughing] And a bunch of queer-bates! And a bunch of effeminates! GET OUT!... If you ever say the word 'LGBT Community' to me, just—you might as well just walk up to me and just say, 'Ya know what, I'm a brainwashed idiot.' [congregation laughs]... They're sodomites; they're dogs! That's what the Bible calls them: dogs! DOGS!"

This is what the Bible calls a "railer:"

rail (v): to utter reproaches; to scoff; to use insolent and reproachful language; to reproach or censure in opprobrious [contemptuous and hateful] terms
(See 'rail', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Dec 15, 2017,[webstersdictionary1828.com])

Railing is when a man uses prideful words that carry contempt, and contempt is when a man views others as vile and worthless; railers use language that reflects that contemptuous attitude. There is a far cry difference between Biblical rebuke from Scripture and railing because railing is simply one outpouring his own prideful heart from his mouth. But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. -Matthew 15:18

It is good and Biblical to rebuke the sins of man (like sodomy), as the Bible instructs us to rebuke them before all so that others may fear (1Ti 5:20), but it is NOT good, and it is NOT Biblical, to call out the sins of man with severe, scoffing, and scornful language, which is what "reproach" means. The Bible says we should suffer reproach and railing, but not dish it out to everyone else:

For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.
-1 Timothy 4:10

Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing.
-1 Peter 3:9

The Bible condemns the sin of effeminism (1Co 6:9), which is a man acting like a woman in dress (like Jenner), stating clearly that those who live that lifestyle will end up in hell. However, in God's Word, Jesus Christ and His disciples didn't start screaming out railing accusations, calling them "fag-hags," like we just heard/read from Steven Anderson.

Even when confronting the devil, Michael the archangel did not use such railing accusations:

Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.
-Jude 1:9

The Bible specifically instructs us NOT to fellowship with, nor sit down and have a meal with, anyone who calls themselves a "Christian" and is a railer. Read carefully all of you in "Faithful Word" Baptist Church: If you are of Christ and you are going to be faithful to His Word, then you are not supposed to be fellowshipping with Steven Anderson, you are not supposed to sit down and have a meal with Steven Anderson, and the Bible says the railer is wicked and should be removed from the church:

But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.
-1 Corinthians 5:11-13

After hearing this type of railing accusation from Steven Anderson, the real question is: Why hasn't the congregation of Anderson's "Faithful Word" Baptist Church (FWBC) obeyed the Word of God and rebuked him? It's fairly obvious that Anderson's pride would keep him from repentance on the matter, and he's already flat-out told his congregation that if they aren't on his side, then get out of HIS church (i.e. not Christ's church). The problem with FWBC is that they don't follow the Word of God; they follow Steven Anderson (i.e. it's a cult), and they don't dare question him because they fear being the target of his railing accusations.

The fear of man bringeth a snare: but whoso putteth his trust in the LORD shall be safe.
-Proverbs 29:25

The reason some Christians get nervous when I take a stance that Anderson is not of Christ is because they see some of his messages, like that against sodomites/homosexuals, and think, "Well, that's true, so he must be of Christ." They fallaciously think that anyone who would preach anything correct from the Word of God at any time is automatically a Christian, but that's not the case.

In the early days of Christ and the church, the Pharisees were just like the pastors of our day, in which there are a number of things that they taught correctly. They had knowledge from the Word of God, but they were not of God. In fact, Jesus told them to observe the things they were instructed by the Pharisees from the Word of God, because they were teaching those things which ought to be taught in many areas, but they themselves were not God's ministers:

Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
-Matthew 23:1-5

If they do good works, they do it to be seen among men, so that they will convince others that they are of God, even though they are not of God. There is a reason Steven Anderson is a media whore, namely, because he loves to have his works seen among men; he's not doing the works to be faithful unto God, but rather, he does them so he will increase his standing with the people and garner more attention.

There are many who speak the truth of Christ, but are not of Christ; for example, in Acts 16, Paul and Timotheus went to the city of Thyatira to preach the Word, and there was a young woman who had the spirit of a devil in her. She followed them for many days and declared to the city that they were the servants of the most high God that would show the people the way of salvation, which IS true, but here's how Paul responded:

But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.
-Acts 16:18

Christians, I urge you to consider that just because a man teaches some truth in certain areas, that does not automatically make him a child of God. Even devils teach the truth in some areas, and can transform themselves to look like ministers of righteousness.

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
-2 Corinthians 11:13-15

That's why they are called wolves IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING. It means that on the outside, they try to make themselves appear as close to a sheep as they possibly can; seeming to be charitable, wise, honest, and hard-working, but inside, they are deceitful workers of iniquity.

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
-Matthew 23:27

That's why we don't judge a man based on him having a church building, a congregation, and a pulpit, but rather, we ought to judge righteous judgment, and I'll quote Christ on this verse again:

Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
-John 7:24

Some may argue that Anderson spends a lot of time in door-to-door evangelizing, but I would respond that Jehovah's Witnesses do the same thing. Some may argue that Anderson spends lots of time reading the King James Bible, but I would respond that there are many Mormons do the same thing. Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Anderson's "Faithful Word" congregation all claim to be of Christ, they all claim to do good works, and they all claim to be teaching the truth, but they are all cults.
(Read "Corruptions of Christianity: Mormonism" & "Corruptions of Christianity: Jehovha's Witnesses" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

I'm not saying that every single person in Anderson's church building are unsaved, but the question we have to ask ourselves is why haven't they sanctified themselves yet? If there are any saved in his congregation, certainly they won't be there for long once they start studying Scripture, and if they are, for what reason has God blinded their eyes?

Anderson spends a lot of time going through the Old Testament in his teachings, and reading how God views the sins of man, and he makes some attempt (I repeat: SOME attempt) to preach against sin through God's eyes. I also teach that we Christians ought to view the world the way that God sees it, not as we want to see it through our own eyes.

Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil.
-Proverbs 3:7

Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts.
-Proverbs 21:2

So for example, Anderson goes to the Old Testament, sees how God told the Jews to execute any among them who practiced sodomy/homosexuality, and that we ought to view the matter with the same seriousness as God views it. Obviously, Steven Anderson does not honor any traditions or celebrate any holidays of the homosexuals. However, there's a huge blister of hypocrisy coming from Anderson because he is not willing to do this same thing when it comes to idolatry and witchcraft, both of which were also punishable by death in Old Testament Jewish society.

At this point, I would highly recommend Christians (if you haven't done it already) go read two of our articles, "Christmas: The Rejection of Jesus" and "Easter: Christians Celebrating Abomination," which explains the huge amount of witchcraft and idolatry involved in these holiday celebrations, and that churchgoers everywhere participate in them with blissful and willing ignorance. Every ritual, tradition, symbol, and decoration involved in these celebrations is born out of pagan idolatry (and fused with the Catholic Church), and once a discerning Christian learns the truth about what these things mean, they'll want nothing more to do with it.

To give some quick examples, the Christmas wreath is a symbol of the witch's wheel of the year, representing all their pagan holiday rituals, and the fruit and pine cone ornaments that ordain the wheel represent the genitals of the sun and moon goddess having sexual intercourse throughout the year. Can you find any Biblical representation of that wreath in Scripture? You can't because it doesn't come from the Bible; it comes from witchcraft, and yet, churchgoers just put them up everywhere and turn a willingly blind eye to it. (That is only one of MANY examples you'll find in our teachings.)

I also cover thoroughly where the "Christmas tree" concept came from, which is called the "Yule Log," and it is a pagan altar that witches believe will draw divine blessings and grant them magic power in their witchcraft. It's called the "Yule Log" because of the celebration of Yule, the origin of the modern day Christmas celebration, and that's why you'll see Christmas songs and cards talk about "Yuletide Greetings" or "Yuletide Carols." Today, many witches put up a "Yule Tree," and if you compare a so-called "Christian" Christmas tree with a witch's Yule tree, you couldn't tell the difference; they even include the same star, which is the pentagram symbol of witchcraft.

In the following image, there are three holiday trees. Try to guess which trees are "Yule" trees and which ones are "Christmas" trees.
Ultimately, the Christmas tree is an altar to the sun god, and pagans use it as a form of worship of the sun, bringing a traditional hope to resurrect the sun god for the coming year, all of which is directly condemned in Scripture, that we ought not to learn these ways, but Steven Anderson and his wife shamelessly participate in it and teach it to their children. (See Zsuzsanna Anderson, "Christmas 2017," Steven Anderson Family Blogspot, Dec 26, 2017, retrieved Feb 8, 2018, [stevenandersonfamily.blogspot.com/search?q=christmas])

In their family blog, Anderson's wife (Zsuzsanna) explains that they use an "Advent Calendar," which is a calendar that has flaps that open up, one for each day leading up to Christmas Eve, and there are gifts handed out each day to family members based on the cards inside each flap. This is also pagan in origin. It was the German Catholics of the 19th century that began to call it the "Advent" calendar, but it was originally called the Julekalender, or "Yule Calendar."

In addition to the witchcraft involved in his traditions, Anderson is also willingly ignorant of the Catholic Church's influence over these pagan holidays, like Christmas and Easter, which is where the modern-day leavened church buildings got the tradition. The Catholic Church's entire origin is rooted in witchcraft and paganism because it was born out of Rome, and Rome was the umbrella for the world's pagan worship, temples, and rituals.
(Read "Corruptions of Christianity: Catholicism" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.
-Jeremiah 10:2-4

heathen (n): pagan, Gentile, one who worships idols, or is unacquainted with the true God
(See 'heathen', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Dec 20, 2017, [webstersdictionary1828.com])

When the Bible says "be not dismayed at the signs of heaven," God's talking about how the pagans think and believe. The witch's wheel of the year (represented by the Christmas wreath as seen above) contains all the major demonic pagan holidays, and they are scheduled around the position of the sun, moon, and stars. The pagan believes the sun god dies during the fall to winter months, which is a dismay (depression, fear, or discouragement) to them, and they participate in the traditions of Yule (i.e. Christmas) to celebrate the rebirth of the sun god after the winter solstice, and Ishtar (i.e. Easter) to celebrate the fertility of the moon goddess (both of which were practiced long before the time of Christ).

All of these things the Lord God instructed the Jews not to learn, and not to do their customs, because witchcraft is an abomination in His sight. Sadly, most churchgoers believe that such idolatry and witchcraft traditions were only condemned in the Old Testament, and that in the New Testament, Christians can just do whatever they want, but that is not the case:

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
-Galatians 5:19-21

But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
-Acts 15:20

Despite these warnings and commandments in the New Testament, typical churchgoers, like Steven Anderson, ignore it, and claim that they are delivered by Christ, so they can do whatever they want. What they don't understand is that the Jews gave God the exact same excuse, and He rebuked them for it as well:

Will ye steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely, and burn incense unto Baal, and walk after other gods whom ye know not; And come and stand before me in this house, which is called by my name, and say, We are delivered to do all these abominations?
-Jeremiah 7:9-10

Anderson has a teaching in which he attempts to justify Christmas, and he addresses the passage from Jeremiah 10, which I quoted above. He teaches that this passage is not referring to the Christmas tree, but rather, he says it is the process by which idols are created:
"And what the Bible is saying here is that they're carving it into an idol because look, in verse 5, he says they are upright as the palm tree, but speak not. Nobody thinks that a Christmas tree can speak or walk or do good or evil."
-Steven L. Anderson, "Should Christians Celebrate Christmas," retrieved Dec 26, 2017, [https://youtu.be/-pQ0cyWHNI4?t=25m30s]

They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.
-Jeremiah 10:5

First of all, I want to point out that Anderson is partially correct. If you read the entirety of Jeremiah 10, you'll see that it is talking about the process by which an idol is created by heathen, but I say he is only "partially" correct because, as we'll see in a moment, Anderson is still guilty of idolatry, and worse still, he teaches in total hypocrisy.

What I'm pointing out is that witches think their pagan gods to whom they burn incense on their altars (2Ki 18:4, 2Ch 28:25) speak to them through their rituals (like Yule and Isthar), and they pray to their false gods (i.e. devils) that they would receive blessings from them, but Anderson does not care whether or not he participates in pagan and witchcraft traditions. Rather, Anderson is willingly ignorant of his witchcraft traditions because it's a special funtime celebration that gives him a warm, gooey feeling inside, and was something he was raised on both in his family and the church buildings he grew up in, so he turns away from the truth so he can continue to hold witchcraft traditions close to his heart. (And it's not just Anderson; most churchgoers and church buildings around the world do the exact same thing in willful ignorance.)

Later, Anderson points out that, in verse 14, they carved an idol out of the tree, and that founders would come to put silver plates around the figure:

Every man is brutish in his knowledge: every founder is confounded by the graven image: for his molten image is falsehood, and there is no breath in them.
-Jeremiah 10:14

Anderson teaches that Jeremiah 10 is describing a process by which idols are carved and fashioned with silver and gold, and that is correct; it is ultimately describing that process. What Anderson ignores is that he is doing the first part of the process (verses 2-4) with the Christmas tree, but then stops before carving a pair of eyes, nose, and mouth into the wood.

Anderson deceives his listeners by telling them people like me are only quoting part of Jeremiah 10 out of context, and falsely accusing him, but in fact, it's the opposite. I'm only quoting verses 2-4 in Jeremiah 10 because I'm only going to accuse Anderson of doing what he's guilty of; I won't accuse him of what he's not guilty of. If I said that Anderson was guilty of ALL of Jeremiah 10, then I would be a liar, because Anderson is not carving out faces in the wood and plating them with silver. I will not falsely accuse Anderson, or anyone else. Apart from carving a face out of the wood of the tree, Anderson participates in all the other traditions of witches that were ordained thousands of years ago in their demonic covens, and then to try and save face on the matter, he attempts to demonize us Christians that sanctify ourselves according to God's Word.

Anderson continues to yell and scream and mock sanctified Christians, and then claims that we won't address certain passages in the Bible, like the entire context of Jeremiah, that I just went over. He also says that we won't quote passages like Isaiah chapter 60 and verse 13, which he uses as a justification for his Christmas tree:

The glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee, the fir tree, the pine tree, and the box together, to beautify the place of my sanctuary; and I will make the place of my feet glorious.
-Isaiah 60:13

So Anderson says, because God had the Jews bring pine and fir trees into His temple, therefore, Anderson is justified to get a pine or fir trees, decorate them with ornaments (which contain graven images), and do all the other traditions in honor of Christmas. There are a few problems with this:

God commanded the Jews (not the Christians) to bring these trees into His temple. Unless Anderson has some secret plans to convert to Judaism and rebuild Solomon's temple in his home, then Isaiah 60:13 does not apply in the context of Anderson's Christmas witchcraft traditions. The temple is no longer in a specific location, built with bricks and mortar, but rather, the temple of the New Testament dispensation is the bodies of born-again Christians, where the Holy Spirit dwells. (1Co 6:19) So unless Anderson has plans to swallow trees to put inside his body, he is a hypocrite and does not understand the doctrines of Scripture. Anderson, who continually lies to his audience that he "teaches the context of Scripture" fails to understand the end of verse 13. Notice that God said, "I will make the place of my feet glorious," which means they were not uprooting these giant fir, pine, and box trees to grow them in Solomon's temple, but rather, they were using fir, pine, and box wood to lay the inside, like flooring and bases, which would make the whole temple smell wonderful.

When Solomon built the temple, he covered the temple with cedar, which has a wonderful scent. He also laid the floor of the temple with planks (cut lengths of) fir wood.

So he built the house, and finished it; and covered the house with beams and boards of cedar. And then he built chambers against all the house, five cubits high: and they rested on the house with timber of cedar.
-1 Kings 6:9-10

And he built the walls of the house within with boards of cedar, both the floor of the house, and the walls of the cieling: and he covered them on the inside with wood, and covered the floor of the house with planks of fir.
-1 Kings 6:15

Nowhere does the Bible indicate that they brought in whole trees into the temple, stood them upright, and nailed them to the floor so they would not move. Again, these are simple matters that Anderson cannot see because he does not have the Spirit of God for understanding.

Anderson is doing what every other false convert preacher does, looking for a justification to continue their witchcraft traditions, and they do not care how God sees the things they do. (Deut 12:8) We are not supposed to walk as the heathen/Gentiles walk, meaning that we are not supposed to adopt their pagan traditions and rituals, and follow after their ways:

This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. But ye have not so learned Christ; If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus: That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.
-Ephesians 4:17-24

The core problem with Steven Anderson on this subject is that he believes that idolatry can only happen if you take wood or stone, carve out a face with hands and feet, and then bow down to worship it. Of course, that is idolatry, but that is only PART of idolatry, and Anderson does not understand the Word of God on this matter. Anderson believes that idolatry is ONLY carving out graven images, because he is only repeating the Ten Commandments when it says:

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
-Exodus 20:4-5

I will explain his error on this shortly, but I want to switch over to Anderson's teaching called, "The Seven Sins of Halloween," and show his hypocrisy on this matter:
"Number 1. The first sin of Halloween is idolatry. Idolatry. The Bible says here, [1Co 10:20] 'But I say the things which the Gentiles sacrifice', and we know he's talking about sacrifice unto idols, he's says they're not sacrificing it to an idol. They're not just sacrificing it to a piece of wood, or a stone, or gold, or silver; some kind of a graven image cunningly graven by the work of man! [he starting yelling again] Hey! We know they are SACRIFICING TO A DEVIL!"
-Steven Anderson, "The Seven Sins of Halloween," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Oct 24, 2009, retrieved Feb 8, 2018, [https://youtu.be/8Gi7fL1KXEs]

Anderson yells and screams these things into the microphone, and even though he is correct in what he said in this instance, it makes him a total hypocrite. Witches and pagans are sacrificing to devils and it is idolatry; however, Anderson is willingly ignorant that these same sacrifices are done during Yule and Ishtar. but because rabbits and eggs, or a tree with lights on it, seem more friendly in his own eyes, he ignores the facts to protect his favorite fun-time witchcraft traditions of Easter and Christmas.

Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts.
-Proverbs 21:2

Though he properly rebukes Samhain (sao-win, or Halloween), Anderson will embrace the sacrificing to devils that is done in Yule (Christmas) and Ishtar (Easter); it's just that he turns a blind eye to it, or in other words, Anderson does not like Halloween, so he rebukes it, but he does like Christmas, so he won't rebuke that. For Steven Anderson, it is NOT about the truth of the Word of God, it's about his personal preferences. (The video above demonstrates that.) It is the same witchcraft at two different times, but he likes to slap a Jesus label on the ones he prefers, and it is complete hypocrisy, which is exactly what Jesus Christ warned us about:

Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
-Matthew 7:5

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
-Matthew 23:15

Anderson continues:
"'Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath,'... Now before he told you not to bow down or serve them, he says don't make them."
-Steven Anderson, "The Seven Sins of Halloween," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Oct 24, 2009, retrieved Feb 8, 2018, [https://youtu.be/8Gi7fL1KXEs]

Normally, I would not split hairs on this subject, but this is Steven Anderson, and I have to point out that if you go look at his Christmas tree in the image above, you will see ornaments on the tree that are images of the things in the earth beneath. Of course, what most people say is that they are not bowing down and serving them, but Anderson just taught us that the Bible says not to MAKE them at all, and I am simply pointing out that he does this and keeps them in his home because he is a hypocrite. (i.e. He teaches one thing, but does another thing.)

"Don't make any graven images. Don't make any idols. Now let me ask you something: When you walk down the street, or drive down the road, in the month of October, and you drive by a person's house, whose house is decorated for Halloween, what will you see on their porch? If it's not a carved image of an evil face in a pumpkin."
-Steven Anderson, "The Seven Sins of Halloween," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Oct 24, 2009, retrieved Feb 8, 2018, [https://youtu.be/8Gi7fL1KXEs]

So as you can see, Anderson believes that idolatry ONLY involves carving a familiar face or shape out of some material. He believes that is where idolatry stops, and again, that is because he does not have the Spirit of God for understanding. I would highly recommend Christians look over a teaching we did called "The Biblical Understanding of Idolatry," because in that teaching, we go over the "idolatry of the heart," as described in Ezekiel 14:

And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, Son of man, these men have set up their idols in their heart, and put the stumblingblock of their iniquity before their face: should I be enquired of at all by them? Therefore speak unto them, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Every man of the house of Israel that setteth up his idols in his heart, and putteth the stumblingblock of his iniquity before his face, and cometh to the prophet; I the LORD will answer him that cometh according to the multitude of his idols; That I may take the house of Israel in their own heart, because they are all estranged from me through their idols.
-Ezekiel 14:2-5

To help understand this a little better, Jesus Christ addressed the subject of adultery in the same way:

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
-Matthew 5:27-28

The problem is that there were men, who were in positions of authority in the synagogues (like pastors in church buildings), who claimed they did not commit adultery because they did not lay in bed with another woman. However, they would look at women and lust after them, very similar to pornography of our modern day, and think they were not guilty of sin. Jesus Christ said they were guilty of that sin in their hearts, and that would be called "adultery of the heart."

Likewise, there is "idolatry of the heart," where men like Steven Anderson do not go out and forge graven images into shapes and bow down to worship them, but rather, he is an idolater in his heart. Anderson's rebuke of Halloween, but not Christmas, is the same as him rebuking adultery, but not pornography. He hangs on to Christmas and Easter because of traditions of men that he was raised on (or as the Bible says, the "rudiments [first teachings] of the world" in Col 2:8), not because of any commandment or any righteousness found in Scripture, and thus, when he teaches for doctrine the commandments of men, that churchgoers are set at liberty to adopt the traditions of witches and pagans, he worships God in vain.

He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
-Mark 7:6-7

In his Halloween teaching, Anderson hypocritically quotes 2 Corinthians 6:

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
-2 Corinthians 6:14

Yet, he yokes together with all the unbelievers who celebrate Christmas and Easter every year. For example, the Catholic Church, that is antichrist in nearly all of their doctrine, also celebrates the same exact Christmas traditions as Steven Anderson, but he does not care because it is a tradition that gives him the warm, gooey feeling inside. (i.e. He worships himself and his feelings instead of Christ.)

It should be noted that, during his Christmas teaching, Anderson claims the term Christmas is good because there is nothing wrong with the word "mass" in terms of the Catholic Church. Of course, he does say the Catholic Church is evil, but he also says that nobody knows where the term "mas" in Christmas comes from, which is not only a false statement, but it once again shows the willful ignorance of Steven Anderson.

He tries his best to disconnect that the word 'Christmas' comes from the "Christ-mass" of the Catholic Church because that makes his witchcraft traditions of Christmas look bad. Anderson even attempts to deceive his congregation by telling them that the word 'mass' comes from the word 'messiah', which is not true, and he provides nothing in his teaching to back up that claim. The word 'mass' is from the Latin, meaning "to gather" or literally "to dismiss," but the word 'messiah' comes from the Hebrew verb 'masah', and which means "to smear or anoint."
(See 'anoint', Bible Study Tools, retrieved Mar 13, 2018, [biblestudytools.com/dictionary/anoint]; I don't recommend BST for study, since most of it is from corrupt lexicons and concordances, but this is simply to address the subject of word origins in the Hebrew to demonstrate that Anderson doesn't know what he's talking about; See also 'mass', Online Etymology Dictionary, retrieved Mar 13, 2018, [etymonline.com/word/mass])

Even if Anderson was right, the word 'Christmas' would not make sense because it would be redundantly "christ-messiah," meaning "anointed-anointed." The Greek word 'Christos' and the Hebrew word 'Messiah' mean the same thing: "anointed." In other words, Anderson is in complete error; his theory creates redundancy (i.e. nonsensical repetition), and removes the core meaning in the title of the holiday celebration.

Anderson continues to preach more hypocrisy:
"And look, just because a word—and let's just say the word [Christmas] has a Catholic origin, that doesn't still make it a bad word because, you know, a lot of the words we have today have Islamic origins, a lot of words we have today have pagan origins..."
-Steven L. Anderson, "Should Christians Celebrate Christmas," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Dec 9, 2013, retrieved Dec 26, 2017, [https://youtu.be/-pQ0cyWHNI4]

So Anderson, for the justification of the witchcraft Christmas traditions, is telling everyone that just because sinful entities (like Muslims and pagans, who hate the Christian God of the Bible) make up or use certain terms, that does not mean they are bad; they are just part of our language. I agree that there are words from many sources in our language, even from pagan sources; however, when it comes to homosexuals coming up with words, Anderson flip-flops on this subject, and I will quote him here again from the video I embedded earlier in this teaching:

ANDERSON: "YOU THINK I'M PREACHING TOO HARD?! YOU! HAVE! LOST! YOUR! MIND! AND IF YOU EVER SAY THE WORD [in mocking tone] 'LGBT Community' TO ME, you might as well just walk up to me and just say, 'You know what, I'm a brainwashed idiot! I don't read the bible! I don't love God! I'm just a brainwashed fool that has my mind filled with TV, Hollywood, and can't think for myself!' LGBT? They're SODOMITES!"

So if you use words like 'gay' or 'lesbian' or 'homosexual' or 'LGBT', instead of the Biblical term 'sodomite', Anderson says you are "a brainwashed idiot that does not love God." I would agree that such terms like 'LGBT' are corrupt terms commonly used by heathen unbelievers to justify their sin. However, when attempting to justify the word 'Christmas' in the idolatry of his heart, Anderson hypocritically teaches that such terms are now not only acceptable, but if you slap a "Jesus" sticker on them, they become Biblical, even though there is no Bible-equivalent term for word (or celebration of) 'Christmas'.

When he talks about the traditions of Halloween, Anderson tells his church building not to be partakers of the wickedness of the world:
"Ephesians chapter number five verse six: Let no man deceive you with vain words, for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. BE! YE! NOT! Therefore partakers with them!"
-Steven Anderson, "The Seven Sins of Halloween," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Oct 24, 2009, retrieved Feb 8, 2018, [https://youtu.be/8Gi7fL1KXEs]

Yet, Anderson is a hypocritical partaker with the children of disobedience in his Christmas and Easter celebrations that he learned from his Baptist mentors. I add "Baptist" in there because Anderson also subscribes to denominations, which is completely unbiblical, and that "Baptist" denomination taught him these traditions, as he testified in the video above.
(All denominations, including Baptists, Methodist, Calvinists, Lutherans, Nazarenes, Wesleyans, etc, are all unbiblical sects; Read "Denominations Are Unbiblical" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

A lot of readers may be surprised to learn that Anderson corrects the King James Bible, just like the new-age scribes and hypocrites of the new-age bible versions. He claims that "Easter" used in Acts 12 actually means "Passover," which is exactly what the new-agers and leavened preachers also teach. He says it directly, yelling in his mocking tone: "EASTER MEANS PASSOVER!," knowing that if he screams it at people, they are less likely to go do their own research, and no one will oppose the great and powerful Steven Anderson. I can prove without any doubt, from correlating verses in the Bible, which Anderson claims to believe in, that the pagan celebration of Ishtar, called "Easter" is the correct interpretation of Acts 12:4, but the reason Anderson will not teach that is because he still celebrates the pagan witchcraft traditions of Easter, and tries to justify them, so to avoid having people point out his hypocrisy and contradiction, he lies to his congregation about the meaning of that verse.
(See Steven L. Anderson, "Acts 12:4 'Easter' Means Passover," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Jan 21, 2018, retrieved Feb 28, 2018, [https://youtu.be/xf49W7wJ0xM]; He does not say that pascha means "passover;" he's claiming that the word 'Easter' itself means "passover," which is not true.)

Furthermore, he claims that he only does Bible teachings, and does not go into "extra-biblical" teachings, but he is a liar:
"I'm not one of these preachers who preaches a lot of extra-biblical material; everything I preach is found in the Bible. So I'm not one of these guys who's going to give you some kind of a history lesson. I'm not going to get up here and tell you about the ancient origins of Halloween because, you know what, I don't know if that's really true; you won't know if what I'm saying is true... so I'm going to preach to you from the Bible,"
-Steven Anderson, "The Seven Sins of Halloween," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Oct 24, 2009, retrieved Feb 8, 2018, [https://youtu.be/8Gi7fL1KXEs]

Anderson preaches a message exposing a corrupt book by the Seventh-Day Adventists called The Clear Word. He reads from that extra-biblical material in his teaching.
(See Steven L. Anderson, "Seventh Day Adventist Lie #4," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Feb 16, 2018, retrieved Feb 28, 2018, [https://youtu.be/Cw7uqhjX_p4])

Anderson goes over the history of Marquis de Sade, a French sadist, when discussing quotations from extra-biblical sources from a man named Doug Batchelor. This is only one of countless examples; he goes over the history of many things in a wide variety teachings, including the history of the Bible itself in a documentary he made.
(See Steven L. Anderson, "Doug Batchelor = Marquis de Sade," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Feb 15, 2018, retrieved Feb 28, 2018, [https://youtu.be/A7dXUr21DHk]; See also Steven L. Anderson, "New World Order Bible Versions," ThePeriledSea, Mar 29, 2014, retrieved Mar 13, 2018, [https://youtu.be/iXK8yJj-S4U])

Anderson exposes the history and doctrines of Islam. He quotes directly from the Quran, which is extra-biblical.
(See Steven L. Anderson, "Islam in Light of the Bible," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Feb 5, 2018, retrieved Feb 28, 2018, [https://youtu.be/GfYuWj3t2eI])

Anderson exposes the history and doctrines of Hinduism. He quotes directly from the Bhagavad Gita, which is extra-biblical.
(See Steven L. Anderson, "False Teachings of Hinduism & the Bhagavad Gita," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Jan 22, 2017, retrieved Feb 28, 2018, [https://youtu.be/WOvQnZ1Xoc0])

These are just a few examples I found within only about five minutes of searching on his Youtube channel. If Anderson's cult followers do not want to believe me, then they can go check out any of these sources and look for themselves, but, being familiar with his doctrines, they ought to already see his hypocrisy clearly. (i.e. They are willingly blind when it comes to his hypocrisies and contradictions.) In fact, if you listen to Anderson's entire Halloween teaching, he goes into the details of the witchcraft and other sins involved in Disney movies, and therefore, he contradicts himself in that very same teaching.

A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
-James 1:8

The point I am making here is that Anderson has taught extra-biblical, historical material many times, which is not a problem in itself, but rather, the problem is his hypocrisy when he refuses to look at the extra-biblical and historical material that condemns Halloween. I would guarantee he has seen the evidence and looked into the matter, be he chooses not to look at it any further, and he does not want any of his listeneres to know he has seen it because Anderson knows his happy-go-lucky pagan fun-time witchcraft holidays are too precious for him to give up for the Lord Jesus Christ. Anderson knows full-well that he would have to (as he stated in one of the above videos) "eat crow," meaning that he would have to shake off his pride, confess his error, repent (i.e. in grief and godly sorrow of his wrongdoing), and correct himself, which something which is too grievous to Steven Anderson for him to ever do.

Correction is grievous unto him that forsaketh the way: and he that hateth reproof shall die.
-Proverbs 15:10

He that refuseth instruction despiseth his own soul: but he that heareth reproof getteth understanding.
-Proverbs 15:32

The Bible also describes that Jerusalem would not receive correction:

Woe to her that is filthy and polluted, to the oppressing city! She obeyed not the voice; she received not correction; she trusted not in the LORD; she drew not near to her God.
-Zephaniah 3:1-2

In addition, if Anderson acknowledged the truth of the pagan idolatry of things like Christmas and Easter, it is not just his own embarrassment he would suffer. It would also mean that he would have to rebuke all his mentors, other church buildings that he has called "good" (we will see more on that later), and he knows they would condemn and alienate himself from the few outside supporters he has, so for the sake of keeping his friends and connections, he refuses to sanctify himself, ignores the truth, and then teaches lies to his congregation.

As we can see, Anderson is a master of manipulating people, and he twists the Bible out of its context so many times I could not count or keep track of them all. He has so many deceptive, contradictory, and hypocritical teachings, I eventually just had to pick and choose a few and stop writing this article.

Anderson continues deceiving his listeners by calling his pagan witchcraft traditions "doubtful disputations," which comes from Romans 14. A doubtful disputation would be something argued that is founded in personal opinion; meaning that there are no secured facts to dispute, and the purpose and meaning of the argument is not clear.

Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
-Romans 14:1

doubtful (adj): not settled in opinion, not clear in its meaning, uncertain
disputation (n): argumentation in opposition, controversy
(See 'doubtful' & 'disputation', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Dec 20, 2017, [webstersdictionary1828.com])

An example of a doubtful disputation would be something like: "Should Christians use smart phones?" There are some that would argue for it, and others against it; however, it is not a subject that is addressed in Scripture, so one way or another, it does not really matter. Some have them for Christ, others refuse them for Christ; either way, both are done for the Lord.

An example of something that is NOT a doubtful disputation is: "Should Christians abort their babies?" Abortion is murder, which is sin, and thus, if there is someone who claims to be a Christian that seeks to justify murder via abortion, then we should not accept them into the church. The point I am making is that doubtful disputations are things that should not be argued in the church, otherwise it just causes strife and contention; however, when sin is involved (like witchcraft and idolatry in Christmas and Easter), it is no longer a "doubtful" disputation, but rather, it is a RIGHTEOUS disputation, rebuke, and call to repentance.
(Read "Abortion: Paganism, Satanism, Sacrifices, and Witchcraft" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

Just to make sure we are clear on the hypocrisy of Steven Anderson, let's imagine for a moment that a sodomite/homosexual churchgoer came up to Anderson and told him that his debate against sodomy is just a doubtful disputation. Anderson would immediately, in his hateful, works-of-the-flesh manner, rail against the sin of homosexuality, point out to the homosexual that he was just making an excuse for sin; however, when it comes to the witchcraft traditions of his favorite holiday, Anderson hypocritically uses the same argument the homosexuals would use.

Steven Anderson and homosexuals/sodomites both use the same basic arguments to make justifications for their sin.

