Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): Vocal.Media

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2026/02

Rev. Dr. Louise Goben is President of the North Hollywood Interfaith Food Pantry and has volunteered with the pantry almost since its inception. With her family, she spent decades transporting food from Temple Beth Hillel to distribution at First Christian Church, strengthening a practical Jewish–Christian partnership against hunger in the San Fernando Valley. Ordained in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), she is retired from active congregational ministry but still preaches and teaches Bible when invited. She also teaches World Religion and History of Religion through the Encore Program at Los Angeles Pierce College. Her work centers on dignity.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen talks with Rev. Dr. Louise Goben on interfaith as cooperation rooted in the Golden Rule and shared humanity, not conversion. She recounts how Jewish and Christian congregations formed the Pantry in 1983 during the Reagan-era recession, motivated by compassion and an ambitious mission to eliminate hunger in the San Fernando Valley. Today, food supply is abundant, but inflation drives need—especially among seniors and families living in multigenerational homes. Key bottlenecks include limited space and the logistics of warehousing at Temple Beth Hillel while distributing at First Christian Church, sustained by volunteers and dignity-centered service.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What does Interfaith mean in practice?

Rev. Dr. Louise Goben: Every religious and philosophical tradition of the world embraces a concept of the Golden Rule. “Do to others as you would have them do to you.” Interfaith conversation means that we seek to engage in conversation and partnerships with one another, not to convert or to gain one-upmanship, but to understand the common ground on which we all stand – our shared humanity. We posses the ability to rise above conflicts that often divide us. It is imperative that we do this as the very real possibility exists that we can destroy the world. This is not to sound doomsday-ish. Rather it is a hopeful approach to understanding the goodness that is inherent in all humanity. We work together for the benefit of the whole world.

Jacobsen: How did the partnership model evolve?

Goben: The particular partnership of the North Hollywood Interfaith Food Pantry (NHIFP) began when 5 women, representing several congregations (Jewish and Christian) became alarmed by the increasing numbers of people facing food insecurity as a result of the economic recession in the US during the Reagan administration. These women were motivated by their faith traditions and their compassion. They felt compelled to care about hungry people in their community. It was that simple – compassion. In 1983 the Pantry was created with the goal of “…eliminating hunger in the San Fernando Valley.” It was an optimistic goal, but it is still part of our Mission. We believe that no one should go hungry; there is ample food available for all people.

Jacobsen: Which needs are rising fastest right now, e.g.,food quantity, families, unhoused clients, etc.?

Goben: Today we are sharing more food with our neighbors than we were during the recent pandemic. During the COVID crisis, there was a panic over resourcing enough food as everything came to a sudden, grinding halt. That is not the issue today. Food is available in abundance! However, prices are much higher due to inflation. Prices are higher for everything, including gasoline, rent, insurance, and utilities. And salaries are not rising on par with the cost of living. At the Pantry we are noticing an increase in the number of seniors seeking food assistance, as well as families. In many households we find that there are multiple generations living in a single home, and in some cases more than one family that shares the same residence. While we have a percentage of folks that are unhoused coming to us for assistance, it is the by far the smallest segment of our clientele.

Jacobsen: What are the hardest operational bottlenecks?

Goben: One of our biggest challenges is space. A little over three years ago we moved from a distribution space of about 400 sq. feet to a larger facility that is approx. 1900 sq. feet. We have outgrown it already. And this is just our distribution space. For the 43 years we have been in operation, the Pantry has had two locations for the work we do. The warehousing is done in the basement of the education building at Temple Beth Hillel, while distribution occurs on the property of First Christian Church. It requires much coordination and effort to make sure that there are sufficient volunteers to move food back and forth between the facilities. Both of these properties are located in areas that are fairly residential and there are nearby schools, so we try very hard to be aware of the impact of literally hundreds of vehicles that line up to receive assistance. We are very grateful to have an abundance of volunteer help, and the willingness of many local schools that provide us with student contributions as well.

Jacobsen: How do you balance compassion with fairness?

Goben: Interesting question that I’m not quite sure how to respond to. I don’t really see an unfairness about what we try to accomplish. We serve all people that come to us equally and we have never turned anyone away because we have run out of food. If there are individuals that are unruly or appear threatening, we will serve them and get them on their way quickly. We have security on hand to keep everyone safe. And those who volunteer with us are asked to participate in a non-discrimination agreement. I think it is also important to note that at our point of distribution we have volunteers that speak several languages. The East San Fernando Valley has a variety of ethnic constituencies. We have volunteers that speak Farsi, Armenian, Russian, Ukrainian, and of course Spanish. We have had requests for other languages and that is when apps on our cell phones come in handy!

Jacobsen: What metrics track impact beyond meals served?

Goben: For this we largely rely on the stories we hear from our clients. People tell us about their health concerns, loss of jobs, housing concerns, etc. And people also share with us when they find a new job, or how they depend on knowing food is available to them. Food is what we do. We don’t provide clothing or medical assistance, etc.so there are no metrics on housing or some of these other needs.

Jacobsen: As a minister and religion educator, how do you speak about hunger?

Goben: When I am speaking to gatherings of religious folks, the most obvious place to start is with scripture. The Bible is filled with both admonitions and invitations to care for “the least among you.” And compassion is a hallmark of how God blesses and cares for us. That said, not all groups I address are religious folks. I was invited to speak at a meeting of the LA County Board of Supervisors last year. In that context I needed to be aware that this was a civic gathering, and emphasized that we are all engaged in serving our communities in a variety of settings. And my answer to the following question will also reflect on how I speak about hunger.

Jacobsen: What is one policy change to most reduce the pantry’s caseload?

Goben: It is difficult to choose one! In the short term, I believe it is important that the administration reduce the barriers that prevent people from receiving SNAP benefits. There is SO MUCH food that is being produced in our world. And a significant amount of that food is thrown out. The US government estimates that as much as 40% of food that is produced in the US is wasted. That’s mind boggling to me. There is no reason anyone should not have enough to eat. Hunger is a man-made issue. Don’t get me started…

Jacobsen: Thank you very much for the opportunity and your time, Louise.

Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): Vocal.Media

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2026/02

Rabbi Sarah Hronsky is Senior Rabbi of Temple Beth Hillel, serving since July 2003 after ordination at Hebrew Union College–Jewish Institute of Religion in Los Angeles. She holds master’s degrees in Hebrew Letters and Jewish Communal Service and is a Fellow of the Shalom Hartman Institute’s Rabbinic Leadership Initiative. She is the President of the Los Angeles Council of Religious Leaders and Immediate Past President of the Board of Rabbis of Southern California. Honored with the 2023 Los Angeles Pioneer Women Award, she focuses on interfaith dialogue and social justice, including homelessness, and serves on the North Hollywood Interfaith Food Pantry Board.

In this interview, Scott Douglas Jacobsen speaks with Rabbi Sarah Hronsky, Senior Rabbi of Temple Beth Hillel, about durable interfaith cooperation and service amid polarization. Hronsky says durability grows from shared moral commitments—loving the neighbor and the stranger—and from showing up repeatedly for honest dialogue. She critiques misconceptions that reduce believers to denominational caricatures. Grounding hunger and homelessness work in Torah and rabbinic tradition, she describes practical adaptations: discreet deliveries, expanded pantry hours, multi-faith distribution partnerships, and joint training and action. Hartman learning, she adds, strengthened pluralism and provided a supportive cohort. For navigating antisemitism, fear, and stress with compassion.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What makes interfaith cooperation durable?

Rabbi Sarah Hronsky: While challenges are easily identifiable, so is the common base that faith leaders share. We hold tightly to binding morality, based on creating a just world. This often means lifting shared values such as loving one’s neighbor, caring for the widow, the stranger, the orphan—the most vulnerable. Centering oneself in space of wholeness and completeness in order to bring this to the larger community around. While issues may pull us apart, and the tensions in political divides and polarization are very real, we can usually unite and bridge together over preservation and well-being of humanity.

Jacobsen: What are common misunderstandings faith communities have about each other?