And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.
-Luke 16:15

For example, the Unitarian Universalist Association (UAA) is, much like Anderson's "Faithful Word Baptist Church," a cult that calls themselves "Christian." On their website, UAA states:
"Many Unitarian Universalist congregations celebrate and recognize important days in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) calendar, planning services and joining community events in support of National Coming Out Day (October 11) and other LGBT witness opportunities."
-Unitarian Universalist Association, "Celebrating National Coming Out Day," retrieved Dec 22, 2017, [uua.org/worship/holidays/coming-out-day]

This sodomite/homosexual cult claims that anyone who would argue with them are just bringing up "doubtful disputation," or because they use corrupted new-age bible versions, they would say it is a "disputable matter." Of course, Anderson would rebuke that church building for their sin, but in doing so, he's contradicted himself, and I'll show you what I mean from Anderson's own teaching:

ANDERSON: "It's okay for different people to have different opinions. And it's also okay for people to have rules for themself [sic] that are not Biblical rules; just rules that they just live by, just because it's their opinion, but that they should not try to impose those rules upon someone else,"

Now we have a serious contradiction because Anderson ignores the fact that his traditions are rooted in witchcraft and idolatry, remaining willingly blind that he's an idolater in his heart, and then teaches everyone that witchcraft is just "different opinions" that some people "just live by." He then goes on in his teaching to quote from Romans 14, and tell everyone that if you tell anyone that Christmas is idolatry and witchcraft, then you are "weak in the faith," which he took from the first verse of Romans 14:

Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
-Romans 14:1

Anderson argues that whether someone regards a day like Christmas or not is entirely up to them, and therefore, those who would dare rebuke the holy sacred cow called Steven Anderson, are "weak in the faith." Let's look at the verses he uses under false pretences:

One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
-Romans 14:5-6

Regard means to "observe" in this context; so for example, there are some Christians who observe one day each week to the Lord by taking a day of rest and relaxation, and there are others who don't. Both those who do and those who don't believe they do this unto the Lord, and both are acceptable in the New Testament; as long as one does not teach that you MUST regard a day, or that you CANNOT regard a day.
(Read "Should Christians Keep the Sabbath?" here at creationliberty.com for more details; we don't observe the Old Testament Sabbath because that was fulfilled in Christ.)

For example, as far as I know, Thanksgiving is not founded in sin, like idolatry and witchcraft, and thus, whether Christians choose to observe it or not makes no difference. My wife and I don't observe it (not for any reason; we just have work to do), but we also have no problem with Christians who observe it, we wouldn't have any objection to observing it with someone else, and any Christians who would argue against either side would be bringing in "doubtful disputations."

However, let's suppose some churchgoers decided to regard Saturnalia, which is the Roman origin of the Christmas tradition, and participated in the traditions to worship the sun god; would it be wrong to judge them in their wickedness because it's just (as Anderson says) "a rule they live by?" Absolutely not; it would be correct to judge and rebuke their wickedness because it is SIN. We Christians ought not to have desire to be associated with a celebration that honors fornication, idolatry, and witchcraft. If we live according to the Spirit of God then we would openly rebuke them in their sin because we do not tolerate it in the Body of Christ:

Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.
-1 Corinthians 6:18

I have little doubt that Anderson would rebuke the sin of fornication and tell his congregation to flee from it, but when it comes to witchcraft and idolatry, he deceives them, and attempts to give them an excuse for sin:

Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.
-1 Corinthians 10:14

Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen.
-1 John 5:21

Furthermore, Paul gives exceptions to this, but again, that requires us to read the Word of God "here a little, and there a little," as He instructed in Isaiah 28.

Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.
-Romans 14:1-4

Whether a man eats meat or is a vegetarian, there is no Biblical reason to judge him on the matter. However, when addressing the Corinthian church, Paul also taught exceptions to this:

As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled. But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse. But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak. For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols; And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.
-1 Corinthians 8:4-13

So in Romans, Paul correctly teaches that we have liberty to eat all things, but then in Corinthians, he teaches that it is a sin against Christ to eat meat offered unto idols for the express purpose of wounding the weak conscience of those who do not understand this liberty. Thus, in order to avoid offending someone who perhaps may have grown up in a pagan household, and knows that witchcraft traditions are an offense against God, then we ought not to eat meat offered unto idols; likewise, in order to avoid offending those who have understanding that witchcraft traditions are an offense against God, we ought not to honor a day that was founded in the sin of idolatry and paganism.

For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
-Acts 15:28-29

On top of that, Paul taught the Galatians not to observe the rituals and celebrations developed after the gods of the pagans:

Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ. Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. [e.g. Christmas, Easter, Halloween, etc.] But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.
-Galatians 4:7-11

And finally, if you keep reading through Romans 14, you'll find that Paul says the same thing to the church in Rome:

I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.
-Romans 14:14-15
(Read "Bible Contradictions: Eat Idol Meat or Not?" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

Don't misunderstand; you don't go to hell because you celebrated Christmas; our salvation in Christ is not by works. There are a number of Christians out there who still celebrate it in their ignorance because the church building preachers (like Anderson) have deceived them with false doctrine. However, what I've always told Christians is that they ought to learn the truth, and then when they see these holiday traditions, at least be willing to admit in their minds that these are witchcraft and pagan traditions, and over time, just as with all other sins, they will begin to abhor them, just as the Lord God abhors them, and sanctify themselves via the conviction of the Holy Spirit.

Yet, in his teaching, Anderson states that there is "no Biblical basis" for abstaining from the idolatry of Christmas:
"The reason I want to preach about the subject of Christmas is that this has become a big issue in the last few years of people attacking Christmas and saying that we should not celebrate Christmas. Okay? Now, several years ago, this wasn't even an issue. I mean, when I was growing up, when I was a child, the only people who didn't celebrate Christmas were pretty much the Jehovah's Witnesses. I mean, that's pretty much it. It was not—pretty much every Baptist, every Christian that you knew, just celebrated Christmas and it was not something that even came up."
-Steven L. Anderson, "Should Christians Celebrate Christmas," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Dec 9, 2013, retrieved Dec 26, 2017, [https://youtu.be/-pQ0cyWHNI4]

First, I would point out that Anderson is, once again, arguing from the fallacy of majority opinion by saying that "pretty much every Christian did it," which is saying that "everybody's doing it, so don't worry about it." Perhaps Anderson's mother didn't teach him what my mother taught me, which was the question, "If everyone jumped off a bridge, would you do it too?" The point is that we ought to study these matters out, not just follow what everyone else is doing; however, Anderson proves that he DOES understand this concept.

As I started comparing Anderson's teachings to one another, his hypocrisy is far greater than probably anyone I've ever heard. Keep in mind that above quote from Anderson's Christmas teaching, and let's go back to his "Seven Sins of Halloween" teaching; notice here that he points out sin #5 on his list is "not thinking for yourself," or in other words, don't follow the majority opinion:
"But number five—how about the sin of not thinking for yourself? The Bible says in Exodus 23:2, 'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil.'... What does it say there? Don't follow a multitude to do evil. Don't do evil just because everyone else is doing evil. That's what he's saying. Now think about this: I'm young. You know, I've grown up in America. So all my life, Halloween has just been taught to me as something that's acceptable, and every church that I went to, it seemed like everybody was out, you know, participating in Halloween, or whatever; I mean, that's just the way I grew up. And so I thought it was just fine; I thought it was normal. You know, there came a time in my life where I decided to think for myself, and decide this is not right. This is not godly."
-Steven Anderson, "The Seven Sins of Halloween," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Oct 24, 2009, retrieved Feb 8, 2018, [https://youtu.be/8Gi7fL1KXEs]

Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment:
-Exodus 23:2

On the one hand, Steven Anderson teaches that you should not follow after the multitude just because they decide something "good," but on the other hand, Steven Anderson teaches that you should not question something that the multitude does on an annual basis. One more time, quoting from his Christmas teaching:
"I mean, when I was growing up, when I was a child, the only people who didn't celebrate Christmas were pretty much the Jehovah's Witnesses. I mean, that's pretty much it. It was not—pretty much every Baptist, every Christian that you knew, just celebrated Christmas and it was not something that even came up."
-Steven L. Anderson, "Should Christians Celebrate Christmas," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Dec 9, 2013, retrieved Dec 26, 2017, [https://youtu.be/-pQ0cyWHNI4]

Perhaps Steven Anderson should do a teaching on which Steven Anderson we should listen to, because they both can't be right at the same time. On one hand, Anderson argues that it is sin to go along with the multitude, rather than think for yourself, and on the other hand, Anderson teaches that churchgoers ought to just go along with the multitude.

That being said, Anderson is also speaking in pure ignorance. Even back in the late 19th century, Charles Spurgeon was addressing the problem of Christians running off to yoke themselves up with the Roman Catholic Church by celebrating Christmas:

"We have no superstitious regard for times and seasons. Certainly we do not believe in the present ecclesiastical arrangement called Christmas: first, because we do not believe in the mass at all, but abhor it, whether it be said or sung in Latin or in English; and, secondly, because we find no Scriptural warrant whatever for observing any day as the birthday of the Saviour; and, consequently, its observance is a superstition, because it is not of divine authority. Superstition has fixed most positively the day of our Saviour's birth, although there is no possibility of discovering when it occurred... Where is the method in the madness of the superstitious? Probably the fact is that the holy days

were arranged to fit in with heathen festivals. We venture to assert, that if there be any day in the year, of which we may be pretty sure that it was not the day on which the Saviour was born, it is the twenty-fifth of December."
-Charles Spurgeon, sermon given Dec 24, 1871, Metropolitan Tabernacle, Newington, The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit: Sermons, Passmore & Alabaster, 1872, p. 697

Charles Spurgeon preached that Christmas was a based on heathen traditions, and that it was pagan and Catholic superstitions that Christians ought not to regard, but Anderson tells us that no one (outside of Jehovah's Witnesses) until this day ever had a problem with it; clearly, Anderson is not only speaking in ignorance, but willful ignorance.

The kind of superstitions that Spurgeon was rebuking were the same as those Paul rebuked. Paul was speaking to the heathens in Athens:

Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.
-Acts 17:22

superstition (n): excessive exactness or rigor in religious opinions or practice; extreme and unnecessary scruples in the observance of religious rites not commanded, or of points of minor importance; excess or extravagance in religion; the doing of things not required by God, or abstaining from things not forbidden; or the belief of what is absurd, or belief without evidence
(See 'superstition', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Mar 23, 2019, [webstersdictionary1828.com])

But it doesn't stop there because in the 19th century, many Christian church buildings, including the Baptists that Anderson holds in such high regard, closed their doors on the 25th of December, and did not put up any Christmas decorations, because they refused to acknowledge the idolatry and witchcraft traditions of the pagan festival:
"The churches of the Presbyterians, Baptists and Methodists were not open on Dec. 25 except where some Mission Schools had a celebration. They do not accept the day as a Holy One, but the Episcopalian, Catholic and German Churches were all open. Inside they were decked with evergreens."
-New York Daily Times, December 26, 1855, quoted by Joanne Martell, American Christmases: Firsthand Accounts of Holiday Happenings from Early Days to Modern Times, John F. Blair, 2005, p. 100, ISBN: 9780895873194

Again, I would encourage born again Christians to read our teaching, "Christmas: The Rejection of Jesus" because in it, I document how many towns in the early days of America banned Christmas as "sacrilege" (i.e. violation of the sacred things of God) because it was pagan idolatry. This was because Christmas was starting to see an uprising among unbelievers in the colonies, as people from different countries traveled over from Europe and brought their traditions with them. The Christians in these towns banned the Christmas outfits, gifts, feasting, and greetings (i.e. "Merry Christmas") typically used around the Christmas celebration, and labeled them as "Satanical Practices" that was punished with a fine if you were caught doing any of them. "PUBLICK NOTICE: The Observation of Christmas having been deemed a Sacrilege, the exchanging of Gifts and Greetings, dressing in Fine Clothing, Feasting and similar Satanical Practices are hereby FORBIDDEN with the Offender liable to a Fine of FIVE Shillings."
(See P.N. Oak, World Vedic Heritage: A History of Histories, Vol. 2, self-published, 2003, p. 1024)

I would also like to point out that such notices were published in the 17th century, which is LONG before the Jehovah's Witness/Adventist cults ever appeared in America. So Anderson's argument that it was "just some Jehovah's Witnesses who didn't celebrate it" is said in his complete and willful ignorance, and the problem is that leavened corruption made its way into the church buildings of early America, which is why the average American church building (including Anderson's) is so laden with sins today.
(Read "Corruptions of Christianity: Jehovah's Witness" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

In his teaching, Anderson never addresses the witchcraft and idolatry of Christmas. Instead, he makes an accusation:
"You can't show me any place in the Bible that says don't celebrate Christmas, but I can show you places that say don't be a false accuser."
-Steven L. Anderson, "Should Christians Celebrate Christmas," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Dec 9, 2013, retrieved Dec 26, 2017, [https://youtu.be/-pQ0cyWHNI4]

First of all, I have shown where the Bible teaches not to celebrate Christmas because the Bible teaches us not to learn the way of the heathen. Obviously, if you do not learn their ways, then you will not honor their traditions, but I want to focus on Anderson's fallacy of challenging all of us to prove a universal negative.

In any discussion, the person who has the positive claim needs to provide evidence for it; not the other way around. For example, if someone said to you, "There is a pot of gold at the end of every rainbow, prove me wrong," that is absurd challenge. It is not our responsibility to provide evidence for the negative position, and in fact, it is impossible to prove that pots of gold do not appear at the end of every rainbow because you would literally have to be at all places, at all times, at the same time to disprove it, but rather, it is that man's burden to provide the proof of his positive claim for pots of gold at the end of rainbows. Therefore, if Anderson is going to say, "Christmas is a good, wholesome holiday for Christians to celebrate," then he needs to show us in Scripture where the Bible says "Go celebrate Christmas," and backs up the "wholesome" aspect of its traditions. (i.e. The Bible never gives Christians instructions of any kind to celebrate the birth of Christ, nor does it even indicate when Christ's birth took place.)

Anderson does pose the question of, "Why would it be wrong to celebrate the birth of Christ?" However, he never answers the question in his teaching, and not only does the Bible never address that subject, but also, Anderson is asserting that Christmas is connected to Christ's birth, which is not true. There are no traditions ever given by the church in the New Testament to celebrate pagan traditions, but I can prove that Christmas was born out of the Roman Catholic Church and their fusion of pagan traditions, I can prove there are commandments to abstain from idolatry and witchcraft, and furthermore, I can prove that birthdays are only mentioned twice in Scripture, both times it is the heathen that participate in them, and wicked things happen in both instances.
(Read "Why I Don't Celebrate Birthdays" here at creationliberty.com for more details; Modern-day birthday traditions are also rooted in witchcraft.)

Anderson continues his accusation:
"To sit there and say that you're worshiping Satan is ridiculous; when you're saying the name Jesus Christ, you're quoting the King James, and everything that you're singing about and talking about lines up with the Bible. That's not worshipping Satan, that's worshipping Jesus."
-Steven L. Anderson, "Should Christians Celebrate Christmas," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Dec 9, 2013, retrieved Dec 26, 2017, [https://youtu.be/-pQ0cyWHNI4]

First, I want to point out that I do not make the claim that anyone worships Satan because they celebrated Christmas. There may be some unstable preachers out there who make that claim, but that is a false assumption. The Santa Claus figure DOES represent Satan, and you can learn more about that if you read our Christmas teaching, but I do not accuse people of being Satanists for celebrating Christmas; that's absurd.

Secondly, Anderson is setting up another strawman argument because the problem is not quoting the Bible or singing about Jesus. The problem is when men like Anderson, in their prideful, willful ignorance, insist on slapping a Jesus sticker on the traditions of witches, falsely claim it is "good," while dragging Christ's holy name through the mud.

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
-Isaiah 5:20-21

But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
-Hebrews 5:14

Towards the end of his false teaching, Anderson then claims that the secret source of all those who rebuke Christmas are Jews. This is not a joke. I am not creative enough to make this stuff up; this is actually what he teaches:
"I just want to close the sermon with this: Who is behind the movement among Christians attacking Christmas? Where is it coming from? Like I said, when I was a kid, you didn't hear about it. When I was a teenager, you didn't hear about it. When I started this church [hits the pulpit] you didn't hear about it! But in the last few years, this is a real big movement. Who's behind it? Well, just Googling [i.e. internet searching], you know, 'Christmas is pagan'... I notice that basically the people who are pushing this are Zionists and Jews."
-Steven L. Anderson, "Should Christians Celebrate Christmas," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Dec 9, 2013, retrieved Dec 26, 2017, [https://youtu.be/-pQ0cyWHNI4]

It is interesting that when I first started investigating Christmas, I simply began to notice that the church buildings had always taught me that all the Christmas traditions were of Christ, but I found nothing about it in the Bible. So I began to investigate the origins of as many traditions as I could find information on (i.e. if it is not found in Scripture, then where did it come from?), and at the end of every path was paganism and witchcraft—it is that simple; no Jewish or Jehovah's Witness conspiracy. (In fact, in my preaching, I rebuke both Jehovah's Witnesses and Jews for their rejection of the Lord Jesus Christ.)

I took Anderson's suggestion and Google searched "Christmas is pagan," and among the first two pages of results (listing out 10 results on each page), there were a couple of Jewish websites, but most of them were Catholic websites supporting Christmas, other leavened sites supporting Christmas, like Christianity Today, Wikipedia, or other news sites like Forbes. I decided to skim through the first 10 pages of results, and most of them were Catholic/Christian sources, not Jewish. As I have already stated, I have a teaching that rebukes the idolatry and witchcraft of Anderson's Christmas traditions, and I am firmly against the teachings of the Hebrews roots cultists that he is referring to. Of course, Jews would hate the concept of Christmas, and that is not hard to figure out, but I was struggling to figure out where Anderson found this giant Jewish conspiracy against Christmas on Google (as he claimed), just as I struggled to find many of the claims he makes in his teachings because Anderson almost never backs up what he claims.
(This is not to say that Jews do not abhor the Christmas celebration, but rather, I could not find Anderson's "Google search" claim.)

Anderson goes on raise issue against people who have abandoned Christmas in favor of Jewish traditions like Hanukkah, and I teach that Christians ought not to do that. There are some who do this, but Anderson believes the mass majority are doing this in some giant Jewish conspiracy against Christmas:
"Those who are rejecting Christmas today are rejecting it for Hanukkah."
-Steven L. Anderson, "Should Christians Celebrate Christmas," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Dec 9, 2013, retrieved Dec 26, 2017, [https://youtu.be/-pQ0cyWHNI4]

Do not misunderstand; I am not saying you are going to hell because you celebrated Hanukkah or Christmas, because we are not saved by works, but Christmas is pagan witchcraft tradition, and Hanukkah represents the rededication of the Temple of God in Jerusalem, which is no longer valid because Christ did away with the sacrifices (Heb 7:27), and as we mentioned earlier, the temple of the Holy Spirit now dwells in the body (1Co 6:19) of each individual born again Christian. (i.e. Celebrating Hanukkah denies the New Testament dispensation and rejects Christ's authority over the church; not to mention that Hanukkah was never appointed by God in the Bible.) My family and I do not celebrate Christmas, nor do we celebrate Hanukkah, because we do not need worldly or pagan traditions to have an excuse to fellowship with our brethren and loved ones.
(Read "Should Christians Observe Jewish Passover?" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

However, we can now see that Steven Anderson is a hypocrite once again because he is rebuking Christians for celebrating Hanukkah. Did you catch it? Did he not just make the argument that it is a doubtful disputation to argue if a Christian decides to honor a day or not? Andereson clearly taught that Christians should be freely allowed to do those things, so long as they do not force their standards on Steven Anderson. Anderson contradicts his own teaching within his own teaching because he is so blind in his desperation to justify his pagan traditions, and rage against anyone who dares to question him, he cannot see clearly.

"There's an attack on our culture today of just being Christian, and they want to make us a Jewish roots Hebrew culture."
-Steven L. Anderson, "Should Christians Celebrate Christmas," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Dec 9, 2013, retrieved Dec 26, 2017, [https://youtu.be/-pQ0cyWHNI4]

That is true; there is a religious Hebrew-Roots cult that is doing attacking the New Testament church, and I end up having to rebuke them frequently. However, what Anderson ignores is that there is an attack on our culture today of just being Christian, meaning that they want to make us an ecumenical (i.e. one-world) pagan worshipping Roman culture, and the reason he ignores it is because that pagan Roman culture developed many of the church-ianity traditions and doctrines that Anderson teaches and practices today, and so to rebuke those things means that he would also have to rebuke himself, but he abhors the idea of judging himself.

In addition to that, at the beginning of his teaching, Anderson clearly said that he was not trying to convince anyone to celebrate Christmas, but by the end of his teaching, he accuses anyone who does not celebrate Christmas as being part of a Jewish conspiracy. All I can say to that is, praise to the Lord Jesus Christ that He has opened His Word to the lowly and meek of heart that they would be protected from such wicked wolves as Steven Anderson.

Towards the end of his teaching on Christmas, Anderson told his audience that they should not participate in the "bad aspects" of Christmas. However, there was not one word that I recall hearing in his entire presentation where he even attempted to address idolatry and witchcraft like he did in his Halloween teaching; Anderson conveniently avoided those sins because if he addressed them, then he would be forced to admit his error and contradiction, and he avoids that topic because he loves his tradition more than he loves the Lord Jesus Christ.

Anderson's hypocrisy continues:
"[You should not] have a holiday at the same time as Christmas to be a substitute for Christmas."
-Steven L. Anderson, "Should Christians Celebrate Christmas," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Dec 9, 2013, retrieved Dec 26, 2017, [https://youtu.be/-pQ0cyWHNI4]

Yet, Christmas IS a substitute for the witchcraft holiday of Yule. Anderson substitutes Christmas for days and times of witches, tells everyone it is okay to have a day to honor the Lord, but then turns around and tells them that if they replace anything for Christmas, they are not of Christ, and part of a secret Jewish conspiracy. (Frankly, it is easy to see the influence Alex Jones had on Anderson's education.)

This is a twisted web of mental gymnastics that I want no part of, but I will continue for the sake of my brethren in Christ, and for the sake of those people who have been deceived by Anderson. He deceives again at the end of his talk:
"Nothing could be more wholesome than to eat a good meal, give gifts to someone that you love, drink a cup of hot chocolate, and sing hymns and songs of praise unto Jesus... I don't believe it's pagan."
-Steven L. Anderson, "Should Christians Celebrate Christmas," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Dec 9, 2013, retrieved Dec 26, 2017, [https://youtu.be/-pQ0cyWHNI4]

I also do not believe that eating a good meal, giving gifts to someone you love, drinking hot chocolate, or singing hymns to Jesus is pagan. I do not teach that. What I teach is that putting up a Christmas tree and decorations, and participating in the rituals set forth by the witches, first in their covens and then throughout Rome, is pagan, and that we ought to abstain from such pollutions through their idolatry. Anderson did not mention any of the Christmas rituals and traditions in that short list because he knows he can manipulate people, and lead them to believe that Christian teachers (e.g. like me) are falsely accusing him.

Notice also that he says, "I don't believe it's pagan," but it is very difficult for him to know that when he intentionally closes his eyes to any information that would teach him the truth. For example, he has no Biblical source for his Christmas tree, which means it did not come from Scripture, but then refuses to hear the truth of where it does come from, and then in his willful ignorance, declares what HE believes, not what the Bible says.

Let's move on to the subject of tithe because with Steven Anderson being the typical false preacher, he also brings the false doctrine of storehouse tithing in the New Testament, which has become a staple of modern-day false church buildings to boost their income. If any Christians have not seen our teaching, "Is Tithe a Christian Requirement?" I would highly recommend readers stop for a moment and go over that teaching because it will give you the details on how strictly unbiblical tithing is in the New Testament.

What fascinates me is that we just got done talking about Anderson's heresies on Christmas, and he preached from Galatians that people should not seek to go back under the bondage of Jewish law. Yet, because Anderson was trained in a typical leavened seminary college, and because he is hell-bent on following tradition, he brings people under the bondage of the Jewish law in tithe.

Let's start by quoting Anderson in his teaching on tithing:
"This doctrine of tithing has come under attack recently, if you notice who's behind the attack on tithing, its people who are against going to church at all."
-Steven Anderson, "Tithing in the New Testament," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Aug 3, 2015, retrieved Feb 9, 2018, [https://youtu.be/E_ugTo7m_0g]

Before we start addressing the doctrine, notice that he claims another "recent attack" on tithing in the same way he did about Christmas. This is another lie. Just to give an example, let's go back to Charles Spurgeon again, and we'll see that even in the 19th century, tithe was not preached in the New Testament church:
"It is also noteworthy that, with regard to Christian liberality, there are no rules laid down in the Word of God. I remember hearing somebody say, 'I should like to know exactly what I ought to give.' Yes, dear friend, no doubt you would; but you are not under a system similar to that by which the Jews were obliged to pay tithes to the priests. If there were any such rule laid down in the gospel, it would destroy the beauty of spontaneous giving, and take away all the bloom from the fruit of your liberality. There is no law to tell me what I should give my father on his birthday; there is no rule laid down in any law-book to decide what present a husband should make to his wife, nor what token of affection we should bestow upon others whom we love. No; the gift must be a free one, or it has lost all its sweetness."
-Charles H. Spurgeon, The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit Sermons, Passmore & Alabaster, 1896

Although I am not familiar with the works of J. Vernon McGee, nor do I know if taught all the truth of the Gospel, the point I want to make with this quote is that he taught the same in the early 20th century:
"Again, I would remind you that we are not under the tithe system today. There are many humble believers with very little income for whom a tenth would be too much to give."
-J. Vernon McGee, Thru the Bible: Genesis Through Revelation, Thomas Nelson, 1984 ,ISBN: 9781418586034

These are just a few of many example which could be given, and thus, Steven Anderson, once again, is either completely ignorant, or he's lying. He's trying to create a idea in the minds of his listeners that the church has always taught tithe or Christmas, but it's just come under "attack" recently, when the truth is that Anderson often lies, and keeps himself in willful ignorance because he refuses to research the truth of a matter.

So, what does he mean that Christians who preach the truth about tithe are against going to church? Most of you reading this, who understand the truth of the doctrine on tithe, are in favor of assembling yourselves together with the church, so where is Anderson's attack coming from?

Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.
-Hebrews 10:25

This is a very manipulative and deceptive tactic from Anderson because what he means by "those who are against going to church" are those who do not pay for, or cannot afford, a large building to meet in; or in other words, it's anyone who has a home church. Anderson believes that every step he has taken in his so-called "ministry," has been God-inspired, and if you don't do everything exactly the way Anderson did them, then you're unbiblical and not of Christ.

Sadly, he manipulates people to think that those who expose his false doctrine on tithe are rebellious against the church, which means we first have to cover his false doctrine on church buildings before we even get to the topic on tithe:
"The house church movement is unbiblical. Keep in mind, I'm not talking about a church that starts meeting in a house and then eventually outgrows it. I'm talking about the movement that says that if you ever were to outgrow the house, you should split up the 'church' so it can stay small. In the book of Acts, they started with 120 people and grew from there. I don't know about you, but I can't fit 120 people in my living room."
-Steven Anderson, "The House Church Movement," Steven Anderson Blogspot, Dec 27, 2017, retrieved Feb 8, 2018, [sanderson1611.blogspot.com/2017/12/the-house-church-movement.html]

At this point, there's a logical fallacy we need to explain called "Poisoning the Well." In this article alone, we've already seen Anderson do this many times, but I haven't named what it is in logical terms yet. The formal argument looks like this:

Person 1 claims negative information about Person 2. Therefore, the claims made by Person 2 will be false.

That's too confusing, so let's simplify it:

Billy tells the schoolmaster his side of the story between his fight with Dave. Billy warns the schoolmaster that Dave is well-known liar, so anything Dave says will be a lie.

In the example, Billy is attempting to create a situation in which those who are listening to his argument will only believe him, and no one else. This often happens when you have someone who doesn't quote anyone or give you any references, which is what Anderson does in his teaching; meaning that Anderson is poisoning the well against anyone else, so his listeners will simply take his word for it, and not go do any research on the matter. (Again, his aggressive and yelling speeches help to incite fear into his audience, so he will be more believable.)

In fact, Anderson is doing a combination of many logical fallacies, including a false dilemma, ad hominem (i.e. railing), demonization, poisoning the well, strawman, and red herring. In simple terms, he's creating a situation where it's "Anderson vs everyone else who is not Anderson," making everyone else seem like they're stupid without anyone actually seeing any quotes or references from these people, while making up some arguments that people like myself are not making, and then distracting you from the topic at hand. Steven Anderson has done this in almost every teaching I've seen from him, and again, he learned these tactics from his wicked, false preacher mentors, like Jack Hyles.

For example, I rebuked a "pastor" here in Indiana where I live for abandoning the preaching of the Gospel in favor of the politics he adopted. (We had previously worked with his organization until that point.) That pastor didn't like the fact that we had a home church that met every week. So he kicked us out, told me that the devil was manipulating me, and then went on a little crusade to contact every church building and leader we had been in contact with and told them that we were "rebelling against the church." He lied. In reality, I was defending the Gospel and rebuking him to correction and repentance, to come out of his tradition and do what was right by Christ, but instead, he did exactly as the chief priests and Pharisees did in the New Testament; he clung to his tradition, and said all manner of evil against me falsely, to the point that we still, to this day, do not have one church building in Indiana that supports our ministry.
(It should be noted that they still sell DVDs of my teachings, even though I gave them no permission to sell them. Why would they sell the teachings of a man who is supposedly "rebelling against the church?")

Don't misunderstand; this really doesn't concern me at all. My job is to teach the truth, and the prophets of the Old Testament were treated the same way:

For Jesus himself testified, that a prophet hath no honour in his own country.
-John 4:44

Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.
-Matthew 5:11-12

Getting back to the above quote about the church meeting in homes, it should be pointed out that Steven Anderson's "Faithful Word" Baptist Church ALSO started out as a home church. So what Anderson does instead is makes a stipulation to say, "I'm not talking about a church that starts meeting in a house and then eventually grows out of it," or in other words, Anderson's saying "everyone else except me," so he can deceive people to think he's not a hypocrite on the matter.

Ultimately, what Anderson is arguing is that if the group you meet with does not outgrow the size of someone's home, then you're not a real church. Remember that he claimed these people are "against going to church at all," meaning that if they meet with believers together in someone's home, and have not yet grown to the size they can no longer meet in someone's home, therefore, none of them "go to church."

When the Lord Jesus Christ had explained the parable of the seed that fell on good ground, which produced fruit, He said:

But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.
-Matthew 13:23

The Lord Jesus Christ did not say that every Christian would bear the same amount of fruit, but Steven Anderson believes otherwise. So not only is Anderson teaching a false gospel (i.e. on repentance as we saw earlier) when evangelizing, but also, anyone who bears fruit of 30 instead of 100 is therefore "against going to church," which is unbiblical and beyond absurd.

We have a home church that also meets online, and we have Christians who join us from Australia, England, South Africa, and many other places, but I don't want anyone to think I'm part of a "House Church Movement." If there is such an organization, I'm not a part of them; I simply read the Scriptures, saw that the early Christians met in their homes, and concluded that, despite what I was being told, we didn't need a fancy building to justify Christians assembling ourselves together.

Members in our church are thankful because they learned far more about the Word of God in a few short years than in the decades they were attending traditional leavened church buildings (including Anderson's "Baptist" denomination), but sadly, due to the brainwashing of men like Steven Anderson, people think they can't have a "church" unless they pay money for a separate building first. Anderson's saying that if you don't go buy a building, and pay all the expenses for its upkeep, then you are "unbiblical," and Anderson is not the first so-called "pastor" I've heard make that claim.

In fact, what Anderson doesn't tell people up front is the building they meet in isn't paid for by the church; Anderson pays for it out of his own pocket because that's the same building he conducts his business in. Anderson has a security business that he owns and operates. Thus, Anderson has a building he owns, and his church meets in that building, so how exactly is that different from meeting in someone's home? (i.e. It's hypocrisy and contradiction; he's just willingly blind to it.)

Anderson also fails to mention that, soon after Acts 2, the Christians were being hunted and executed, and they therefore had to hide. They couldn't have church buildings like Steven Anderson with giant signs out front because they would all be rounded up and killed, and thus, they spread out in the homes in different areas to fellowship with one another, but according to what Anderson just told us, we would have to conclude that the early church in the book of Acts was "unbiblical" because they didn't buy large buildings for fellowship.

"Not only is it unscriptural to intentionally stay small, but the typical house church lacks leadership. If God intended for the New Testament church to be a free-for-all where everyone has equal authority, why did he give us such strict qualifications for an elder or bishop? The pastor has to be somebody who's been in church for a while, has the aptitude to teach, etc."
-Steven Anderson, "The House Church Movement," Steven Anderson Blogspot, Dec 27, 2017, retrieved Feb 8, 2018, [sanderson1611.blogspot.com/2017/12/the-house-church-movement.html]

Faithful Word Baptist Church lacks Biblical leadership too because they've got a wolf in disguise running it. Anderson acts exactly the same as every other leavened traditional church building operates; he is a pastoral king who expects everyone to respect his person, and if they don't, he will personally remove them and brand them a "heretic."

Notice that he said "intentionally stay small," and thus what he's doing is poisoning the well by claiming that anyone who has a home church means to "intentionally stay small." Again, that's a fallacious argument, and it's totally unscriptural for him to make such claims which, though generalized, are aimed at our church, as well as many others. Part of the reason Anderson's cult has grown to the size it has is due to his exposure to media (which he purposefully seeks out), and also due to his false doctrine on repentance, filling his church with false converts, which means the "fruit" Anderson's bearing is not coming from good ground.