Hronsky: Faith communities, like the rest of the population, can get caught up in assuming that because you are x you must fully believe y. All too often it is assumed that the overarching denomination sets the beliefs of all the individuals and this is simply untrue. For example, because one identifies as Jewish, they must hate Palestinians. Because you are white and Christian, you must believe in all that White Christian Nationalists believe including xenophobia and the domination of men over women. Because you are Catholic, you must be pro-life and anti-choice. One’s faith is a significant part of their identity, but no single person is all one direction or another. Our faith may drive or provide the foundation for our choices, but it does not dictate all. There is also the divide created between those who identify with faith and those who do not. Assuming one is better than the other, or one is more zealous, misconstrues matters.

Jacobsen: How do you connect Jewish teaching and tradition to work on hunger and homelessness?

Hronsky: Thirty-six times (the Talmud states perhaps thirty-seven times) we are commanded to care for the widow, the orphan, and the stranger. These categories indicate the most vulnerable, the most marginalized in society—the ones for whom access to food and shelter would be most limited. We are also taught in the Holiness Code in Leviticus to “love our neighbor as we would wish to be loved ourselves,” and a few verses later to “love the stranger” similarly (Leviticus 19). This is not about emotional love; rather, love is demonstrated by actions of care. Food, shelter, and access to medical care are precisely these kinds of responsibilities and endeavors.

For the neighbor and the stranger alike, we are commanded to provide for their needs—whether they are individuals I know, individuals from the same community, or strangers geographically, ethnically, religiously, etc. Each person, no matter their background, is deserving to be cared for equally, in the same manner that I would wish to be cared for.

Our sages taught that when establishing a Jewish community we are obligated to create a kuppah—a charity fund that it is mandatory to give to each week, with several individuals overseeing its distribution to those in need (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 17b; Mishneh Torah 9:13). Thus, while a house of study, a house of worship, and a place for burial are essential components of establishing a Jewish community, right alongside these core elements exists a command to care for all in the community. Providing food and advocating for the unhoused is exactly what my faith demands of me.

A further example comes from Deuteronomy 24:19–21:

“When you reap the harvest in your field and overlook a sheaf in the field, do not turn back to get it; it shall go to the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow—in order that your God may bless you in all your undertakings. When you beat down the fruit of your olive trees, do not go over them again; that shall go to the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow. When you gather the grapes of your vineyard, do not pick it over again; that shall go to the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow.”

While there are 613 commandments for the Jewish people, caring for others—shared humanity, and knowing that each human being was created in the image of God—compels me to live the value of providing for the most vulnerable as best I can. The world can be hard, and the tasks to repair it overwhelming. By supporting and working in the food pantry, I can take one small action to live my faith and my values, and to bring about a spark of hope and light.

In Pirkei Avot we read: “Rabbi Tarfon said: It is not your duty to finish the work, but neither are you at liberty to neglect it.” I will not be able to end hunger or homelessness, but I also cannot ignore it.

Jacobsen: As President of the Board of Rabbis of Southern California, what trends are you seeing in community needs?

Hronsky: This is a little tricky for me to answer. The trends I see around increasing hunger and the growing needs of the greater community are not necessarily related to the work I have done, or continue to do, with the Board of Rabbis.

I have had many conversations with interfaith leaders about the expanding needs at our food pantries, particularly for people who fear going to work or fear ICE raids. Our work has changed dramatically. Last week, during a Zoom meeting with the Los Angeles Council of Religious Leaders, we each identified where need has increased and how we have adapted to meet it. For example, some pantries have shifted to food delivery rather than in-person distribution. In one case, a truck drops food at a private neighborhood location, and an individual quietly distributes it to those who would typically come to the pantry.

Another religious group has significantly increased its food supply—by thousands of pounds—which is now delivered to distribution partners in the downtown area. Yet another has linked a frozen-meal service within the Jewish community to a variety of service partners, many from multiple faiths, for broader distribution. Another group identified a new resource and asked that its link be shared more widely: a program that pays street vendors, who are afraid to be out on the streets, to prepare food safely at home, which is then provided to the unhoused through drop-in centers.

Still another faith partner shared that they extended their food-pantry hours, offering only a few small distribution slots at a time so that no recipient is left standing in a line and vulnerable to ICE activity. On and on, adaptations and ideas have been shared and then adopted. This is partnership—working together to respond to increasing needs.

Jacobsen: How do you keep interfaith spaces safe and honest?

Hronsky: I might need clarity on the question, as I am not certain I am able to answer in a manner that fully addresses what you are interested in. What I can say is that, during this particularly polarized time, I have found that continuing to come to the table—and continuing to offer respectful spaces for individuals to share their narratives—matters. No matter how hard it is, coming together again and again makes a difference in seeing the other as human.

In addition, literally doing the work together as much as possible makes a difference. Continuing to bring individuals of different faiths into shared spaces allows for humanizing rather than demonizing. This happens, for example, through shared community work on distribution days at the North Hollywood Interfaith Food Pantry. It is difficult to make sweeping claims about this faith or that faith when you know that the person who identifies with x faith is a good person, someone caring for others, someone you laugh with while sorting food, packing bags for those in need, or working the car line together to make sure another person does not go hungry.

The same is true when we bring groups together for training in nonviolent demonstration and then march side by side, crying out against the brutality of ICE and demanding the release of individuals from detention centers. Honest work, honest conversation, and honest gathering matter.

On Sunday, I joined the AME Church’s Founder’s Day celebration with a few other interfaith leaders, where we worshipped together and learned from Stacey Abrams. Gathering in a traditionally Black church, learning side by side, and being welcomed into their space allows me to honor their truth, grow from it, and deepen allyship.

There are many other examples. On Friday, February 6, several interfaith leaders—Catholic, Jewish, Hindu, and others—will participate in a Habitat for Humanity build. We choose to swing hammers, wield paint brushes, and help a specific family and community, all while growing in friendship and partnership. I have also been part of a group planning a significant gathering in March of religious leaders from across Los Angeles to come together in conversation, learning, and action. The title of the event is A Multi-Faith Response to the Current Constitutional Crisis.

Creating spaces to learn, to listen, and to act allows us to keep showing up for one another. Do I always feel safe in every space? No. Do I keep coming back? Yes. If I am not at the table, my voice will disappear.

Jacobsen: What did the Shalom Hartman leadership experience change for you during polarization or rising antisemitism?

Hronsky: I am currently not studying at the Shalom Hartman Institute. However, the foundation it provided taught me to be more pluralistic in my thinking and gave me a vast cohort of individuals across North America and Israel to reach out to at any time. I learned to work closely with—and to be open-minded enough to learn from—Jews whose observance differs from mine and whose understanding of what it means to be Jewish also differs from mine. The Shalom Hartman Institute continues to step into the fray of breaking down walls of polarization through several podcast series and in-person learning opportunities. It is a strong model for engaging in complex dialogue around complex issues.

Jacobsen: What have you learned about service delivery that you did not learn in seminary?

Hronsky: Seminary is a wonderful builder of foundations and learning blocks. However, most of what I have learned about being in service to others comes from my upbringing in a Jewish home that taught everyone to participate in making a better community—everyone must give back to help others. That grounding was further strengthened by being welcomed into a synagogue pulpit deeply steeped in social justice and action. For the past 23 years, I have grown and learned alongside my congregants and my movement, continually finding ways to remain in service.

Jacobsen: What would you most want secular readers to understand about faith-based interfaith work?

Hronsky: While each person’s individual efforts make a difference in healing and repairing our world, those efforts are uplifted and can become more impactful when we include others. While faith may be an important driver of the service work we do, interfaith efforts—and working alongside those who do not identify with any faith—can increase our impact and bring us closer together. Interfaith work helps us build bridges, recognize how much more alike than different we are, and engage with one another’s shared humanity.

Jacobsen: Thank you very much for the opportunity and your time, Sarah.

Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): Vocal.Media

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2026/02

Rabbi Debra Bennet is the Director of Jewish Life & Learning at the Mid Island Y JCC in Plainview, NY. Ordained in 2007, she has served as Rabbi Educator at Temple Beth Torah in Melville and Associate Rabbi at Temple Chaverim in Plainview, where she developed programs to engage teens and strengthen the Jewish community. Rabbi Bennet focuses on the ethics and practice of belonging, fostering dialogue across differences, navigating pastoral and communal challenges, and creating inclusive, connected communities in synagogues, schools, and Jewish organizations.

With Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rabbi Debra Bennet explains that Jewish community is rooted in shared peoplehood, memory, and mutual responsibility. She highlights the minyan as an ethical safeguard against isolation, especially in grief, and frames belonging as a lived practice shaped by holidays, mitzvot, and the call to repair the world. In conversation with Scott Douglas Jacobsen, she describes how JCCs can unite diverse participants through multiple entry points and universal human needs. She discusses conflict as unmet needs, accountability through dialogue, teshuvah as repair, and digital Judaism’s paradox of access and disconnection.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: In Jewish thought, what makes a group of people a community? What are the ethics of belonging in Jewish traditions?

Rabbi Debra Bennet: In Jewish thought, community is at the center of our Jewish identity. We are not merely a religion defined by individual belief, but as “People”, a group bound by a shared history, a common culture, and a collective destiny. This transition from a collection of individuals into a true community occurs largely through our commitment to mutual responsibility.

We see this most clearly in the laws of the minyan: our tradition mandates that ten Jewish adults must be present to recite the Mourner’s Kaddish. This requirement ensures that a person in the depths of grief is never left to walk that path alone. Instead, they are surrounded by a community that cares for them and holds their pain.

This sense of belonging is further cemented by our shared past, which is woven into the fabric of our holidays. Whether we are reliving the exodus from Egypt on Passover, resisting oppression on Chanukah, or standing together at the foot of Mount Sinai on Shavuot, we experience these milestones not as historical footnotes, but as personal and collective memories.

Finally, a community is defined by its shared mission. To be part of the Jewish community is to be tasked with L’taken et Ha’olam, to repair the world. Through

The performance of mitzvot, the commandments, we move beyond ourselves to take active responsibility for the well-being of others, transforming a group of people, in our greatest moments, we pray, into a unified force for good.

Jacobsen: In a JCC setting, how do you build community across differences?

Bennet: Building community across differences requires a commitment to the idea that we can be a unified community without being a uniform one. In a JCC, we see individuals from a vast array of religious backgrounds, cultural perspectives, and life experiences entering our doors every day. To build a cohesive community among them, we must meet people exactly where they are.

This involves creating diverse ‘on-ramps’ for communal life. For some, the entry point is a secular one, like a fitness class or a parenting group, while for others, it is deeply spiritual, like a class on Jewish identity or an experience of a holiday. By providing these accessible entry points, we allow people to enter this community on their own terms and feel a sense of comfort and belonging wherever they are.

In addition, the key to building across these differences is to identify the universal threads within our Jewish values. We connect people through shared human experiences, including the desire for health, the education of children, or the need for support during aging. By focusing on these connections, the Mid Island Y JCC becomes a rare ‘third space’, where people who might never meet can build meaningful relationships based on mutual care and a shared sense of place.

Jacobsen: What are common rabbinical realities in navigating beneath community conflict? How do you design accountability, firm but non-punitive?

Bennet: In navigating community conflict, it is essential to recognize that conflict often reflects unmet needs or deep-seated fears. My approach to leadership in these moments centers on the power of the conversation itself, connecting with individuals and groups through curiosity rather than judgment. By facilitating honest dialogue, we allow individuals to feel heard, which is often the first step in de-escalating tension. The goal is to learn from others and arrive at new conclusions together. This mirrors the Jewish value of Machloket l’shem shamayim (dispute for the sake of heaven), where the objective is to reach a higher truth through the respectful discussion of different perspectives.

Jacobsen: What does repair look like in practice, individually and then communally?

Bennet: Human beings are fallible. We all make mistakes, and we all act in ways we later wish we could change. Rather than faulting this as a flaw, Judaism recognizes it as an essential part of the human experience. This is why Yom Kippur is one of our most sacred days; it is a communal acknowledgement that we have gone astray and a collective commitment to do better. In practice, repair, or Teshuvah, is the process of taking responsibility for our “missed marks” and actively working to realign ourselves with our values.

Individually, repair begins with an honest inventory of our actions, followed by a sincere effort to make amends to those we have hurt. It is not just about saying ‘I’m sorry,’ but about changing behaviour so when the same situation arises again, we choose a different path. Communally, repair looks like creating a culture of forgiveness and second chances. It means building a community that is strong enough to hold the mistakes of its members without casting them out. When we practice repair together, we move from a place of judgment to a place of grace, recognizing that our shared fallibility is what binds us most closely. We believe in the human capacity for change, and our communal structures should reflect that hope.

Jacobsen: How has digital Judaism changed the texture of belonging?

Bennet: The digital age presents a unique paradox for Jewish belonging. On one hand, technology can feel isolating, with individuals often more connected to their devices than to the people sitting beside them. In this landscape, the Jewish emphasis on physical, face-to-face community becomes a vital antidote to modern loneliness.

At the same time, digital Judaism has expanded our understanding of what belonging means by removing the barriers of geography and physical ability. Today, belonging is no longer confined to a single zip code. We see this when a loved one attends a funeral across the country via Zoom because they can no longer travel, or when millions of Jews tune into Shabbat services from their living rooms. Digital tools allow our most skilled teachers to reach students far beyond their own cities, democratizing Jewish wisdom.

While we must be careful not to let digital connection replace the intimacy of shared physical space, these tools have ensured that no Jew, regardless of their health, location, or mobility, ever must be truly outside the community.

Jacobsen: From teen and intergenerational work, what practices reliably turn participation into ownership?

Bennet: Ownership happens when we make individuals part of the story, showing them that the Jewish narrative is not just something they inherit, but something they are actively helping to create. In my experience with teen and intergenerational work, this transition occurs through agency and shared experience. Whether it is a group of teens exploring the complexities of Israel through deep, honest conversation, or grandparents and grandchildren learning together how to bring the ritual of Havdalah into their modern, diverse homes, the goal is to move from passive learning to active participants in their Jewish lives. The story is not our story; it is their story as well.

Jacobsen: Thank you very much for the opportunity and your time, Debra.

Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): Vocal.Media

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2026/02

Wesley Farnsworth is an author, speaker, and communications professional whose work centers on faith, transformation, and the formation of authentic Christian community. With more than 16 years of experience in visual storytelling, branding, and digital communication—including service in military public affairs—he helps individuals, churches, and nonprofits communicate with clarity, integrity, and purpose.

Wesley speaks and consults on recovery-informed ministry, mental and emotional health, authenticity and vulnerability, church communications, nonprofit development, and creative strategy. He is the author of The Blueprint of Becoming: A Practical Guide to Faith, Failure, and Finding Your Way Forward, and hosts the podcast Unmasked with Wesley Farnsworth, where he facilitates honest conversations about identity, healing, and the freedom found in living truthfully before God and others.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen speaks with Farnsworth about building a public life around evidence rather than vibes. They trace Farnsworth’s path into critical thinking, the mentors and books that mattered, and the common cognitive traps that make smart people believe weird things. The conversation turns to human rights: why free expression, secular governance, and scientific literacy reinforce one another, and how misinformation corrodes democratic problem-solving. Farnsworth offers practical advice for readers—how to check claims, argue without dehumanizing, and stay curious when certainty feels comforting. The interview closes on cautious optimism and concrete next steps for communities, classrooms, newsrooms, and conversations alike.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What does Christian theology define as a human being’s core?

Wesley Farnsworth: At the heart of Christian theology, a human being is defined not by productivity, autonomy, or moral performance, but by being created in the image of God. This means our core identity is relational before it is functional—we are made to know God, to be known by Him, and to reflect His character in relationship with others. Sin distorts this image, but it does not erase it; redemption restores and reshapes it. From a Christian perspective, the human core is not self-constructed but received, grounded in belonging before behavior.

Jacobsen: How does this core relate to the definition of a Christian community?

Farnsworth: If humans are fundamentally relational image-bearers, then Christian community is not optional—it is essential. The church exists as a living body, not a collection of isolated individuals pursuing parallel spiritual goals. Community becomes the environment where identity is affirmed, formation happens, and faith is both professed and practiced. A Christian community reflects God’s relational nature by creating space for mutual care, accountability, confession, and growth.

Jacobsen: Can there be confusion in church community between mere attendance and active participatory communal life?

Farnsworth: Absolutely. One of the most common confusions in modern church life is equating presence with participation. Attendance can be passive, but true community requires engagement. A healthy Christian community invites people not just to observe but to contribute—to serve, to be known, and to take responsibility for one another. These should be genuine “iron sharpens iron” relationships. Without intentional pathways toward participation, churches risk cultivating consumers rather than disciples.