Just as a side note, the fact that a mainstream national (and international) news outlet, which is run by those who serve the Devil, is willing to feature an interview with Steven Anderson ought to be a red flag raised in the minds of all Christians. The Devil would never have his mainstream news service publish the truth about Christ, and so we have to ask ourselves, why did Anderson get featured in the first place? As I stated earlier, Anderson is a media whore, and he bows the knee to all those who will give him public exposure.
Anderson also says that home churches "typically" lack leadership, but gives no examples of this. Leadership starts with the apostles (who are what we know today as missionaries, but "missionary" is a Catholic term), and they lead the church until it is large enough that it requires leadership; the apostles did not preach in an area, have three people born again and immediately bring them into the church and make them all elders. However, this gets more confusing because Anderson continues to argue on both sides of his mouth:
"The house church people will say they are all elders, but are they really qualified? At Faithful Word Baptist Church, we don't have an overabundance of qualified guys. Even in a church of over 300 people, 'faithful men' who are actually qualified to pastor a church are hard to come by. These house churches want to have multiple pastors in their living room, and what they have is too many chiefs and not enough Indians."
-Steven Anderson, "The House Church Movement," Steven Anderson Blogspot, Dec 27, 2017, retrieved Feb 8, 2018, [sanderson1611.blogspot.com/2017/12/the-house-church-movement.html]

So he first argued that home churches don't have enough leadership, and now he's arguing that they have too much leadership. Which one is it? Ultimately, Anderson is making the claim that if you don't purchase and upkeep a separate building outside of your home, then you don't have proper leadership.

Anderson believes that only one person should have the aptitude to teach, and that's because he doesn't understand the role of evangelists, prophets, and pastors. He instead sticks to the tradition he was taught in the church buildings, that one pastor should rule over everything and everyone. (Yes, I'm sure they have "elders" in their church, but those elders all strictly follow Anderson.)
(Read "Is the One-Pastor Church System Biblical?" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

Don't misunderstand; I'm not saying that there should be tons of teachers in the church because the Bible warns us about heaping unto ourselves many masters:

My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.
-James 3:1

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
-2 Timothy 4:3-4

With growth comes an assortment of gifts and calling of God, and Anderson rejects that, even though he will claim he does not. Anderson's the sole ruler over the church, and that's clear by just looking at his "Faithful Word" Baptist Church. The New Testament also mentions prophets, which are those who deliver the Word of God for rebuke and correction, and Steven Anderson rejects prophets out of his church building because he doesn't want anyone correcting him.

"What it boils down to is pride. House church proponents don't want to pour water on the hands of Elijah like Elisha did because they think it would be degrading and demeaning. Elijah wasn't perfect, but he was a man of God. A smart person like Elisha gets behind a qualified man of God and learns from him."
-Steven Anderson, "The House Church Movement," Steven Anderson Blogspot, Dec 27, 2017, retrieved Feb 8, 2018, [sanderson1611.blogspot.com/2017/12/the-house-church-movement.html]

I agree with that last sentence, but the problem is that Anderson is comparing himself to Elijah, which, based on what we've seen of Anderson so far, is absurd. Anderson accuses everyone else of "pride," then claims he is a "qualified man of God" like Elijah, and that everyone should get behind him, which is typical of cults, where the cult members ignore the prideful statements of their guru. We ought to learn from those who have come before us in the church, who demonstrate love, righteousness, meekness, patience, and faith, but we ought not to follow after wicked cult leaders like Steven Anderson.

But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness.
-1 Timothy 6:11

An Example of Anderson's "Leadership" The following video is of Steven Anderson firing one of his employees, a man by the name of Tyler Baker. I am not defending Baker in this video because he makes some reference to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit being similar to pagan "polytheism," and he did confess that he slacked on his duties as an employee, to which he did not seem apologetic for. However, what I want to point out is how Steven Anderson handled the matter, and as you can see, his hateful, warmongering, railing attitude is clear as day once again: ANDERSON: "YOU SUCK as an employee, YOU SUCK THE WHOLE TIME YOU'VE WORKED HERE!!!... Your testimony sucks right now... Don't be an idiot and play semantics with me, I'm not going to play your stupid game... I guess you're all high and mighty now 'cause you think you're leaving and do whatever the hell you want!... You've sucked from the beginning. You've always sucked. I told my wife that you're a C minus... don't screw up your life, idiot!" And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; -2 Timothy 2:24-25 It should be noted that this conversation took place while the man's wife was in labor in the hospital. For born again Christians, that should tell you pretty much everything you need to know about Steven Anderson, and furthermore, it should show you that he's not qualified to be elder: A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous... Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. -1 Timothy 3:2-7 The unbelievers of this world have taken videos like this and posted it everywhere on the internet, with people believe that this man is a Christian, when he's not. Anderson doesn't have a good report, and that's because he's a wolf, but the world uses this false preacher as an excuse to tarnish the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and falsely accuses the true church, those of us born again in Christ, because of his wicked words and actions.

Furthermore, Anderson is claiming that if you don't buy a building, then you're prideful, and don't follow Biblical leadership. Again, this is totally absurd. I hope Christian readers are beginning to understand why I put Steven Anderson in our Wolves in Costume series; he has a nasty habit of hypocritically accusing others of pride without ever looking in the mirror.

For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
-1 Corinthians 11:31

Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
-Matthew 7:5

The point of his article, which he somewhat states at the end, is that he believes that no soul-winning programs exist in home churches because the home churches aren't growing. That makes no sense unless Anderson has been able to track and analyze every home church around the world; how does he know they have not grown? Of course, not only does not know these things, but he also ASSUMES every building that calls itself a "church," and has a cutesy sign out front, is automatically growing. (i.e. There are many church buildings that do not grow, and others that close down completely.)

Again, I want to point out that soul-winning programs are useless if you don't have the doctrines of repentance and faith correct, because if you soul-win on false doctrine, you're only adding false converts to your church building. Since Anderson has not been born again in Christ, it's no wonder there are so many blind people in his congregation; this is not to say that there are no born again Christians in Anderson's "Faithful Word Baptist Church," because that is possible, but a little study of the Bible and conviction from the Spirit of God would soon lead them to reprove the church, and if the church won't come to correction, they would need to sanctify themselves to keep themselves from leaven.

Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth? This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
-Galatians 5:7-9

People like Anderson draw false converts to their cults, and because Christians will sanctify themselves away from pastors like him, he ends up scattering the sheep of Christ:

Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the LORD.
-Jeremiah 23:1

Again, the fallacy is that if you're soul-winning, then you'll automatically grow at the rate Steven Anderson is growing. As we read earlier, that's not what Christ taught. Anderson believes that if you don't eventually have hundreds, or thousands of people underneath your pastoral authority, and you don't purchase lavish buildings with lots of features, then you are not of Christ. (i.e. The Gospel of Christ is supposed to go out to the poor and needy, but if they join up with Anderson, he requires them to pay for a bunch of things to please Anderson's personal preferences, and we'll cover more on that when we get back into the tithing problem later.)

Anderson continues:
"Of course, in the Book of Acts, the early church started out with 120 people in it, which is about what we have here this morning. I don't know about you, but I can't fit this group in my house... Nobody has a house big enough to house 120 people, but not only that, the Book of Acts chapter 1, they had 120 people, but in Acts chapter 2, they added 3,000. Do the math, that's a pretty big house."
-Steven Anderson, "Tithing in the New Testament," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Aug 3, 2015, retrieved Feb 9, 2018, [https://youtu.be/E_ugTo7m_0g]

Again, the building they meet in is Anderson's business storefront, which means it is a house that he owns, and they are meeting in it. It's so simply deceptive that the average listener won't see Anderson's sleight-of-hand. Anderson said something similar to this in an earlier quote, mentioning that 120 people won't fit in a house; let's go to Acts 1 and read it for ourselves:

Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey. And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James. These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren. And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)
-Acts 1:12-15

abode (n): to dwell or reside; residence for a longer or shorter time
(See 'abode', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Mar 6, 2018,[webstersdictionary1828.com])

This tells us that 120 people gathered together in the home that the apostles were staying in, and yet, Anderson says that no one has a house big enough to fit 120 people. I've known some people who have done such a thing in their garage, but according to Steven Anderson, they're not biblical, and they're not part of the church. Again, I'm not opposed to having a separate building if it's necessary, but Anderson sarcastically mocks and blacklists anyone who opposes him, and this the type of wickedness that forces me to rebuke church buildings (or rather, church building mentality) in the first place.

Then he points out an absurdity that, after they added three thousand people, they would have built a church building for 3,120 people. That's why he said, "do the math, that's a pretty big house." He's mocking the idea that 3,000 people would fit in one house, which they obviously didn't, but this has a double meaning because Anderson is implying that they would have built/purchased an enormous building, instead of splitting into smaller groups and spreading out. (He also assumes that those thousands of people all lived in Jerusalem, which was not the case; that's why the Holy Spirit spoke in tongues through them so that all would understand.)

There is not even a slight indication, anywhere in the New Testament, that they built huge buildings to house thousands of people all at once. These people would have split up according to locations and elders appointed to specific areas, meeting together in their homes, and meeting in houses is mentioned many times in the New Testament (Acts 2:2, Acts 2:46, Acts 10:24-27, Acts 12:12, etc), but as we read earlier, that is something that Steven Anderson has condemned; thus, Anderson condemns as "unbiblical" the example that was set for us in Acts, and mocks those of us born again in Christ who try to follow that example.

Anderson continues to mock and jeer:
"So don't tell me, 'Oh, they just met in the house back then'. No. They had 120 people, all with one accord in one place, then they added 3,000, then they added 5,000, then it says they multiplied greatly. So we're talking about a huge church there in Jerusalem."
-Steven Anderson, "Tithing in the New Testament," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Aug 3, 2015, retrieved Feb 9, 2018, [https://youtu.be/E_ugTo7m_0g]

Can you see now that he's teaching that they built/purchased a building that would bring together at least 10,000? He's talking about the numbers, but he's not giving any Scripture to back up where they spent enormous amounts of money to construct some huge temple. That was never recorded as having been done by the early Christians, and the only people who were recorded to do such things in the centuries after Christ were wicked men who founded the Roman Catholic Church, which would end up being a blight on Christian churches and doctrine for the next 1700 years.

As I said before, it was literally impossible for them to construct huge buildings for that purpose, or to purchase them for that use, because they were being hunted and killed under heavy persecution by both Jews and Romans. Steven Anderson ought to know what real persecution is after all the sodomites allegedly coming after him (according to his testimony), but since he hasn't been persecuted for the sake of Christ (i.e. he's only persecuted for his vile mouth), he seems to have been blinded to this understanding.

Anderson accuses home churches of not being ordained, or participating in ordainment.

ordain (v): to set, to establish in a particular office or order
(See 'ordain', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Mar 13, 2018,[webstersdictionary1828.com])

First of all, Steven Anderson quickly forgets that some men are ordained by Christ outside the church. Paul was ordained outside of the church on the road to Damascus. (Acts 9:3-4) Apollos was also called by the Lord God to preach Christ outside of the church; Aquila and Priscilla discovered him while he converted the Jews and called them to repentance. (Acts 18:24-28) It's also important to note that the church did not pressure them, but encouraged them by helping these men to further preach the Gospel; they didn't bring them in to force them into tithing, while making sure that the authority of lofty pastors (like Steven Anderson) and their traditions were first respected.

So we needed to understand this matter first to see that Anderson is rightly preaching ordainment in the church, which most church buildings traditionally teach (since it supports their love for preeminence), but the problem is about who is doing the ordaining. Even the Catholic Church "ordains" ministers, but they are not of Christ, and often, these same "ordained ministers" forget that men like Paul and Apollos were ordained OUTSIDE of the church by the Spirit of God. When a wicked man like Steven Anderson takes up position behind the pulpit, claiming that all should follow his "qualified leadership" (which is not Biblically qualified for), we ought to be rebuking him and sanctifying ourselves, knowing that he loves respect of his person more than the Lord Jesus Christ.
(Read "Respecting Persons Is Sin" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.
-James 2:1

This brings us back to the tithe problem, in which Anderson says that anyone who is against tithe is against "going to church at all." What he means is that he believes that those who have a home church "don't go to church," because he believes it's not a church, and therefore, all those who "attack tithe" don't go to church. This is folly, and hopefully, Christians can clearly see how Anderson manipulates people.

Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.
-Proverbs 26:5

Let's continue looking at Anderson's false doctrine on tithing:
"Most of the people that you see that are saying, 'Oh, tithing's unscriptural, tithing's not in the bible, or tithing is an Old Testament doctrine', are people who are telling us to forsake the local church, and to just meet in houses. Quote unquote, [in mocking tone] 'like they did in the book of Acts'."
-Steven Anderson, "Tithing in the New Testament," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Aug 3, 2015, retrieved Feb 9, 2018, [https://youtu.be/E_ugTo7m_0g]

Again, this is more deception because I've never told people to forsake the local church, but remember that Steven Anderson believes that if you have not purchased a building that is specifically set aside with a pulpit and chairs, then you're not "the local church." That's unbiblical and unreasonable. Men and women born again through repentance and faith in Christ, and assembling together in someone's home, IS the local church. Many church buildings are fake, they are filled with false converts, and they are not the local church. I've taught Christians to sanctify themselves away from the wicked leavened church buildings, like Anderson's "Faithful Word" Baptist Church, because they teach so much false doctrine and reject the humility of repentance because they do not want the fulfillment of Christ in the New Testament, no matter how much they claim they want it with their mouths.

This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
-Matthew 15:8

I have never taught that "tithing is unscriptural" or that "tithing is not in the bible," but rather, I have said that tithe is unbiblical specifically IN THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH. Anderson does not have the Spirit of God in him, and because he has been blinded by the traditions of his seminary college, therefore, he cannot see that Christ and the early apostles taught us CHARITY, not tithe.

Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth... And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
-1 Corinthians 13:4-13

The typical "storehouse tithing" sermon that is preached by these leavened church buildings is what Anderson also teaches, and that movement was started by the Wesleyan Church back in 1895 because they got themselves in a bunch of unbiblical debt. It is interesting to note that the reason they got in that debt in the first place was because they were paying for fancy church buildings and they didn't have enough money. They tried all sorts of worldly side shows to make money, like bake sales and raffles, and then a preacher discovered that they could make far more money by preaching false doctrine on tithing, and guilt-tripping people into giving more. The "storehouse tithing" was not taught amongst the church prior to the turn of the 20th century, but Anderson teaches it because he was taught the tradition of men through the Baptist Church organization.
(Read "Is Tithe a Christian Requirement?" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

After continuing for a few minutes to manipulate his audience on the false doctrine of church buildings, Anderson finally gets back to tithe. He talks about them passing the offering plate on Sunday mornings, and then says:
"God has always provided our church's needs, and in eight and a half years, we've never had any debt. We've never borrowed any money. We've never been unable to pay our bills. We've always had plenty of money."
-Steven Anderson, "Tithing in the New Testament," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Aug 3, 2015, retrieved Feb 9, 2018, [https://youtu.be/E_ugTo7m_0g]

I am in no way arguing against the fact that Lord God provides for His children, and I can personally testify to that fact; however, mega-church televangelists have plenty of money and can pay all their bills too, so does that mean God has called them? The problem is Anderson's boasting about being rich and having need of nothing:

Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked... As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.
-Revelation 3:17-19

There's a lot of zeal (passion) coming from Anderson, there's no doubt about that, but there's no zeal to repentance (i.e. grief and sorrow of wrongdoing), and so what happens is the same thing that happens to many church buildings: They pressure people to come in and give tithe, making them think they need to do this to be right with God, the preachers and church buildings become rich and increased with goods, thinking they have need of nothing, and are willingly ignorant that they are blind, wretched, and miserable. It's not for sake of the Lord Jesus Christ, because if they were His children, then He would be chastening them for their works of the flesh and false doctrine, and the fact that there is no chastening coming from God on these matters shows clearly that Anderson is not His child.

Anderson goes on to give the same line that typical preachers do, how they aren't greedy for money, making all sorts of excuses for themselves, and then says:
"But at the same time, to sit there and, you know, attack God's institution of the local church, or to attack tithing, you know, shows that your heart is in the wrong place, and that your heart might be on the unrighteous mammon of this world, and that you're so attached to money, that the idea of giving unto the Lord, is somehow repugnant of you. That kind of shows where your heart is."
-Steven Anderson, "Tithing in the New Testament," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Aug 3, 2015, retrieved Feb 9, 2018, [https://youtu.be/E_ugTo7m_0g]

The members of our church have been disgusted with Anderson saying such things, and that's offensive against all the Christians I know out there who are charitable with their time, money, and resources. In reality, Anderson is more upset that they don't pay homage to him because that tithe money goes somewhere, and the real problem is that Anderson attacks born again Christians who are under the New Testament law of liberty in Christ, while he holds unrighteous mammon in high esteem in his heart, that the idea of charity is somehow repugnant (i.e. morally wrong) to him.

For the entire hour of his teaching, Anderson quotes almost solely from the Old Testament, and that's what is so incredible about his hypocrisy. If you remember earlier, he just mocked Christians for explaining to him that "tithe is an Old Testament ordinance" that was to be specifically carried out by the Jews. So he mocks Christians for telling him that it's an Old Testament ordinance that Christ had fulfilled, and thus now we should operate under liberty of charity in Christ, but then Anderson spends most of his teaching quoting the Old Testament, and in the end, Anderson is just like every other wicked mainstream preacher out there; the only difference being that he screams and kicks the pulpit like a child.

Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
-1 Corinthians 14:20

In 2 Corinthians, Paul talks about sending some of the brethren to collect money to help with the needs of the other saints (i.e. Christians):

Therefore I thought it necessary to exhort the brethren, that they would go before unto you, and make up beforehand your bounty, whereof ye had notice before, that the same might be ready, as a matter of bounty [gift of giving], and not as of covetousness.
-2 Corinthians 9:5

Then he goes on to explain that everyone will reap what they sow, and that if they sow bountifully, they'll reap bountifully. However, he NEVER preached tithe unto them, and in fact, he preached the opposite:

But this I say, He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully. Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.
-2 Corinthians 9:6-7

Here, Paul told them not to give "of necessity," and since tithe was a requirement for the Jews, to provide for the Temple of God and the Levites, this means that tithe was not being practiced. The Order of Aaron (i.e. the Levites) were no longer needed in the New Testament dispensation because the temple is now our individual bodies (1Co 6:19), and thus, tithe is also no longer needed; it is replaced with charity:

Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit [perform] you like men, be strong. Let all your things be done with charity.
-1 Corinthians 16:13-14

And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
-1 Corinthians 13:3

Steven Anderson talks in his teaching about how generous he is, and how giving and loving he is (as do most preachers boast of themselves), but he still teaches and practices tithe, which is a requirement under the Biblical definitions of the Old Testament. It's not charity if you're required to pay, otherwise, sales tax is just a "generous donation to the State." They are not giving charitably, they are giving of necessity through tithe.

I am unsure of what Anderson is taking out of that tithe money since his I don't have any access to his church building's financial records. They don't have any obligation to provide them, I just don't have access to that information. However, as wicked as he is in his heart, to me, something stinks; I just don't have enough information to judge the specifics of the matter yet.

At this point, I wasn't sure what to go over next because Anderson teaches so many strange and false doctrines; for example, Anderson teaches that if you're a Christian man, and an American patriot, you are required to urinate while standing up. This is not satire; this is literally what he teaches, as you can watch the video for yourself:

ANDERSON: "I kept seeing this phrase jump out at me in the Bible... Thus saith the Lord, he said I will destroy from Jeroboam him that pisseth against the wall... And you say, 'Oh, I can't believe you'd speak that way, that's vile'. I'm sorry, but the Bible that the words of Jesus Christ are wholesome words, and the Bible says every word of God is pure. And so don't accuse me of using bad language. That's what the Bible says. He says I will destroy him that pisseth against the wall. Now, did you ever stop and think, what did God mean by that?... All the men, right? He said I'm going to kill all the men that come from Jeroboam because there's a difference between men and women. Men piss against the wall. Women don't. Okay? And so God said—he used that language, which he used that expression, and by the way, that phrase is only in the King James Bible... And God said a man is someone who pisses against the wall. Did you know this? When I was in Germany—you're not even going to believe this. You say, why are you preaching this? Because it's in the Bible. Okay? I was in Germany, and I went to use the restroom in Germany in several different peoples' houses; I mean totally different people. And even in public places, they had a sign that prohibited a man from peeing standing up. I'm not kidding. You can ask—my wife is from Germany, and I was there for three and a half months. [Note: He's getting substantially louder as he's explaining this.] They had a sign in people's house, they had a sign in the public restroom that prohibited—now, I'm not, ya know, it was a circle and a line through it, and it's 'No Peeing Standing Up'. And I asked my wife, I was like, I thought it was a joke. I was like, is that a joke? That's kind of a crude joke. She said, 'It's not a joke'. She said, 'No man in Germany pees standing up'. [Long silence; Anderson stares at audience] That's where we're headed in this country my friend. We've got a bunch of pastors who pee sitting down. We got a bunch of—and you say, 'Oh, ya know, you're being vile'. I'm not—hey, then God's vile! God's the one who wrote the Bible my friend. We've got pastors who pee sitting down. We've got the President of the United States probably pees sitting down. We got a bunch of preachers—we got a bunch of leaders who don't stand up and piss against the wall like a man. And I'm going to tell you something: That's what's wrong with America. You—you don't like it? You don't like an old fashioned Bible that tells you what being a man's all about? Because it's called the King James Bible, and if you don't like that term 'piss against the wall', you know what? Go to the book store this afternoon and buy a New King James... It'll take out anything in the Bible that has any power to it. It'll take out anything that tells you how things are supposed to be. But you know what? [He's now yelling at the top of his lungs.] Four hundred years ago, PASTORS USED TO STAND UP AND PREACH THAT A MAN SHOULD BE A MAN!! NOT A MALE! Not the males! It's because the editors of the NIV pee sitting down. It's because the editors of the New King James, they all pee sitting down. I'm going to tell you something: I'm not going to pee sitting down. I don't care if it's Germany. I'm going to Germany in about a month. You better know I'm going to stand up everywhere I go."

Again, Anderson teaches that if you, as a man, do not pee standing up, then you are not a Christian who is right with God, you are not a masculine man, and you are not a patriot to your country. Folks, this is how corrupt a man's mind gets when he's leader of a cult, and those who follow him will have their minds corrupted as well because:

A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
-Galatians 5:9

Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
-1 Corinthians 14:20

To follow the Biblical commandment that we be adults in our understanding, let's investigate this unique phrase in Scripture. It is true that six times in the Old Testament, God uses the phrase "pisseth against the wall," but what Anderson fails to recognize is that each time He uses that phrase, he's describing wicked men, not righteous men. The Lord God said he would destroy those who piss against the wall:

For in very deed, as the LORD God of Israel liveth, which hath kept me back from hurting thee, except thou hadst hasted and come to meet me, surely there had not been left unto Nabal by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
-1 Samuel 25:34

For the whole house of Ahab shall perish: and I will cut off from Ahab him that pisseth against the wall, and him that is shut up and left in Israel:
-2 Kings 9:8

Don't misunderstand, I'm not arguing whether a man should stand up or sit down when he empties his bladder; the choice is his, and it's none of my business. However, what I'm saying is that God used this description to speak of evil men who He thought to destroy.

Anderson is ignorant that this phrase was known by the Jews to refer to dogs, young boys, or lewd men, not to "righteous pastors who stand for the truth." The following 19th century book is a list of passages in the Old Testament in which the author was exposing commentators on Scripture (like Steven Anderson) who departed from the teachings of the King James Bible:
"[A]gainst the wall, a sort of contemptuous [vile] expression to denote a small boy, especially where mention is made of exterminating a whole tribe or family... The phrase seems thus contemptuously to denote a boy, because in the East it is customary for men to perform this office of nature [peeing] in a sitting posture, beneath their flowing garments, nor does decency permit it to be done in the presence of others... The phrase has been variously interpreted of males, children, and dogs."
-Richard A. Barret, A Synopsis of Criticisms Upon Those Passages of the Old Testament, Vol. 2, Issue 1, Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans, 1847, p. 467-468, [University of Wisconsin - Madison]

So first of all, men and women wore robes in that day, and it was customary for both men and women to squat down when they peed because if they didn't, they would reveal their genitals for all to see. Typically, young boys, who are not yet old enough to have any sense of decency about their male members, would do this out of ignorance, or in some instances, a young boy may expose himself as a troublemaker to get a rise of shock from onlookers.

In another sense, it was also referred to as dogs, who have no sense of decency to avoid urinating on the wall of someone's house because they don't have any understanding to respect someone's home. The same would be applied to a man who would walk up to the wall of someone's home and start urinating, not only exposing himself, but also disrespecting someone else's house. The Lord God used this phrase to refer to men who were vile, immature troublemakers who had no understanding, and disrespected God's chosen nation, and thus, He sought to destroy them because of their pride and persecution against His servants.

As we pointed out earlier, when Anderson called sodomites "dogs," dogs are referring to pastors in most contexts throughout Scripture, which means Anderson is the dog described in Scripture. Here, we have another instance in which God is referring to men as nothing more than dogs, and Anderson proudly takes up that mantle on himself, declaring that, just as the wicked men, he too will "piss against the wall."

It should also be noted that he was saying that pastors should be men, but not "males," as if the word "male" is some new-age political term that's evil, or that it was some term created by sodomites/homosexuals. When I heard Anderson say that, I immediately thought of Genesis:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
-Genesis 1:27

Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
-Genesis 5:2

On the one hand, Anderson yells and screams in defense of the term "pisseth against the wall," which was intended to describe wicked men, but on the other hand, Anderson yells and screams in attack of the term "male," which was used by God as a word to differentiate between men and women. Again, this goes to show how a man who does not have the Spirit of God in him can read the Bible and not be able to see, nor understand, what is right in front of him.

In another teaching, Anderson mocks those who would dare call him "Steve" instead of his desire to be called "Pastor Anderson."

ANDERSON: "What I don't understand sometimes, is how sometimes, people don't figure this out. It's like, I feel like Jesus said to Philip, 'Have you been so long with me and you do not know me?' You remember when he said that? It's like, have you been at Faithful Word Baptist Church for so long and you haven't figured out that my name is not Steve?! It's 'Pastor Anderson!' Have you not figured that out?... It's not 'Hey Steve! Hey Stevie! Hey buddy old pal!' And you know, it's time for some people to give honor unto whom honor is due, and the pastor of the church not just a little buddy who comes in here in shorts and t-shirt!"

Before I address the Scripture, I want to point out, once again, Steven Anderson's railing and hateful attitude. He's saying, "have you not figured that out," which is really saying, "If you call me 'Steve', then you're an idiot!"

The first part of Scripture Anderson's referring to is from John 14:

Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
-John 14:9

Anderson either needs to admit his complete ignorance and hypocrisy when using that verse in this context, or he's actually comparing himself to God. Jesus was questioning Philip because of what Philip requested in the previous verse:

Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
-John 14:8

Anderson ought to fear God more because he used this verse far out of its context to try and justify his wicked doctrine. Anderson wants everyone to respect his person in sin, and tried to use Philip not recognizing God in Christ (John 10:30) as a metaphor for himself, and that people should lift him up with a fancy prestigious title. (This should be no surprise because I've seen countless pastors do the same thing.)

Certainly, those who labor in the word are worthy of double honor (1Ti 5:17), but not to the point we start acting like the world to hand out fancy titles. We also never want to honor someone to the point that we respect their person in sin; for example, when Anderson points out his fancy-looking suit, rather than a t-shirt:

My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: Are ye not then partial [i.e. biased] in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?... If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors. For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
-James 2:1-10

In fact, the New Testament church never used titles. The typical church buildings today walk around calling one another "Pastor Anderson," "Brother Jackson," "Sister Miller," "Elder Baker," etc, but the church did not use such titles in the New Testament; for example, Paul was called to be an apostle, as he states in Romans 1:1, but he was never called "Apostle Paul" with a title.
(Read "Titles Are Unbiblical in the Church" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

The second part of Scripture Anderson's referring to is from Romans 13:

Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
-Romans 13:7

Romans 13 is the chapter about governing rulers (e.g. judges, kings, presidents, etc); not about pastors. Based on everything we've learned about Anderson so far, it makes sense that he would use these verses out of context since he rules over his cult like a king, but if we go back one chapter, Paul said:

For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.
-Romans 12:3

Personally, I stop and think why God has ever given me the least of His holy thoughts. I am not a man worthy of the least of God's mercies, yet He came to me in my broken state, gave me a heart of repentance, filled me with His mercy, even coming to find me when I was a lost sheep to bring me back into the fold during my days as a prodigal son, and my brethren in Christ are far more worthy than I am to be in such a teaching position that I am in; however, I have not once seen that attitude in Steven Anderson.

Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.
-Philippians 2:3

Whereas the Bible tells us a Christian ought to consider himself to be low, unworthy of honor; Steven Anderson believes the opposite. Anderson, being blinded by the pride of his heart and tradition, thinks he's should have a title of worship.

worship (n): a title of honor, used in addresses to certain magistrates and other of respectable character
(See 'worship', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Mar 27, 2018,[webstersdictionary1828.com])

Though Anderson will get up and preach that men should worship God only (Mat 4:10), this is not how he acts. That's why Christ warned us that, though men in authoritative positions, like that of a pastor, may speak from the Word of God, that we should not follow after them because they are hypocrites that preach one thing and do another.

All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
-Matthew 23:3

On another topic, Anderson believes that Jesus went to hell for 3 days and was tormented by fire: "I believe that Jesus Christ was in a place—his soul was in a place of fiery torment for three days and three nights."
-Steven L. Anderson, "Dr. James White Full Interview 'NWO Bible Versions'," Framingtheworld, Aug 11, 2014, retrieved May 28, 2018, [youtu.be/xJrptikLjq8?t=2h25m35s]

What's interesting about this heresy is that it is the same thing Anderson's fellow wolf Joyce Meyer teaches; she also believes that Jesus was tormented by hellfire and devils for three days and three nights to pay for the sins of man. The above quote came from a discussion between heretics James White and Steven Anderson, and though White is as deceptive as they come, even he understood enough to call out Anderson's heresy on this matter.
(Read "Wolves in Costume: Joyce Meyer" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

Certainly, Christ's spirit went to hell, but the Bible doesn't say he was tormented there:

For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
-1 Peter 3:18-20

First of all, notice that it was that Christ suffered ONCE, which means, one time, when he was "put to death in the flesh." If Christ also suffered in hell, then that would make this passage a lie because He would have suffered twice, not once.

Christ went there to preach unto those spirits, the dead men and women, who were disobedient; people who went back thousands of years, clear back to the days of Noah. Don't ask me why Christ went to do that; I don't fully understand it myself, but I don't have to know the why to understand the fact of the matter; there is no Scripture that tells us Christ went into torment in hell, but Anderson teaches it anyway because, again, he takes Scripture out of its context and trains his cult followers to do the same.

Another strange thing Anderson teaches is that sodomy/homosexuality is the worst sin in the Bible:
"I'm preaching against the worst sin in the Bible, which is homosexuality."
-Steven Anderson, "The Seven Sins of Halloween," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, Oct 24, 2009, retrieved Feb 8, 2018, [https://youtu.be/8Gi7fL1KXEs]

Homosexuality is certainly a grave sin, but the Bible doesn't teach it is the worst among all. If there is any sin that is taught to be the worst of all, it is either lies or pride, since those were the very sins that caused the fall of man in the first place. Satan wasn't lifted up because of his homosexuality, and mankind didn't fall because of sodomy. (i.e. There was only one man and one woman in Eden; meaning that it was impossible to be a homosexual at that time.)

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
-Isaiah 14:12-14

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
-John 8:44

These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.
-Proverbs 6:16-19

Anderson does not see that pride and lies are the most wicked sins in the Bible because he has never come to repentance (i.e. grief and godly sorrow of wrongdoing). His pride is so great, he can't see the forest of pride he's in because his haughty trees are in the way. Anderson thinks it's an acceptable Christian practice to manipulate and deceive with his lies, and he thinks it's acceptable to yell and rail from the pride of his heart while teaching those lies.

It's likely for that reason that Steven Anderson also supports 501c3 corporate church buildings. Many readers may not know that because Anderson's church building is not 501c3 incorporated, but he does think 501c3 church buildings are good and right with Christ.
(See Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html])

As I've already said, Anderson is just like every other mainstream preacher out there, and teaches the same thing they teach when they try to justify 501c3. They go back to when Jesus said "render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's," and teach false doctrine in their ignorance. If any readers have not yet studied our teaching on 501c3, I would highly recommend stopping here to go over that teaching before continuing because you will get a lot of details that Steven Anderson won't talk about.
(Read "501c3: The Devil's Church" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

Anderson starts out quoting Matthew 17:

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented [stopped] him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.
-Matthew 17:24-27

Anderson then says:
"And I think that this passage right here in Matthew 17 is Jesus Christ's most clear teaching on taxes, and about paying taxes.... the words 'tribue', 'custom', these are all just words for taxes."
-Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html]

Wrong. The problem is that tribute is not taxation. There was never any question that was raised about paying taxes (i.e. custom), but rather, the question was about tribute, and I go over that subject in much more detail in our teaching "Should Christians Submit to Governing Authority?." (That article is about the Christian's submission to governing authority, except when they step over the line of commandments Christ has given His church.)

Tribute was money that was annually gifted to Rome by all the surrounding countries (except those with an allied exception), and that gift was to recognize Rome's authority over the lands they had conquered, including Israel. If they did not pay Rome tribute, it would be taken as an insult to their authority, and upon further investigation, it could lead to war. That's why the Lord Jesus Christ said, "lest we should offend them... give unto them [their tribute];" He didn't say, "lest we should break the law." There was no law that required any country to give tribute, but it was collected to avoid offending the Roman government, which would lead to war, and since the nation of Israel was supposed to be sanctified by God, Christ was challenged by the Pharisees as to whether or not it was lawful to pay tribute to Caesar:

Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk. And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men. Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites? Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's. When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way. -Matthew 22:15-22

This wasn't a question of taxation; this was a question of AUTHORITY. That's why later, in Romans 13, Paul wrote:

Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom [i.e. taxes] to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
-Romans 13:7

However, the church was never to be handed over to Rome. In fact, that's how the Roman Catholic Church got started; because some people decided that they were going to hand over the things of God to Caesar, and that's exactly what's happening with the 501c3 church buildings today; leavened preachers and false convert churchgoers hand the authority of the church over to the government, which was never mandated or permitted in Scripture.