Jacobsen: What pastoral realities threaten a healthy community?

Farnsworth: Several realities consistently threaten communal health: unresolved conflict, unaddressed power imbalances, burnout among leaders, and a culture that rewards appearance over honesty. Additionally, when churches lack clear values around vulnerability and accountability, people either overshare without wisdom or hide entirely. Fear of conflict, decline, and discomfort often prevents the conversations that sustain long-term communal health.

Jacobsen: How should a Christian community think about boundaries?

Farnsworth: Boundaries are not unloving; they are an expression of love ordered by wisdom. Healthy boundaries protect people, clarify roles, and create safety for growth. Boundaries acknowledge human limitation and the need for trust to be built over time. A Christian community should view boundaries not as barriers to grace, but as structures that allow grace to be experienced without harm.

Jacobsen: What is a theologically defensible model of discipline that is restorative?

Farnsworth: Restorative discipline begins with the goal of reconciliation rather than punishment. Biblically, discipline is meant to call someone back into alignment with truth and community, not to exclude them permanently. A defensible model includes clarity about expectations, proportional response, due process, and a clear pathway toward restoration. Without relationship, discipline often feels like punishment; within relationship, it can become a difficult but necessary path toward healing and renewed trust.

Jacobsen: What does repair require after harm?

Farnsworth: Repair requires truth, time, and shared responsibility. It begins with honest acknowledgment of harm, not defensiveness or minimization. Forgiveness may be offered, but trust must be rebuilt through consistent action. Communities must resist the urge to rush reconciliation without repentance or to demand silence for the sake of unity. True repair honors both justice and mercy.

Jacobsen: How can communities make room for testimony without oversharing or turning vulnerability into a moralistic performance?

Farnsworth: Testimony is meant to point toward God’s faithfulness, not put the storyteller at the center. Healthy communities create guidelines that honor privacy, consent, and context. Vulnerability should serve formation, not spectacle. Leaders play a key role in modeling restraint—showing that it’s possible to be honest without being explicit, and transparent without performing pain. When testimony is framed as witness rather than exhibition, it builds faith instead of pressure.

Jacobsen: Thank you very much for the opportunity and your time, Wesley.

Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): Vocal.Media

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2026/02

Dr. Sam Adeyemi is an Atlanta-based CEO, executive coach, and author who leads Sam Adeyemi, GLC, Inc. He founded and serves as executive director of Daystar Leadership Academy, whose programs have graduated 45,000+ alumni. With a large social-media following, he delivers leadership and organizational-growth guidance to executives worldwide. Adeyemi earned a Doctorate in Strategic Leadership from Regent University and belongs to the International Leadership Association. His books include Dear Leader: Your Flagship Guide to Successful Leadership and SHIFTS. He also cofounded Daystar Christian Centre in Lagos, Nigeria, where he is Senior Pastor. He lives in Atlanta with his wife, Nike.

In this interview, Scott Douglas Jacobsen speaks with Dr. Sam Adeyemi about “community” as a theological reality: believers bound to God and one another through the Holy Spirit. Dr. Adeyemi frames Christian belonging as love expressed through mutual respect, support, and spiritual growth. He argues congregational community forms when purpose, identity, shared values, rituals, regular interaction, and clear leadership create order. On difference, he emphasizes teaching impartial divine love, cultivating identity in Christ, cross-cultural humility, and diverse leadership. He describes discipline as restorative correction, not vindictive escalation, and says repentance requires admitting wrong, prioritizing victims’ healing, restitution, and stopping harmful practices.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: When you use the word “community,” what do you mean theologically?

Dr. Sam Adeyemi: Community, theologically, means a group of believers who share a relationship with God and with one another, through the power of the Holy Spirit.

Jacobsen: What are the ethics of belonging in a Christian community?

Adeyemi: The ethics of belonging to a Christian community rest on the foundation of love. They include mutual respect, mutual support and spiritual growth.

Jacobsen: What turns a random local crowd into a congregational community?

Adeyemi: A random local crowd becomes a congregational community when it creates order. This includes establishing a common purpose, identity and shared values, establishing rituals and interacting regularly, and establishing a clear structure with leadership.

Jacobsen: How should churches build community across real differences?

Adeyemi: Churches can build community across real differences by teaching on God’s impartial nature of love, fostering a common identity in Christ, encouraging cross-learning across cultures with humility, and intentionally demonstrating diversity in the leadership.

Jacobsen: What does healthy church discipline look like?

Adeyemi: Healthy church discipline begins with sound biblical teachings and continues into taking corrective measures where necessary. Corrective measures begin with confronting individuals and then escalating where necessary in line with established procedures. The aim is restoration and not vindictiveness. It should be done in humility.

Jacobsen: When a community harms someone, what does repentance and restoration require?

Adeyemi: When a church community harms someone, repentance and restoration require the admission of wrongs to the individual or the community depending on the situation, focusing on the healing and wellbeing of the victim, making restitution if needed, and ensuring the behavior or practice that created the situation is stopped.

Jacobsen: What pastoral realities distort community life?

Adeyemi: Pastoral realities that distort community life arise from personal failure (sexual immorality or financial indiscretions), poor management and leadership skills (lack of delegation and poor conflict management) and cultural shifts within the church and in the society.

Jacobsen: How can online spaces genuinely help the churches?

Adeyemi: Online spaces can help churches to increase the effectiveness of their local and global outreach efforts, improve the effectiveness of their discipleship programs, increase the effectiveness of their internal and external communications, and improve the efficiency of their operations.

Jacobsen: Thank you very much for the opportunity and your time, Sam.

Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): Vocal.Media

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2026/01

Terence A. Townsend is a Texas-based ministry leader, certified life and mental health coach, clergy mentor, licensed insurance broker and entrepreneur who blends faith, business strategy, and personal development in his work with WisdomWorx 2.0. With decades of experience as a speaker, author, consultant, and media host, he guides individuals and organizations in leadership, AI integration, financial stewardship, and spiritual growth. Townsend’s journey encompasses ministry calling from youth, transformational coaching, and practical tools for entrepreneurs, pastors, and families seeking purpose and resilience. He champions transformative impact through mentorship, strategic simplicity, and faith-anchored action.

In this conversation, Scott Douglas Jacobsen asks Terence A. Townsend how “community” works theologically. Townsend cites Acts 2 as an ideal: believers share life and resources so no one lacks. Belonging, he says, is anchored in hospitality, grace, and the New Testament duty to love, not denominational dogma. A church should model understanding, shared roles, and leaders who teach well and show vulnerability. He flags common failures: shallow study, culture-driven politicization, and prideful “kingdoms” built around pastors. Reconciliation is the default. Online church, he adds, can re-knit scattered people through intentional digital outreach, without watering down doctrine or local accountability.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Let us start very straight forward. What is “community,” theologically?

Terence A. Townsend: Theologically, when we talk about community, we are speaking of a place where people come together and commune, having like-mindedness in their mentality, motivation, environment, and expectations of one another. One of the big things we look at when we examine community theologically is the book of Acts, chapter two—especially verses 42-47—which describe how the first Christian community in Jerusalem came together and shared life. The passage states that the believers had “all things in common,” meaning that resources were shared so that no one among them lacked what they needed. That is what the scripture says. They had everything in common in that no one was left without support or care. That is not to say that people did not have different items, homes, or personal possessions, but their mindset was making sure that no one went without. When we look at that scripture, it describes community. Theologically, we understand that this is what community, at its ideal, looks like.

Jacobsen: Where do you place the ethics of belonging? Is it in practice, such as baptism or confession, or is it in hospitality and mutual obligation? Where does this ethic of belonging sit within a church community?

Townsend: The biggest thing that you have to consider regarding belonging is understanding the values of the community and, unfortunately, the dogma that is promoted within the community. There are church communities—Christian communities—that are genuinely effective at helping people feel they are part of the community. In those settings, people do not feel isolated from the processes or systems within that community. Everyone has some level of access to one another, and although not everyone necessarily knows their specific role, everyone plays some role in helping that community remain stable and well-maintained. The issue arises when we allow denominational dogmas—things we place at a higher value or priority than the core teachings of Christ—to overshadow what is central in the New Testament, such as the command to love one another (for example, in John 13:34–35 and Romans 13:8). The ethic of love, of owing one another love, is presented in the Christian scriptures as more fundamental than secondary rules or traditions. That becomes the problem when we are strictly talking about groups whose core is theological but whose practice is shaped more by institutional or denominational rules than by that central ethic of love. You also have to understand the issues that society introduces: stress, competition, economic pressure, and the need to make a living. Those factors influence people’s participation—whether they want to remain part of the community or step out or away from it. Within a community, belonging should come with the understanding that not everyone is joyful or strongly connected at all times. Understanding this helps us nurture one another through times of hardship, loss, or burdens, whether financial or emotional. Those kinds of struggles, in a Christian theological framework, ought to be held and supported under the covering of love from community members.

Jacobsen: What should a Christian community promise its members? It is a community or communion of people under pastoral shepherding or guidance, with implicit promises. What are reasonable expectations, and what are unreasonable expectations, of the promises of a community like that?

Townsend: Reasonable expectations begin with understanding that all of us have struggles or issues at times. That is the biggest thing we have to understand: perfection is not something any of us walks into. According to scripture, we are constantly striving for perfection, which means it is a lifelong journey to approach anything that resembles perfection. In fact, the Bible goes as far as to say that our best is “as filthy rags,” meaning none of us can achieve a perfectly righteous life. It requires us to walk with understanding. I used to work for a company where, on the first day of training, the first principle we were taught was to seek understanding before anything else. Scripture echoes this: “with all your getting, get understanding.” (Proverbs 4:7; 16:16) We have to understand one another, understand circumstances, and understand what people are going through. From the pastor on down, the leader should establish that pattern: understanding who people are, understanding situations, understanding what people experience, and recognizing that everyone will not be at the same place at the same time.

As far as promises, each member of the community has to play their part and establish not only what they believe a community should be and what their expectations are, but also respond to the standard the leader sets. The leader must show that being part of the community is beneficial. That means leading by example, leading through hardship and heartbreak, teaching where possible, and showing vulnerability in areas of weakness. It is acceptable to connect with others, ask for prayer, ask for help, and ask for guidance. Scripture instructs us that among a multitude of counsellors, there is wisdom. (Proverbs 11:14; 15:22) There are opportunities for us to contribute to the community’s growth and well-being. Members need to feel they are part of what is happening, part of the forward movement and the growth, contributing without feeling as though there is a taskmaster over them. That is a significant part of understanding what true community looks like.

Jacobsen: What practices are the glue to a church community? Because it is the gospel, you will have people from a wide range of political positions, classes, races, ages, immigration statuses, and backgrounds. How does that play out in real time, and what keeps the community together?

Townsend: The thing that keeps the community together—returning to what I have said—is understanding. Knowing that everyone comes from a different background means recognizing that no one has the same upbringing or thought patterns as you do. You also have to allow grace. Grace has to be part of the community. You allow grace so that someone can come to understand who you are, and so that you can understand who they are. Many communities fail because of a lack of trust among their members. In a diverse community—or specifically a church community—people may have experienced hardship, trauma, or victimization; others may have been raised in environments where belief in God was discouraged; others may come from cultures focused primarily on the pursuit of money without recognizing a deeper purpose. All of these perspectives require grace when they come together. Someone new may say, “I have never been here; I do not understand what is happening; I do not know how you function.” Our response must be: let us show grace and allow people the opportunity to grow with us. That is where we must be to see the truth of what God desires—His investment in us—because each one of us has something to give. I believe that before you were formed in your mother’s womb, God had a plan for your life. It is up to us to bring forth what has been placed in us, to ensure that life not only matters but fulfills its purpose. The design for which we were created is meant to be lived out. Part of that calling includes God’s expectation that, in the same way we have received grace, we extend it to others.

Jacobsen: In pastors and church leaders, what are standard modes of failure that you see?

Townsend: For the most part, ministry leaders put in the sweat equity, working through the lack of resources, lack of people capital, and some on the verge of burnout. Rally support around these leaders. Applause goes to those leaders on the frontline. But, when it comes to pastors and some standard modes of failure, there are a few. One significant issue is a lack of knowledge. Scripture teaches, “Study to show yourself approved unto God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth,” (2 Timothy 2:15), meaning presenting the gospel accurately without adding or removing anything. You have to know it first. A lack of knowledge prevents pastors from giving the whole message of the gospel and the full scope of what God is aligning our lives with. Another issue is culture. Many pastors have felt pressured to align their message with cultural needs to help people rise out of misfortunes in their communities. In doing so, they are not always focused on presenting the word itself, but are drawn to respond to ongoing or systemic injustices. They can become more focused on immediate social challenges than on their first calling. That puts a heavier strain on the pastor’s work than ministry ideally involves. Often, the pastor becomes more political than spiritual, more focused on social struggle than on the things of God. That distraction can cause us to react out of frustration, whereas Christ calls us to forgiveness—”forgive them, for they know not what they do.” (Luke 23:34) That tendency is part of our humanness: we rush to put out fires without realizing they may be controlled burns. Another significant failure is what I call the pride trap—when a pastor builds a kingdom around themselves and believes that is the goal. I do not need to say much about this: anyone exhibiting narcissistic behaviour, whether in the pulpit or in political power—a president, a prime minister—needs support and needs to work on themselves. They are often difficult people to deal with.

Jacobsen: Fractures and ruptures happen in the community, whether between personalities or within the community as a whole. When is reconciliation appropriate? When is it relevant to say goodbye to a particular person?

Townsend: Reconciliation is always appropriate. Scripture instructs that if you have an issue with a brother, first present your gift at the altar, then go to that brother and address the matter. Try to make it right. Try to work it out; if you cannot, bring someone else to help. The keyword in the community is unity. It is not a community unless there is unity. Jesus demonstrated this when He said, “The Father and I are one,” and later prayed that we would be one as He and the Father are one. He was speaking of the unity that should exist among us as brothers and sisters. Reconciliation, connection, reconnection, and offering forgiveness have to be active practices. People have been hurt because they were exiled from the community. Scripture gives examples where individuals were separated because they were destructive and had no intention of changing. That judgment is not necessarily ours to make. We are to pray for one another and encourage one another. Our most powerful tool is prayer—that is what we direct Godward. What we direct toward one another is love, and forgiveness is part of that love. We must open and exercise that part of our daily life.

Jacobsen: What does online church do well, or what does it offer to those who have not considered it?

Townsend: Online church reconnects people. After the pandemic, some churches closed, but some pastors showed resilience by connecting with people online who once attended in person and are now scattered in different places. Community looks different today than it did forty years ago. When I was a child, there was no internet, and cell phones were not widely accessible. We went to summer camp, Sunday school every week, and youth meetings every Saturday. Today, with technology, a person’s community is in their hand; they never have to feel alone. The church’s opportunity is to deliver the right message and reach people where they are. Engage on TikTok, Instagram, Rumble, and other platforms, and let people know: we are here, we love you, reach out to us, we want to pray with you and connect with you. We can send information, resources, and invitations—”we have a Bible study at 2 a.m.—join us.”, many are awake anyway. In my book Sharpening Your Sword, I implore pastor and leaders to embrace the digital era and bridges connecting the tech gaps. Host online live Q & A’s, open an online community, build online courses, set in-person meet-ups for fellowship and outreach, find ways to connect and relay your cause through photos and videos. We are dealing with a generation whose sense of self is often dictated by others, shaped by whether their posts receive likes. Their sense of identity is challenged or diminished by what they see online.

Reaching people where they are allows us to say: you matter; your life’s purposes are bigger than what you see. Much of what consumes attention online is vanity. Scripture, especially Ecclesiastes, reminds us that life is full of vanities. Yet we have the opportunity to live life to the fullest. The church can draw on the wisdom of Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, and other texts and learn to use digital algorithms for good. Instead of frustration, believing that platforms favour certain content, understand what they prioritize, operate within those parameters, and make it work. Strategy is necessary; others use it, and we can as well. We must overcome fear and the learning curve, dive in, and bring change. Do not change your message—bring change to the online space. Please recognize that this is a community we are called to connect with.

Jacobsen: Thank you very much for your time today. I appreciate it.

Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): Vocal.Media

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2026/01

Justin McLane is a lead pastor, author, and workshop facilitator whose writing explores Christianity as a personal, everyday relationship with God. A combat veteran with two deployments, he describes earlier years in pagan practice, paranormal investigation, and later conversion following an experience he interprets as supernatural. His ministry emphasizes direct language, boundaries in interfaith friendships, and pastoral care for people harmed by churches. McLane discusses denominational disputes, civic engagement, and the role of faith in public life through initiatives such as the Black Robe Regiment and Gideon’s Pledge. He shares resources via http://www.justinmclane.com. He lives in Tennessee and speaks widely.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen interviews Justin McLane, a pastor and combat veteran, about a trajectory from pagan practice to Christian leadership. McLane recounts a secular home, Wiccan exposure, and years of paranormal investigation before a conversion experience he frames as supernatural. He argues that pagans more readily accept spiritual realities, while atheists struggle most with the supernatural. Military service, he says, trained him to trust, persevere, and apply mission-minded discipline to faith. The discussion ranges from “church hurt” and compassionate moral speech to interfaith boundaries, denominational infighting, public polarization, and the Black Robe Regiment’s call for civic engagement in contemporary America.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: You had early experiences in paganism and later developed an understanding of Christianity. How do you characterize that development over time—the introduction to the first, the transition to the latter, and your current knowledge of that trajectory, especially with the benefit of hindsight?

Pastor Justin McLane: I was raised in what I would describe as a borderline anti-Christian household. My mother is an atheist, my father is agnostic at best, and church was never a part of my life. I was introduced to paganism through a friend at school who was raised Wicca by his parents. I was living in Massachusetts at the time, and I was born there. There was a local metaphysical store run by someone I called a Wiccan high priestess, and my friend and I went there and received instruction and training. For most of my life into adulthood, including during my time in the army, I practiced paganism and became involved in paranormal investigation and related activities. Several years ago, I had an experience I interpreted as supernatural, which led me to God. I attribute my current beliefs and direction to the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and I am now a lead pastor. I planted a church about a year ago. Looking back, I appreciate that earlier path because it allows me to “speak a different language,” and I think Christians often struggle to communicate because religious terminology—such as “seasons” or “salvation”—can be confusing to people outside the faith. I feel comfortable bridging the gap between non-believers and people suffering from “church hurt.” In the past—encouraged by my mother—I would go to churches, find people questioning their faith, and try to persuade them to leave. When I became a Christian, my mother stopped speaking to me, and we have not spoken in several years, which has been challenging and isolating. Many of my friends—non-Christian, LGBTQ, or atheist—also stopped speaking to me after my conversion, and I was viewed as a traitor. That isolation led me to rely more on my faith. Some conversations have resumed, while others have not. Although I regret how anti-Christian I was in the past, I believe those experiences now help me understand and communicate with people who are not believers or who have been harmed by churches. I also believe that telling someone they are “going to hell” is ineffective if that person does not believe in hell.

Jacobsen: How about the combat veteran experience? When you were signing up, where did you check the box when they asked about belief?

McLane: I was pagan. When I first enlisted, the only religions formally recognized were Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and, I believe, Hinduism. It was not until a few years after I enlisted that some pagan religions began to be recognized. On dog tags, for example, religious identification would read “Christian, non-denominational.” If you were pagan, you could not list anything specific; it was left non-specific. That changed only several years later. There is a saying that there are no atheists in foxholes—that once bullets start flying, people start praying—but that is not entirely true. There are not many atheists in the military, and most people who enter military service develop some belief system because they need something larger than themselves to rely on. As a combat veteran and a pagan, I had many experiences shaped by the fact that the military culture was predominantly Christian. I often had people in my platoon—men and women—ask if they could pray for me or invite me to church.

There was one particular instance when I was deployed to Iraq in 2003, stationed in Mosul. I had been on guard duty all night and was returning to the Imperial Guard buildings where we were staying. When I reached my room, my entire platoon was waiting outside. They asked if they could pray for me. I agreed, mostly because I wanted to go to sleep. They prayed, and I went to bed. At the time, I shrugged it off. I did not really think about it again until after I became a Christian.

I had two roommates. One was a Seventh-day Adventist who was deeply involved in his church—very devout, welcoming, and kind. The other was a Southern Baptist. In the military, everyone is “green.” There is less emphasis on differences between men and women or backgrounds because you are fighting alongside one another. In that sense, people are often more accepting than in civilian life.

Jacobsen: How would you describe religious experience before conversion and after conversion?

McLane: Before conversion, I would describe my experience as distinctly pagan. Pagan belief systems accept the supernatural, so when something supernatural occurred, I was more open to it. I believed there were forces and realities I could not see or fully understand, and I accepted many experiences as supernatural without much skepticism. In hindsight, my view was naive. I took many things for granted and assumed they were good when I should have questioned them more. I now interpret some of those experiences as demonic influence, based on my current beliefs, including the idea that the devil offers gifts. In paganism and related practices, such as tarot reading, there is a belief in communicating with an unseen realm.

After I became a Christian, I began attending an Assemblies of God church. I sometimes describe it as “Pentecostal light.” It is a Pentecostal denomination that embraces speaking in tongues, divine healing, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. When I spoke with my pastor, who was mentoring and counselling me, he explained these beliefs and practices. I found them intuitive and did not struggle with them. He told me that accepting the supernatural is often one of the most challenging aspects of conversion for people, but for me, it was not difficult because of my prior background.

Jacobsen: That is a very interesting framing. You rarely hear conversion discussed this way in mainstream discourse—particularly the idea that moving from paganism to Christianity can involve continuity rather than rupture in one’s understanding of religious experience. That perspective is not often articulated.

McLane: I think conversion is more complex for atheists, particularly committed atheists or naturalists. My mother is one. When I was pagan, it was almost a joke in our household because she was not anti-pagan; she was anti-Christian. I would tell her I was going on a ghost investigation or casting a spell, and she would treat it dismissively, saying things like, “That’s nice,” and patting me on the head, because she believed none of it existed. For atheists, I think the most challenging part of moving toward religion is accepting the supernatural aspect—the idea of a God who exists outside of space and time, who is all-knowing, who intervenes in human life, along with angels, messages, and spiritual gifts. That supernatural framework is complex for them. Pagans, by contrast, tend to accept it more readily. In pagan practice, praying to an idol or statue is understood as using a conduit to communicate with a god.

What is more difficult for pagans to accept is the idea of a perfect God. In paganism, gods are fallible; they make mistakes, experience anger, and behave in recognizably human ways, as mythology illustrates. Accepting an all-knowing, all-good, all-loving God requires raising one’s conceptual framework. The transition was relatively seamless for me. After the intense experience I interpreted as supernatural, it made sense to me. It took a few days to process and to re-evaluate my life up to that point, including the belief that much of what I had done was wrong. I also had to come to terms with forgiveness, alongside a lingering sense of responsibility to address past mistakes.

Jacobsen: One defining characteristic of the Christian conception of God is that God is personal. God is described as existing outside of space and time, as all-good and all-knowing. In your book God Is Personal, how do you frame that idea as the crux of the experience? Paganism involves ritual, but Christianity emphasizes a personal relationship. The standard framing is that it is not merely belief, but a relationship.

McLane: In paganism, you are often chasing the gods. There is a sense that they are indifferent or ambivalent, and you hope to gain their attention. Because they are fallible, people can see themselves reflected in them, which makes the idea of a relationship feel more accessible on the surface. In Christianity, by contrast, God is understood as the creator of the universe—vast, powerful, and beyond comprehension. That scale can make it difficult to grasp that such a God would care about individual people.

The challenge is understanding that the same God who created the stars, the universe, and even DNA also knows your name, wants to hear from you, and cares about your life. Scripture emphasizes that God calls people by name. The focus of the book is on reminding people that God is present in everyday life—at the dinner table, on the drive to work, and while listening. Paul speaks of being in a constant state of prayer, not a transactional or formulaic one. It is more like sitting with a parent and speaking honestly about hardship, responsibility, relationships, or uncertainty. Even though God is vast and powerful, He is also personal. The belief is that God wants people to include Him in their lives, to share moments with Him, and to participate in what is understood as His plan.

Jacobsen: What is the Black Robe Regiment?

McLane: The Black Robe Regiment is currently an organization of pastors, though we are expanding membership to include others. My goal, as I described it, is to address what I see as a cultural tension between politics and religion—an effort to push religion out of politics and politics out of personal life. I argue that the two are not enemies but companions, and that biblical moral principles should inform political decisions.