As we've already seen many times, Steven Anderson starts with a false premise, in this case he says that tribute is just taxes, which is wrong, and thus, we now know the rest of his teaching is false because he bases all of it on the idea of his false premise. He teaches in his ignorance, screams and yells at everyone, and then uses the intimidation of fear to get them to believe what he's saying is true.

Warning, incoming hypocrisy:
"Does it seem like protesting taxes was a big part of Jesus' ministry? [Does it] seem like Jesus is on a mission to fight against having to pay these unfair taxes? No, that's not what he's doing. He says, 'let's not offend them', 'let's not fight with them over this'"
-Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html]

Yet, as I pointed out at the very beginning, Steven Anderson decides to protest the border patrols. That means he acted exactly according to that which he is rebuking in this teaching. I would return that question to him: Did it seem like protesting government requests for identification was a big part of Jesus' ministry? Does it seem like Jesus is on a mission to fight against having to show his ID?

Later in his teaching, Anderson starts mocking and screaming again:
"Now you say, 'Pastor Anderson you're a coward, you're a hypocrite 'cause you don't want to go to prison.' Now listen, I am willing to go to prison for preaching the Bible... BUT I AM NOT WILLING TO GO TO PRISON FOR SOMETHING THE BIBLE DID NOT TELL ME TO DO!!"
-Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html]

But that's not true, as we saw earlier, he's also willing to go to prison so he doesn't have to show his ID. Could Anderson explain to us how refusing to show his driver's license, arguing with the police for 90 minutes, being tased, thrown in jail, and having to appear in court helped glorify the Lord Jesus Christ? (It didn't glorify Christ, but it did glorify Anderson and got him a lot of the media attention that he loves so much.) Even Paul used his Roman citizenship (ID) so he could be brought before Caesar to preach the Gospel (Acts 22:26-29), and this makes Anderson a total hypocrite, but I want Christians to remember that when someone preaches in hypocrisy, they are almost always trying to justify something in their wicked hearts.

And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.
-Luke 16:15

Anderson continues to preface his argument:
"Just as Jesus Christ was attacked by people who were trying to use taxes as a way to entangle Him, as a way to accuse Him, as a way to malign Him, and speak evil of Him, the same thing is being used today where people are trying to use this issue to attack men of God who are following Christ. Just as they attacked Christ, they will attack the followers of Christ, and they will use issues like this that are really not Biblical, spiritual issues. Jesus Christ was not a crusader on this issue... The first passage He says, I don't believe in paying these taxes but we're just going to pay it because we don't care."
-Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html]

The problem is that the 501c3 issue is NOT about paying taxes; that's what the new-age false church buildings CLAIM it's about. In fact, people file for 501c3 to AVOID paying taxes, not the other way around. The issue is handing over the authority of Christ's church to Caesar, which Christ did not permit, nor did He teach any such thing.

Anderson uses another fallacy before he even mentions 501c3, and once again, it's majority opinion:
"That's okay if you disagree with what I preach; I think the vast majority of people agree with me on this."
-Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html]

And again, I bring up his teaching on Halloween, that we quoted earlier, in which he condemns "the sin of not thinking for yourself." What he's actually saying here is, "Hey guys, most people agree with me, so you all should agree with me too," and since we already heard him rebuke that type of argument in a previous teaching, that means Anderson knows full-well he's deceiving people, and that's what's really sickening about all this.

"There's a lot of deception out there on this issue, and so I want to clear it up. And that is this issue where people are saying 'Hey, 501c3 church[es] are of the devil.'"
-Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html]

I released our article on 501c3 in 2012, which was uniquely called "501c3: The Devil's Church." There wasn't anything out there that was called that at the time; I know because I remember looking around for it when I first made the title. Likely, he's referring to our article on the matter, because some of his listeners probably sent our material to him, but he hides and never gives any reference to it so people can go check it out and get both sides; whereas I would rather be open with everyone and give you references so you can go look these things up, listen to both sides, and verify if what I'm telling you is true.

What's interesting is that, prior to this point in his teaching, he told everyone what I typically tell them:

He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.
-Proverbs 18:13

Yet, Anderson doesn't reference back where he's getting any of this information from, so it's a matter where Anderson thinks that Proverbs 18 only applies to his teachings. He thinks his audience shouldn't go find out the truth for themselves, but rather, he's happy if they go no further than his teachings.

Anderson goes on to make the claim that the politics of our country don't matter when it comes to the Lord Jesus Christ and the preaching of the Gospel. I agree with that statement, but his blindness is over what he says next:
"The politics of this country don't matter when our nation is filled with 33-40% of couples, one of them commits adultery... 75% of marriage, 50-75% depending on the study you look at, are ending in divorce. The schools are filled with homos and homo propaganda. Okay? One third of women have had an abortion in America. And you're worried about whether or not [I talk about 501c3]?"
-Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html]

The problem is that Steven Anderson views 501c3 in the same way that most people who are AGAINST 501c3 view it; both parties are in error. Yes, you read that correctly, and I will repeat it: Most of the people who write me in favor of my position on 501c3 are in error on the subject, and even when I try to explain it to them, they almost always refuse to listen.

They (alongside Steven Anderson) see 501c3 as the source of the problem, when 501c3 is only a symptom of the underlying problem because it's not that people become leavened, wicked, and evil because they got a 501c3 corporate contract, but rather, they seek out 501c3 incorporation BECAUSE they are already leavened, wicked, and evil in their hearts. (i.e. They need to come to repentance; grief and godly sorrow of wrongdoing.) They don't seek out the worldly doctrines of men because they got a 501c3 contract, but rather, they got a 501c3 contract because they already laid a foundation of the worldly doctrine of men in their hearts. In his teaching, Anderson gets angry and starts yelling because he believes that there are 501c3 church buildings and pastors that he thinks are good, King James Bible believing churches, but with Anderson so blind in his own wickedness, without repentance, we can now understand why he can't see how wicked they are in what they do and teach because he can't see his own first.

Please don't misunderstand, I'm not saying that every preacher and church building is not of Christ because they got a 501c3 contract; I've spoken with a rare few who have sought to get out of it because they want to be right with the Lord Jesus Christ. They hate the thought of handing the authority of the church to governing authorities who are not born again as children of God. However, because the Bible never teaches us to hand over Christ's church to someone else, there are only three reasons pastors and churchgoers seek out a 501c3 contract: Money, respect, and/or tradition.

Anderson whines about Christians leaving church buildings over the issue of 501c3, but because he doesn't see any evil in this, he never uses the word 'sanctify'. Christians are sanctifying themselves from these church buildings that are doing and teaching wickedness, and they are not forced to sanctify themselves because of a 501c3 contract, but rather, they're forced to sanctify themselves because the churchgoers and preachers in that 501c3 church building will not hear the truth of the Word of God on many foundational matters, just as Steven Anderson won't listen. (In short, Christians have to leave because churchgoers have turned their ears away from the truth.)

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
-2 Timothy 4:3-4

Later in his talk, Anderson goes on to yell and scream that he would rather be out studying the Bible and soul-winning than discussing "political matters," which sure sounds good to the listening audience that are deceived under his influence, because Anderson always tries to preach his own perceived "holiness" to people while preaching false gospel; that being said, I actually agree under a Biblical context, that I would rather be studying the Bible or writing on Biblical matters than have to address 501c3. Anderson tries to make his cult believe that the reason we all have to discuss 501c3 is because of people like me, but the reason we have to discuss it is for two reasons: 1) Because willingly ignorant preachers keep running out to get 501c3 contracts, and 2) because wicked preachers like Steven Anderson keep deceiving people about it.

I hate the fact that I have to spend so much time unbrainwashing people from this garbage. However, this is NOT a "political" matter; this is a PHILOSOPHICAL matter, and a philosophy, in simple terms, is a mindset, or a way of thinking:

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments [first teachings] of the world, and not after Christ. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
-Colossians 2:8-10

Anderson attempts to compare the matter of giving Christ's church over to unbelievers the same as arguing vain political matters:
"You're worried about whether or not Mitt Romney or Obama gets elected? You're insane. Do you think that's going to matter? You think it's going to make a difference whether the Satan-worshiping Mormon gets elected or whether the Satan-worshiping Muslim, or charismatic, or whatever he is gets elected? Who cares? That's what you want me to get involved in. That's what you want our church to all be about, politics, and election, and campaigning."
-Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html]

The matter of churchgoers and preachers handing that which belongs to God over to an unbelieving government organization has nothing to do with elections and campaigning. This is how Anderson deceives people; he's mixing up two completely different topics and calling them the same thing, or some people refer to it as "comparing apples to oranges" and calling them the same. It's a logical fallacy known as a "faulty comparison," and I should make mention that the Word of God never uses all these logical fallacies that Anderson uses.

If anyone has made this a political matter, then it's the people like Steven Anderson who are defending 501c3 contracts, alongside all his buddies who go out seeking them. I would rather be teaching on a Biblical topic than having to cover all this information on a wolf like Anderson, but because he deceives well-meaning Christians into following his cult, I believe that I have a duty to warn my brethren, just as Paul warned us of such wicked men (2Ti 4:14-15), and unlike Anderson, who is not part of Christ's church, who has no understanding, at least we Christians love one another enough to teach the truth and warn each other of danger. In addition to that, because Anderson deceives people with false doctrine, then it becomes a philosophical and doctrinal problem, and so we end up covering Biblical topics to show Anderson's wolf-like qualities.

Keeping all that in mind, it is interesting that Anderson defends 501c3 while the church building he runs is not 501c3, and some of you may be questioning why that is. Do you remember at the beginning of this article, I pointed out that Anderson has had a lot of complaints about his security company building also being the location of his church building, but he's never been prosecuted over the matter? The reason Anderson has never been prosecuted for holding his church in the place of his business is because he never got a 501c3 contract, otherwise he would be forced to relocate his church or his business, and part of me suspects he knows that; which also means that even though he attempts to argue that the government does not rule over the church in a 501c3 contract, the fact that he has not yet gone out to get 501c3 incorporated demonstrates that he knows the truth and stays away from it.

Going back to Romans 1 again, this is the type of people God describes, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; meaning that they deceive others to put on a show, while hiding the truth. Anderson expects all of you to accept 501c3, but he won't put his money where his mouth is, meaning that he says one thing, but does another.

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
-Romans 1:18

All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
-Matthew 23:3

Steven Anderson gets up in front of his church building and acts like he has solved the issue of 501c3, and will now reveal the truth to everyone, by holding up a piece of paper with 2 short paragraphs on it that he printed out from the IRS website. The paper was a print out of the paragraph of IRS Title 26, Subtitle A, Chapter 1, Subchapter F, Part I, of 501, Part C, Section 3, for religious, charitable, and educational organizations. Of course, this is all intended to make Anderson look really smart, like he really did his research, but a basic Google search can pull up this information, which, as I'm starting to see, is how Anderson does most of his research. (i.e. Anderson just takes the first thing he finds on Google and runs with it.)
(See Legal Information Institute, "26 U.S. Code § 501 - Exemption from tax on corporations, certain trusts, etc," Cornell Law School, retrieved Mar 8, 2018, [law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/501])

He holds up that piece of paper as if he has really done his research, but the problem is that the contract that is signed holds all the information, not the IRS's general description, but he knows he can't get a hold of that contract because it's very difficult; Anderson instead supplements the general description and then childishly concludes he has understanding of the matter. For example, a job listing for the IRS can describe a career as "fun and exciting" with "many opportunities," but once you get to the interview, and look over the job contract, you find out you're basically doing low-level, boring clerical work. Likewise to 501c3, it is not the IRS's description of it, but the contract itself, which describes what churchgoers have to give up to get money and prestige benefits, and in our teaching on 501c3, I quote former and current IRS agents who point out numerous church building violations of that contract. (As it currently stands, the IRS does not yet have enough manpower to enforce the contract.)
(Read "501c3: The Devil's Church" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

For example, Anderson says:
"What statute 501c3 is saying is that if an organization is going to claim whether it's a corporation, or not, or whatever, if an organization is going to claim to be a religious organization. Like of an organization is going to say, 'We're a church, we're a religious organization,' he say anything that is set up whether it's a corporation, community chest, or just fund, just any bank account that's supposedly, 'This is a church bank account, it's for religious purposes,' that basically all of that money that comes in to the church offering plate, according to this law has to be used for religious, or educational, or charitable purposes. Does everybody understand that?"
-Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html]

First of all, notice that he says "according to this law," in which he implies that IRS statute 501 applies to everyone, but it doesn't. It ONLY applies to those who have signed a 501c3 contract, meaning that if your church does not have a 501c3 contract, and you did not follow the rules listed out in IRS statutes, you cannot be arrested or fined for violating 501c3 because you never made a contract that put your church under their jurisdiction.

Also, IRS agents have come forward and warned 501c3 organizations that they cannot overstep their bounds concerning other religious beliefs. What Steven Anderson doesn't understand is that, for example, Satanist temples also have 501c3 status, and they support abortion; thus, if your church fights against abortion (for example), it means you conflict with other 501c3 religious beliefs (i.e. you fight against abortion while they fight for it), and so you are in violation of your contract. (In fact, Satanic churches are being given "preferential treatment" to get fast-tracked for 501c3 non-profit approval.)
(See Rodney Pelletier, "IRS Fast-Tracked Satanists For Non-Profit Status," Church Militant, Mar 20, 2017, retrieved Mar 8, 2018, [churchmilitant.com/news/article/irs-fast-tracked-satanists-for-non-profit-status]; For an example of a Non-profit Church of Satan, see Lilith Grotto Church Inc Of The Church Of Satan, located at P.O. Box 666 in Times Square Station, New York, Tax Exempt World, EIN: 22-2157331, retrieved Mar 13, 2018, [taxexemptworld.com/organization.asp?tn=148357]; See "Abortion: Paganism, Satanism, Sacrifices, and Witchcraft" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

I also point out in our teaching that giving your word in a contact, and not keeping that contract, is lying. Many of these so-called "good, King James Bible believing" church buildings Anderson talks about are in violation of their contracts, meaning they are found to be liars, but he insists on calling them "good" anyway.
(Read "God Does Not Justify Lies" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
-Isaiah 5:20

The layers of Anderson's deception keep piling on:
"ANDERSON: Now, I know you might just do you your taxes on 1040EZ form but try running a business and you're on all kinds of complicated crazy stuff. What I'm saying is the church is in a business. Let me just say what I've said before, the only people who think business is a bad word are communists and hippies. That's the only people who think business is a bad word. The bible calls the work of the church business. Just look at the word business in the bible. Jesus said, I must be about my father's... AUDIENCE: Business.
ANDERSON: Acts 6 says, we need deacons to handle this...
AUDIENCE: Business.
ANDERSON: Business, business but what I am trying to say is that this stuff is so complicated, and there are all kinds of pastors all across America who organized their church legally in different ways but they're all just trying to do the best that they can, and they just start trying to figure this stupid garbage out. It's just complicated. Look, if somebody just doesn't cross the T or dot the I on their taxes, you wouldn't think that person should be thrown in jail, would you?"
-Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html]

Whoa, stop. Let's slow down and look at this carefully because Anderson has just heaped huge amounts of deception onto his audience all at once.

First of all, Anderson says the church "is in a business." That's very deceptive because, although we as a church have lots of business to do, that is not the same as saying we are "a legal business," and we need to make sure we understand the words we're using:

business (n): affairs; concerns, subject of employment, serious engagement, something to be done
(See 'business', American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster, 1828, retrieved Mar 8, 2018,[webstersdictionary1828.com])

For example:

And it came to pass about this time, that Joseph went into the house to do his business; and there was none of the men of the house there within.
-Genesis 39:11

In no way does the context here claim that Joseph owned a legal business. If you go back and read the chapter, you'll find that he was a slave in his master's house, but he was doing business, meaning he was "seriously engaged in the affairs" of his master. Joseph had work to do to complete the tasks necessary, not that he went into the house to start operating and running his own business.

And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist [thought] ye not that I must be about my Father's business?
-Luke 2:49

The Lord God did not sign up a legal business in Israel, and Jesus Christ was not incorporated on the dotted line. He was doing the will of His father.

Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.
-Luke 22:42

For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
-John 6:38-39

The other example Anderson gave was from Acts 6:

Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.
-Acts 6:3

The business they were referring to was to feed the widows, which was normally the duty of the Jews, but they were not doing their job. Thus, someone else had to come in and help those women. This was not a corporate business, but rather, it was a "serious engagement in the affairs" in the city at that time.

When the IRS talks about a "business," they don't mean what the Bible means; they're speaking in the legal sense. They have a completely different set of legal definitions that have been set forth by lawyers in government:

business: (n) any activity or enterprise entered into for profit/capital
capital: (n) the basic assets of a business (particularly corporations or partnerships) or of an individual, including actual funds, equipment and property as distinguished from stock in trade, inventory, payroll, maintenance and services
(See 'business' & 'capital', Legal Dictionary, The Free Dictionary, retrieved Mar 8, 2018, [legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com]; See also Black's Law Dictionary, retrieved Mar 8, 2018, [thelawdictionary.org])

A corporate business is created for the purpose of profit, which is capital. Capital is the acquisition of property and money. This shows us clearly that when the Bible says "business," and the IRS says "business," they are talking about two very different things. Thus, if what Steven Anderson said is true, that the "business" of the 501c3 church buildings and the business of Christ are one and the same, then Anderson is claiming that Christ's business is about gaining material wealth, which is a lie.