I described an initiative called the Gideon’s Pledge, which encourages pastors to speak about the importance of elections, civic engagement, and political participation. I emphasized that the United States is not a sacred or promised land, but it is home, and therefore something Christians should be involved in shaping.

I said many churches avoid political engagement out of fear, particularly concerns related to the Johnson Act and the potential loss of nonprofit status. I described the historical “Black Robe Regiment” as referring to the pastors who advised and guided many of the Founding Fathers, whom I characterized as predominantly churchgoing Christians. I said those pastors functioned as spiritual guides and that modern Christians should return to Scripture as a moral reference point for determining right and wrong and for helping people heal from personal and social struggles.

I cited abortion as an example of a contentious issue, arguing that prayer outside abortion clinics can be a loving act when done without coercion. I distinguished this from what I described as weaponized or hostile approaches, emphasizing that, in my view, the intention should be to offer compassion rather than impose beliefs.

I said the organization aims to help people understand politics and religion as compatible rather than opposed. I further argued that ideas such as the separation of church and state are often misunderstood, asserting that the American founding documents are rooted in Christian values. I maintained that just as Christians make personal decisions based on Scripture, political decision-making should reflect those same convictions, and I said the organization works with individuals and politicians to promote that approach.

Jacobsen: What do you believe churches misunderstand about faith?

McLane: He said he believes many churches misunderstand faith by reshaping it to conform to personal or cultural preferences. He argued that too many religious communities alter faith and Scripture to fit what people want rather than allowing faith to challenge them. He said he has observed similar dynamics in other religions, including Islam, based on his experiences in Muslim-majority countries. He quoted a saying used by an elder in his church: that there is “too much man in church and not enough God in man.” He argued that when faith is altered to suit individual desires, it becomes diminished and inconsistent, leading to divergent interpretations across communities. He expressed concern about churches that normalize behaviors he considers sinful or promote universal salvation, which he described as modifying biblical teachings to suit contemporary preferences. He argued that this reverses what he believes should be the proper orientation—that individuals should change themselves to align more closely with Jesus rather than reshaping doctrine.

Jacobsen: How did military service shape your theology? You underwent intense training, encountered extreme situations, and served in countries where dominant faith traditions were very different and often more intense in their expression.

McLane: I completed two deployments. My first deployment was in a support role at a warehouse. My second deployment was in an active combat role as part of a convoy security element, where I provided security. During the second deployment, I spent significantly more time outside the wire. I ran 255 missions on the road and had much more exposure to life outside the base, observing how people lived and interacted with one another. During my first deployment, I had more one-on-one interactions with Iraqi nationals. We worked alongside Iraqi staff in the warehouse, interpreters, and local workers. That allowed me to engage with people more personally. Having both experiences gave me a broader perspective and a deeper appreciation for what we have in our own country. My military experience shaped my faith.

The military teaches you not to quit. “Suck it up and drive on” is a common phrase. I apply that mindset now when working with people whose faith is changing. In the military, you are required to do things that do not always make sense or that you may disagree with. For example, in winter, you are not allowed to put your hands in your pockets. It may seem unreasonable, but you follow the rule. When I became a Christian, I encountered things in the Bible that offended me. I had to approach that discomfort by accepting that there were reasons I did not yet understand. Unlike arbitrary military rules, I believed this guidance came from God, which required trust.

In the military, I learned to trust my equipment, my team, my squad, my platoon, and even people I did not personally know while operating in a sector. I had to trust that others were watching my back. That experience taught me how to trust and have faith. When I became a Christian and encountered teachings that challenged or offended me, I drew on that same discipline. In the military, you complete the mission. In Christianity, the mission is to follow Christ and become more like Christ. Personal opinions shaped by parents, teachers, or culture sometimes have to be set aside to trust in God. That lesson is something I carried directly from my military experience.

Jacobsen: How do you work with people in church communities who feel alienated, or with those outside the church who have experienced what is commonly referred to as “church hurt”?

McLane: I have a minimal filter. I am covered in tattoos, and my approach is often rougher than people expect. I am not everyone’s cup of tea, and that is fine. When I work with people whom the church has hurt, I understand them and can empathize. In many cases, what a church did to them was genuinely wrong. Some churches and pastors have done serious harm. As Christians, we often place pastors on pedestals, and that needs to stop. As a pastor, I am not above anyone else. My role is to guide people toward Christ, and I do hold myself to a higher standard, but my own background is not perfect.

Most cases of church hurt involve judgment placed on someone after they made a mistake. I tell people that I have made the same mistakes. I am open about that because a large part of my past involved serious errors. I was an active pagan, and within Christian Scripture, paganism is described as idolatry and wrongdoing. I meet people at that level of honesty and then try to understand their specific situation.

In any form of counselling, the goal is to understand where someone is coming from and what the situation actually was. In most cases, the issue was judgment. In the area where I live, many family churches have operated the same way for generations. They have established routines and traditions they do not want to change. Everyone looks, acts, and sounds the same. That has always bothered me.

When I first started looking for a home church, I attended one where the doors were locked during services, effectively locking people inside. I could not rationalize that. I am not interested in putting other churches down, but I do believe in pointing out mistakes when they are made. When someone comes to me and says their church mistreated them, I listen. One person told me they were from a low-income family and could not afford a particular ankle-length denim skirt. As a result, they were told they could not return. I told them we are a “come as you are” church. If you look at my online sermons, you’ll see that half the time I am wearing a cowboy hat, an Ariat shirt, and jeans. Scripture warns against separating ourselves from people or focusing on outward appearances. What matters is that people walk through the door. We will welcome them.

That does not mean I approve of sin. I will point out when something is wrong, but the way I do it matters. I use the example of driving with my wife in the passenger seat. If she tells me I am speeding, she is not judging me. She is simply pointing out that the speed limit on the sign and the speed on the dashboard do not match. She is stating a fact. That is the approach I believe we need to return to. I can say that something is sinful and that God disapproves of it without casting judgment. I will never tell someone they are going to hell. When people do that, they take God’s judgment into their own hands and rob a person of hope. Saying “you are going to hell” shuts the door on the possibility of redemption.

What I tell people is that what I preach is not original. I did not invent it. I read books, studied Scripture, and I share what I have learned. What someone does with that information is their choice. If they want to move closer to Christ, they are welcome at my church. If my church is not the right fit, I am happy to help them find another one. I know many pastors. We need to stop condemning people and stop telling them they are doomed. We can say something is wrong and that God disapproves, but judgment belongs to God alone.

Jacobsen: How do you approach interfaith efforts, especially given your background, which on the surface appears to involve very different theological and philosophical frameworks—from paganism to Christianity? Whether you are hosting an interfaith event or simply engaging in dialogue, what characterizes healthy interfaith engagement in a politically charged moment like the one we are in now? And conversely, what characterizes unhealthy dialogue so we can consciously lean toward the former?

McLane: As I mentioned earlier, many of my friends from before I became a Christian stopped speaking to me because there were things I could no longer endorse. One of the major issues now is what is often described as the LGBTQ movement. I had previously participated in Pride parades, worn “dad hugs” shirts, and publicly supported those causes, but after becoming a Christian, I felt the need to reassess that support. Many people did not respond well to that change. I still love them, and I still have a small number of friends who are pagan and who identify as LGBTQ. We have conversations, sometimes difficult ones, but the key elements are boundaries, respect, and an understanding that we can agree to disagree. When those conditions are met, relationships can continue healthily.

One of my friends is Wiccan. Early on, she set clear boundaries and told me she was not interested in being evangelized. I respect that. On my side, she understands that I am a pastor, that I have written a book, that I am working on a workshop, and that Scripture plays a significant role in my life. When I talk about faith, I am not trying to change her; I am sharing information and explaining why I believe what I believe. We have that mutual understanding and can agree to disagree. I explain that, according to my faith and experience, there are consequences tied to certain beliefs and actions. She understands that perspective, and I do not need to press the issue repeatedly. I can acknowledge why she believes as she does, based on my own past, while also being clear that I no longer share those beliefs. We recognize the disagreement and move on.

There have also been moments when she has asked me to pray for her, including during a problematic relationship. She made it clear she was not a Christian, but still asked for prayer. That matters from my perspective. Pagans generally accept multiple pantheons and belief systems, so asking for prayer is not unusual. It is rarely an outright rejection of God; more often, it is skepticism toward exclusivity. When she asked me to pray, I saw that as meaningful. I once heard a pastor say that it can take many interactions—sometimes over a hundred—for someone to come to faith. Occasionally, you are the first person in that process. That is often what people think of as mission work. In places like New England, including Massachusetts, some people have never attended church, read the Bible, or meaningfully encountered Christianity.

Jacobsen: Many major universities, especially around Boston, were originally founded by Christian denominations.

McLane: Yes. In fact, the concept of the university itself developed within religious contexts. It was initially a way for people to gather and engage with Scripture and theology.

Jacobsen: Before that, you had Aristotle’s Lyceum and Plato’s Academy, and later, in the eleventh or twelfth century, what we now recognize as universities began to emerge in places like Italy. Some of those institutions still exist today.

McLane: It is on my list of places to visit. There is also a beautiful monastery not too far from there. I learned that you can stay in monasteries and convents for a nominal charge. There are certain expectations you have to follow, but it is possible to travel through Italy or Greece and stay in old convents. Many of them rent rooms because their memberships have declined, leaving extra space, and they regularly host pilgrims.

Jacobsen: Part of American public discourse is fragmented for political reasons and socioeconomic divides. Another major factor is that the religious landscape in the United States is far more diverse than it has been for at least a couple of centuries. We have seen a double-digit decline in Christian belief across the population, with nonbelief and minority religions filling that gap. How do you think this shift is changing public interfaith dialogue and the way faith is discussed in public life?

McLane: Many factors play into that. First, we are actually seeing a resurgence in some areas. Church attendance numbers are beginning to rise again. At the same time, we are seeing increasing polarization in media, culture, and politics. In the past, strong pro-religion or anti-religion views were more confined to the fringes. Now, more people are openly identifying with one side or the other.

In Hollywood and the music industry, it was once common for award recipients to thank God and move on casually. Now, you are seeing more public declarations of belief or disbelief, sometimes to people’s benefit and sometimes to their detriment. That same polarization is visible in everyday life. People are no longer occupying a middle ground. It is increasingly one side or the other.

There are public figures who once avoided clear religious or political identification and are now openly declaring their positions. In the past, that might have damaged a career; today, it can rally support just as easily. You see similar dynamics at work in corporations and cultural debates. These conversations are becoming more heated, and the ability to disagree politely is diminishing. I hope things cool down enough for people to come back to the table and talk without conflict, but realistically, division may deepen before it improves.

Jacobsen: I once knew someone connected to the World War II–era healing revival movement. Figures like William Branham made prophecies, reframed errors as failed predictions, and maintained large followings despite apparent contradictions. Those communities still exist, with millions of adherents. In Canada, where I lived for a time, I knew someone whose father would appear infrequently and spend his visits rebuking everyone around him. It created resentment and distance, even without overt hostility.

Using that as an analogy, there are pastors who engage with other denominations primarily through rebuke, without tact or care. How do you approach interdenominational dialogue within Christianity—especially around political messaging—without becoming the proverbial parent who shows up only to criticize everyone?

McLane: I am currently working on a book titled Christianity from the Outside. In it, interdenominational disagreements have been exaggerated far beyond their actual importance. Doctrinal disputes—such as Calvinism versus Arminianism—have been held onto so tightly that they have become identity markers. There is a joke that always makes me laugh: someone asks, “Are you a Christian?” and the response is, “No, thank God, I’m a Baptist.”

Jacobsen: That mirrors a very Irish mentality. In Ireland, especially in the 1990s, you would hear stories of people being cornered and asked whether they were Protestant or Catholic, not out of theological curiosity but to decide whether they were an enemy. If someone said they were an atheist, the follow-up question would be, “A Catholic atheist or a Protestant atheist?”

McLane: Unfortunately, these kinds of doctrinal arguments have distracted us from addressing much larger issues. We argue endlessly over questions like free will versus the sovereignty of God—Calvinism versus Arminianism—and divide ourselves into camps and denominations. Because of that, when pastors encounter teachings that undermine core Christian doctrines, they struggle to challenge them effectively.

For example, there are pastors promoting versions of universal salvation or claiming that sin no longer exists. I have seen sermons from pastors in liturgical traditions—Lutheran, Episcopalian, Anglican—who argue that we should ignore large portions of Scripture, including much of Paul’s writing, and focus only on selective passages from the Gospels. When pastors object to this, the response is often to dismiss the criticism as just another denominational disagreement, similar to Calvinism versus Arminianism.

I do not see those issues as comparable. Whether one emphasizes free will or divine sovereignty, the core message of salvation remains intact. What I am describing directly contradicts foundational Christian teachings on salvation and repentance. In some cases, Scripture is rejected because it is considered offensive. I recently watched a video in which a pastor criticized John the Baptist for using harsh language when rebuking the Pharisees, comparing him unfavorably to modern political figures. What that pastor ignored is that Jesus later rebukes the Pharisees in nearly identical terms. By reframing Scripture this way, people end up reshaping Christianity to fit their own preferences.

When those reinterpretations are accepted, people begin rejecting the teachings of Jesus himself. Yet these issues are often treated as minor disagreements, on par with debates over personal style or church culture. I have encountered many such disputes. I once suggested in a sermon that introversion could conflict with the Great Commission, which calls believers to evangelize and make disciples. Some people strongly objected. These disagreements can spiral quickly.

To refocus on essentials, we began reciting the Nicene Creed every Sunday. It outlines the foundational beliefs of Christianity. The problem is that Christians have spent so much time arguing over secondary issues that they end up excluding others, threatening damnation over personal interpretations, and elevating opinion to doctrine. That makes it harder to hold people accountable on truly central issues of faith, because endless arguments consume energy over minor points.

Jacobsen: Where do you see the most significant political friction for believers now—particularly within their own internal conversations about faith and public life?

McLane: I think the most significant areas of division are still abortion, LGBTQ issues, and education. Education has increasingly been framed as a divide between homeschooling, often associated with Christianity, and public schooling, viewed as secular. Those are the three most enormous rifts. Abortion is usually treated as a binary issue. From a Christian perspective, I understand why it is viewed that way, because it is seen as the taking of a life. On LGBTQ issues, I believe much of the damage has come from judgmental language. Instead of telling people they are going to hell, the focus should be on explaining beliefs more carefully and compassionately. Eventually, Christian doctrine does assert moral boundaries, but how that message is delivered matters. This issue has become even more complicated because divisions now exist within churches themselves, including congregations that openly affirm LGBTQ identities. That creates confusion about boundaries and beliefs.

Education has also become a growing point of division. When my children were young, homeschooling was not widely accepted, and there was a stereotype that homeschooled children were undereducated. Today, homeschooling resources are extensive, including co-ops, online programs, and curricula, many of which come from Christian sources. Despite common jokes that Christians rely on outdated ideas, religious institutions historically played a central role in education. Churches founded many universities and originally included religious instruction. Jewish communities emphasized literacy so Scripture could be read, and Christianity continued that tradition. The development of books was closely tied to making Scripture accessible.

Today, education debates are increasingly polarized, and funding plays a significant role. Public schools, especially in inner cities, often rely on enrollment-based financing, so when families choose homeschooling, public schools lose resources, further disadvantaging remaining students. I understand why families want the best education possible for their children, regardless of the format. What’s more, these often become adversarial instead of focusing on shared goals and structural solutions. Whether broader institutions like the Department of Education should be reformed or eliminated is a separate discussion, but education has clearly become a major political flashpoint.

Jacobsen: Is there anything else you would like to promote or mention?

McLane: We discussed my book earlier. The book will be accompanied by a complete workshop, both of which are available through my website. The book introduces the idea of developing a personal relationship with God, and the workshop expands on those ideas in more depth. The workshop is structured into twelve chapters, each about an hour long, allowing participants to work through it over an extended period. A workbook will also be included. I am available to speak at conferences and churches, and my focus is on helping people cultivate a personal relationship with God. Church attendance and fellowship are essential, but faith and salvation are personal. Families need to return to shared practices like prayer, gratitude, and mutual support. Many of these traditions have faded, and I see value in restoring them.

Jacobsen: Justin, thank you.

McLane: Thank you very much, Scott.

Jacobsen: Have a great day, enjoy East Tennessee, and Merry Christmas!.

McLane: Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.