For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. And having food and raiment let us be therewith content. But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
-1 Timothy 6:7-10

It should also be noted that a 501c3 non-profit corporation is NOT the same as a corporate business. As I pointed out in my teaching on 501c3, the 501c3 non-profit is exactly that: non-proft, and furthermore, the building becomes a government institution with the pastors and elders as state employees.

Anderson then said that the only people who think business is bad are communists and hippies. Remember, the context of his teaching is trying to justify 501c3, which means he's saying that if you warn people about the dangers and sins involved in getting 501c3 incorporated, then you are just a "communist hippie," even though Christians who listen to my teachings know that I encourage people in business ownership, my dad owned his own business when I was growing up, and my wife owns her own business. It should be no surprise that Anderson would rail on Christians in such a way; that is the mannerism of his wicked heart, as we have already seen many times.

In one of Anderson's teachings I quoted from earlier in this article, I remember very clearly him saying that he is firmly against selling stuff in the church, meaning that he's against church buildings having a table with things for sale. I would agree with that today, but the problem now is that Anderson is fusing Christ's and the IRS's definition of "business," so he's contradicting himself, being for business on one hand, but then turning around and condemning business activity within church buildings. (This all just proves that he has no idea what he's talking about.)

"Do you really think that we should just say that if you don't set it up exactly a certain way, you're demonic, you're wicked, you're of the devil? Just because pastors have different opinions about how to interpret this garbage?"
-Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html]

That's very interesting because earlier, in his Halloween teaching, Anderson clearly stated that it was a holiday of the devil, and that no church should have anything to do with it. Do you really think that we should just say that if you don't do things exactly as Anderson does them, that you're demonic, you're wicked, you're of the devil? Just because pastors have a different opinion about how to interpret this garbage? (i.e. He's a hypocrite.)

Just as Anderson refuses to connect his lust and idolatry of witchcraft to the Christmas celebration, so he also refuses to connect the love of money, respect of persons, and philosophy of men to the 501c3 church buildings. He does this for only one reason: Because there are people that he personally favors who have 501c3 contracts, just as the mentors who taught him also had 501c3 contracts, and for him to rebuke 501c3, he would also have to rebuke them, and because he's a strict traditionalist, he fears them, so he does what's convenient over what's right. (i.e. He talks big about being sanctified, but Anderson doesn't know the first thing about sanctification.)

It is not that every person that has a 501c3, or that is a part of a 501c3, is of the devil; I said it was "The Devil's Church." I'm urging Christians to set themselves apart from it. However, who is of the devil would be those who would hear, but not understand, and for the sake of their lust (i.e. money and respect of persons) and their pride (i.e. not willing to be corrected to the truth) remain in such wickedness, choosing rather to, as Anderson does, lie to people about it; then I would indeed say they are of the devil because the Bible tells us they are.

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
-John 8:44

Just as Jesus Christ could not get most of the Pharisees, Sadducees, chief priests, elders, and scribes to listen to His Word, so are we not able to get most of the pastors today to listen to His Word.

Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
-Matthew 13:13-15

Steven Anderson is arguing that it's acceptable for Christians to ignore God's Word when setting up the structure and habits of the church. That's absurd! What other example do we have? If it's not from the Word of God, then whose word do these traditions come from? (I'll leave that to readers as food for thought.)

At this point, I really wanted to end this teaching on Anderson because I think enough has been said, but there's so much more that Anderson deceives people about that I wanted to quote. For example:
"If $200,000 comes in to Faithful Word Baptist Church, that $200,000 has to be spent only on things that are religious, educational, and charitable... I am saying, here's what they're saying, we can't take the money that comes in in the offering plate and just say, 'Here you go, brother fair child. Here's a 100 bucks out of the offering plate.' We can't just give him money."
-Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html]

In context, he's talking about the rules the IRS has set up for 501c3 church buildings, and first of all, Anderson doesn't have a 501c3 contract, so he doesn't have to abide by that rule, but by him saying this, he's helped prove my point. This is why I've seen a number of people in church buildings, who desperately need some financial help, who, when they ask the church for assistance, get ignored or turned away; the 501c3 contract is preventing charitable works.

"When could we give people money? Here's the thing, we could pay people for the work that they do, as long as the work they do is religious, educational, or charitable."
-Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html]

There are multiple instances of charitable giving of money that takes place in the New Testament, but under a 501c3 contract, Anderson is saying you can't give them any help. In order to "give a gift," you have to first have someone employed under the corporate church, which, again, is absurd. Not only does Anderson teach that you are required to come in and pay money to his organization (i.e. via unbiblical tithe payments), but that if you're in need, he can't help you unless you jump through a bunch of hoops and cut through rolls of red tape, and this should not be surprising because this is how most church buildings in America today operate. In addition to that, it teaches a very poor example; whereas the church is supposed to teach that Christ's grace is a free gift, in order to gain the church's grace, you have to be hired on and work for it.

"I can preach anything in the Bible and still be in compliance with this. There's nothing that this book tells me to preach that I can't do according to this [paragraph on 501c3] in my hand."
-Steven L. Anderson, "501c3 Churches," Steven Anderson's Official Youtube Channel, July 13, 2014, retrieved Mar 6, 2018, [https://youtu.be/aFqSUQNCx2A]; See also the transcript, [faithfulwordbaptist.org/transcript_501c3_churches.html]

Alright Steven Anderson, if that's the case, then go sign up for a 501c3 contract. It's time to put up or shut up. Go get that 501c3 contract, and show the world what happens when you do; I would love to see that. Until Anderson signs up for 501c3 and we let some time pass to see what happens, I'm going to state clearly that he's nothing more than a liar and a coward.

Anderson continues to give numerous comparisons, where he uses his own "Faithful Word" Baptist Church as the example to say, "See, we're free to say and do what we want," when he doesn't have a 501c3 contract. Until he gets one, everything he says is a waste of breath, or in Biblical terms, vanity.

Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Be not ye therefore partakers with them. For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light:
-Ephesians 5:6-8

Steven Anderson is a master of deception and manipulation, and he certainly does take after his mentors; namely Jack Hyles. Hyles was the same way, manipulating everyone around him, teaching false doctrines left and right, but he was wicked in his heart. So too is Steven Anderson wicked in his heart, which is why he teaches all these false doctrines.

(For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;) Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light. Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.
-Ephesians 5:9-14

The Bible teaches us to walk circumspectly, meaning that we should beware of danger on all sides, and that we should redeem the time, meaning to take the best advantage of the time we have, not to squander it by hearing the preaching of fools and wicked men:

See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.
-Ephesians 5:15-16

Many Christians I've known have been deceived by Steven Anderson because they listened to one of his teachings in passing, agreed with what they heard, and then suspected that he might just be off-track a little bit, but still born again in Christ. As I already demonstrated, the Bible tells us what the fruit of the Spirit is in Galatians 5, and Steven Anderson does not have that fruit.

Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
-Matthew 7:20

But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.
-Matthew 15:18

The Unreprovable Steven Anderson As we have seen, I have marked Steven Anderson as a wolf in sheep's clothing, a false preacher, for his railing, lies, manipulation, hatefulness, and other such works of the flesh. Anderson has also accused others of being wolves in sheep's clothing, but let's see on what basis he does this. A man named Victory Tey, who was formerly a part of Anderson's cult, was accused by Steven Anderson in a public video of teaching false doctrine. In a series of emails with Anderson, Tey pointed out that Anderson had falsely accused him, misunderstanding what he had taught, and Anderson ended up deleting his video in which he accused Tey of false doctrine. Tey then emailed Anderson again, in a very kind and calm manner, and requested that Anderson make a public video retracting his accusation and apologizing for his false accusation. As soon as I saw Tey's request to Anderson, I knew it was never going to happen because Anderson can't be corrected. Anderson responded to him by saying, "I believe there is a good chance that you are an unsaved wolf in sheep's clothing," and that is exactly the kind of response I expected to see from Anderson. (See Victory Tey, "Response to Pastor Steven Anderson (Part 1) - False Accusation," The Church in Punchbowl, Aug 1, 2017, retrieved Mar 27, 2018, [https://youtu.be/H6OsfTpsNbk]; It's interesting to note that when Tey got married, Anderson gave him a book on marriage, telling him, "Here's what I believe on marriage," and that book was authored by Jack Hyles. Anderson also tried to insist that Tey go through all the typical church building traditions of a marriage ceremony, which mostly comes from paganism and witchcraft - Read "Marriage: What Christians Should Know" here at creationliberty.com for more details.) Don't misunderstand; I am not supporting Victor Tey because he teaches the same false doctrine on repentance as Steven Anderson, but I'm not accusing him of being a wolf because I don't know his position on certain doctrines. I'm simply using this as an example to demonstrate that Steven Anderson despises correction. Anderson absolutely hates the thought that he could be wrong about anything, and he controls people through fear and intimidation. Correction is grievous unto him that forsaketh the way: and he that hateth reproof shall die. -Proverbs 15:10 Whereas I have given a long list of Biblical offenses showing evidence that Anderson is a wolf, pointing out his specific contraditions (i.e. lies) and his lack of the fruit of the Spirit, Anderson's method of "discerning" a wolf is whether or not that person agrees with Steven Anderson; most especially if he/she dares to request Anderson to correct himself. Anderson acts exactly as most pastors I've ever seen, namely, if there is something they said or taught in error, they sweep it under the rug and hope no one will notice, rather than coming to repentance (i.e. grief and sorrow of wrongdoing), which is how a born again Christian should operate.

Two weeks before I first published this article on Steven Anderson, Billy Graham died, and it was a big media circus. I didn't even find out until a couple days afterward because my wife and I don't subscribe to mainstream media, but until I found out, I couldn't understand why I was all the sudden getting so much hate mail over my expose on Billy Graham.
(Read "Wolves in Costume: Billy Graham" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

The Billy Graham fans (i.e. Grahamites) told me how evil and wicked I was for daring to question him, and railed on me continually because I pointed out the fact that he ended up in hell. The Grahamites defense is that Billy, in some of his teachings, taught that salvation was only by the blood of Jesus Christ, and that there was no saving grace through any other name, and for some people, that's all they need to hear.

The Lord Jesus Christ clearly warned His students about the doctrine of such men:

And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread. Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
-Matthew 16:5-6

They forgot to take bread on their journey, and they tried to figure out why Jesus told them to beware of the Pharisee's bread. He then explained to them how foolish it was to question the bread since He had just fed 5,000 people from a few pieces of food, and it was then that they realized He wasn't talking about bread; that leaven had a metaphorical meaning:

Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
-Matthew 16:12

The problem is that Billy Graham also believed that all men, including Atheists, Muslims, Hindus, and other such unbelievers, who did not believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, were all going to heaven. This is clearly a contradiction; you can't say that only those who believe on the name of Christ will enter heaven, but then also everyone who doesn't believe on the name of Christ will enter heaven at the same time. A contradiction is a lie, and when someone who claims to be of Christ contradicts themselves, and they are not repentant of that contradiction, then that gives us evidence that they are not of Christ because they have not been given a love of the truth by the Spirit of God.

And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
-2 Thessalonians 2:10

Likewise, the Andersonites hear Steven preach that it is only on the name of Jesus that one must believe, or he cannot be saved, but I would like to point out that many preachers have taught that and still ended up in hell. Many people have claimed to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, but they are turned away from heaven:

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
-Matthew 7:21-23

Don't misunderstand, I do not believe or teach that works will earn us a ticket to heaven, but I am saying that Jesus Christ taught that there are MANY people who called Jesus Christ "Lord," which means they believe on His name, who will be rejected from entering heaven. Those people are not rejected from heaven because they didn't do enough work to get in, but rather, they claimed to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, but in their hearts, they rejected Him, and because of that, He never knew them.

Steven Anderson is no different than Billy Graham; those two men teach two different false doctrines in two different ways, but they are both the same. Neither man has been brought to grief and godly sorrow of wrongdoing (i.e. repentance) before the God the Father, neither man has been prepared in his heart to believe on Jesus Christ, and it's because they have not been brought to that child-like humility, that they cannot enter the Kingdom of God.

Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
-Mark 10:15

The Lord Jesus Christ is explaining the humility of a child, in which they come with all subjection, to gain knowledge and understanding, to please their father, and grieve if they have not pleased him. Likewise, Christians who have been born again in Christ understand this very thoroughly; we understand that God's Kingdom is only inherited by those who are poor in spirit.

Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
-Matthew 5:3

Steven Anderson is a man who loves to be in the spotlight, especially in the media, and he got his name popularized through his border patrol arrest, which he later hypocritically taught that he was not willing to go to jail over. Anderson does not have the fruits of the Spirit of God, he does not show any sign of being given repentance by the Lord God, he shows every sign of being lifted up by respecters of persons in his pride, while teaching blatant contradictions (i.e. lies), and therefore, he is not showing any sign that he actually believes on the Lord Jesus Christ that is spoken of in Scripture.

Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.
-Matthew 11:29-30

Some Andersonites may argue and claim that Steven Anderson works really hard, all day, every day, for the Gospel's sake. Again, I would respond: So did Billy Graham, but he didn't end up in heaven because he did not have the grief and godly sorrow of repentance and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. I would also say that Adolf Hitler was one of the hardest working men I've ever read about in history, but that didn't make him right.

Some Andersonites may argue that he goes door to door soul-winning. I would respond: Jehovah's Witnesses say the same thing, but they won't end up in heaven unless they repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and all their so-called "soul-winning" is in vain because they teach that which contradicts Christ's Gospel in His Word.
(Read "Corruptions of Christianity: Jehovah's Witness" here at creationliberty.com for more details.)

Some Andersonites may argue that he's a good Christian family man. I would respond: Followers of Jack Hyles said the same thing about him, but he was inwardly a sexual deviant that perverted the Word of God.

I've heard all these types of arguments from Andersonites in the past, and what they don't realize is that they're arguing for his works, when I just explained that Jesus said to beware of their doctrine. They argue in favor of Anderson being morally upright, but I would remind Christians that the Pharisees were also considered to be the morally upright in Jewish society, and yet, Jesus told them:

For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
-Matthew 5:20

Steven Anderson may be a more righteous man than I am, just as the Pharisees were considered more righteous than everyone else. I wouldn't argue against that, but my righteousness does not come from myself; rather, it is Christ's righteousness that covers my sin.

Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
-Romans 3:24-26

The problem with Steven Anderson is the same problem as every other person I cover in our "Wolves in Costume" series; that he believes in another god he calls "jesus." It's a god of his feelings, his opinions; a god of his traditions, his personal preferences. Anderson is not humbling himself to the Christian God of the Bible, all the while he stands and mocks those who are humbled and born again in Christ, yelling and screaming the hate and pride of his heart from his self-constructed pulpit.

Worst of all is that Steven Anderson deceives many well-meaning Christians into thinking that he's of Christ, being led astray into his cult. My prayer is that those in Anderson's church building, or those who follow his teachings online, would read this and understand it, that they would be sanctified from such wicked men who seek to lead them into false doctrine and wicked traditions, and I would pray that all those who have been led into his cult, believing that they just "accepted Jesus" and falsely believe they are getting into heaven without the humility and grief of repentance, would come to know the truth, love the truth, and be saved by the Lord Jesus Christ.

I hated doing this teaching because listening to Steven Anderson made me sick, and on occasion, I had to stop working because I couldn't stand listening to one more filthy, vile, manipulative word come out of his mouth. I am sad by all the people that have fallen prey to his trap. If just one person would read and be saved or sanctified in Christ through this teaching, then all of this would have been worth it, but most importantly of all, if Steven Anderson, his wife, or his family could be saved through this teaching, I would pray that the Lord Jesus Christ would bring them to repentance and understanding in His truth, save them from hell and God's wrath, and that they would give glory to Christ for His saving grace.

Even though Anderson has prayed for many to die and go to hell, I would not pray that for him. I want him and his family to be saved and sanctified because while they are still among the living, there is hope.

But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.
-Ephesians 2:4-9

Again, it is not the man like Anderson, who stands up, shouts, kicks, and hits things while screaming that he is not like the homosexuals, trusting in his own perceived righteousness, that he is justified before God, but it is the quiet man in the back, who, in his grief and sorrow of repentance, cannot even lift his head, who calls on the mercy of God, who is justified:

And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
-Luke 18:9-14

I just ask that Christians remember that God does not give his grace to the proud of heart:

But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.
-James 4:6

Though Anderson is vicious and warmongering, I would plead with Christians and urge them not to return any anger or railing against him, nor the cultists who follow him, but rather, return unto him blessing and pray that his soul would be saved before the day of judgment.

Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing. For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile [manipulation and deceit]: Let him eschew [avoid and shun] evil, and do good; let him seek peace, and ensue it. For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil.
-1 Peter 3:9-12

Grace be with you, mercy, and peace, from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love.
-2 John 1:3

🔍