Book Review – “Tremble” (by Dave Fiedler)
Reviewed by Dr. Kevin Kuehmichel, April 5, 2015: Recently, Remnant Publications mailed a book to every pastor in North America because they thought this book was so important that none of us could live without it. I receive many books from different sources all the time. Sometimes I get them from parishioners, sometimes from publishing houses and sometimes from my Conference president. I read some, some I just toss, and others are on the “waiting to read” shelf of my bookcase.
I read the introduction of the book and was touched by the inclusion of the author’s statement that he doesn’t always recognize things the way they really are. I was impressed by what I perceived as a position of humility, and feeling I was going to give him a chance, I immediately began to read. As I write this review, I can only pray that I have a similar humble perspective as I analyze and contemplate the author’s thoughts and intent. God forgive me if I stumble.
I am not a historical scholar of Adventism. I have enjoyed reading historical accounts of Adventism and one of my favorite instructors in Seminary was George Knight, an Adventist historian. I also enjoyed the Ellen White classes, and I purchased the Arthur White six-volume set that documents Ellen G. White’s life. I also enjoyed L.E. Froom’s classic four- volume set, Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers. I don’t claim complete knowledge and understanding of all the issues but my awareness of the Kellogg apostasy and the issues surrounding it was part of what intrigued me to read this book. I believe the author did a commendable job discussing that controversy.
My biggest concern with the book has less to do with the history or the theology that Mr. Fiedler wrote about than with his style of writing and ultimately his conclusions based on his research. By style, I mean the method in which he investigates and reports his findings, which include his belief that some of the things he documents in our church today are tantamount to the same issues found in the Kellogg book, Living Temple.
I have questions for the author: Have you ever read any of the authors you denigrate in your book? More importantly, have you done any first-person interviews or attended any of the meetings that you routinely throw on the trash heap? It would seem to me that instead of condemning a person based on association or on your interpretation of secondary sources, you should do first-person research. For example, have you ever attended a “One Project” meeting to see what is being taught? Have you spoken first person to the people you name as the prime movers in this conspiracy to destroy the church?
The majority of the data collected and analyzed in this book was taken from the internet. If internet is the research material, I wonder what type of book could be written about Adventism. One should be very judicious in using internet sources. I wonder if the author would be comfortable with some of the same personal scrutiny and character assassination being applied to himself. Back when I was growing up, we had something tantamount to the internet. It was called a public bathroom wall. There was always something written there by an anonymous person with information that was rarely true and in many cases unverifiable.
I am all for people being accountable for what they say and what they recommend for sources and reading. But I also believe that in our reading, each of us needs to filter out the good from the bad. We all must do this every day as we process inputs. I read a lot of books that are not written by Adventist authors. If I am truly a Bible student, I should recognize the need to, and have the ability to, filter out the good from the bad. I even have to do this with Adventist authors. The fact that a book is published by a certain publishing house, or that an author claims to belong to a certain denomination, does not make that person’s arguments wholly correct or wholly incorrect. I must use wisdom and discernment to filter out what is true and what is not.
One basic theme that occurs to me throughout the book is Conspiracy! Unfortunately, conspiracy theories appear to be what draw many of the book’s readers. In my ministry, I have encountered more Adventists who are ready to flee to the caves and protect themselves than are willing to actually do ministry with the lost and hurting. For me, this is the biggest issue that makes this book not worth reading. It does nothing to move our church to be a more caring, compassionate and serving church, but perpetuates the very stigma of fear and removal from the society and people we are called to serve the way Christ served. This is the primary reason our youth are leaving the church.
I must acknowledge that Mr. Fiedler did assent to the fact that this might be an appropriate issue being raised with the emergent church (page 186). But it seemed to me that after all his criticism, such comments were too little, too late. I seriously don’t think many people will make it that far in the book, or if they do, they will have been so consumed with angst regarding the fearmongering earlier in the book that they miss it.
My basic takeaway is that this book was not worth my reading, nor will it move me to want to read more of what is being published by Remnant Publications. The remnant that they are publishing for seems to have already left the building, but not to do ministry. When they start actually doing compassion ministry with grace, then they can send me another book.
Oh my dear Kevin, I’m just amazed at your narrow view of research in your rather ad hominem critique. First, you write as if to say only personal interviews and participant observations are the most valid research methods. If you were correct, historians, archaeologists, linguists, theologians (like yourself), and philosophers would have limited research options. I encourage you to reconsider what you narrowly consider research. Allow me to share with you a few of the methods we use in social science research without any need for interviews and participant observations.
1. Discourse analysis: This is used by some linguists as well as climate change researchers. Note that Fiedler’s research method falls under this method to an extent. When conducting discourse analysis, one doesn’t need to interview anyone or conduct participant observation (for example at a One Project event) as you assert. Therefore, your objection to Fiedler’s lack of interviews or participant observation is quite weak.
2. Document analysis: This method is used by scholars such as historians and accountants. Note that it is also not necessary to conduct interviews or participant observation when using this research method.
It is shocking that you compare the internet to a bathroom wall. From a research standpoint, you write as if you are unaware that the internet is a legitimate source of research data. If you are not aware, social scientists find the internet to provide a wealth of data for both qualitative and quantitative research. Please note the following researches conducted by reputable scholars using the internet:
1. The Smithsonian Institute (Special Issue Spring 2015): Are you aware that a computer science professor, a Google engineer, and the Smithsonian Institute used Wikipedia and Google databases to generate the list of the 100 most influential Americans? Even Wikipedia turns out to be an awesome source of research data. Adventist Today had an article on this Smithsonian research since Ellen G. White made it to that list of 100 most influential Americans.
2. Virginia Tech: A scholar at Virginia Tech (White, 2002) gathered all his data (transcripts of Congressional Committee Hearings) using the internet.
3. O’Brien & Tooley, 2013: This article will help you to see why a website (like that of the One Project) can be an appropriate data source for research. These researchers studied data from websites of the various organization they were studying.
Last, I’m appalled that you call for grace while ironically exposing an extremist version of the opposite. Wow! After censoring Fiedler off your shelf, you condemn a whole publishing association to be so contaminated that you would not read any of the thousands of books from the publisher. I have never heard such extreme views from any person who promotes grace. If you are serious about grace and helping our communities (which your work involves), take time to read Fiedler’s book d’Sozo:…
I wonder if Mr Fiedler followed the directions of Jesus for dealing with someone where you differ? According to Jesus your first action should be to approach that person privately, then again if necessary with one or two witnesses.
I make heavy use of the Internet as a resource. The Internet though is NOT a source, it is only a means of publication. One must still consider and evaluate the underlying sources whose work is being disseminated.
Well, if the internet is unreliable as a source of information, what are we doing in this website that is supposed to illustrate our minds? “…every man to his tents, O Israel.” 2 Sam. 20:1.
the internet can be a valuable resource for any type of investigation if we investigate the source of what we plan to use. Very little is objective or balanced if we are looking for material to justify our own bias. I suspect Mr. Fiedler already had his mind made up before he began his “investigation.”
I could prove just about anything I wanted to on the internet.
I go with the reviewer for “by their fruits you will know them.” The only real conspiracy out there is the one that Satan has been carrying on for thousands of years. The others he customizes for each individual, and there are many conflicting ones under all kinds of banners. There are special ones for those who believe conspiracy theories. In such a way Satan makes good look evil and evil look good.
“After censoring Fiedler off your shelf, you condemn a whole publishing association to be so contaminated that you would not read any of the thousands of books from the publisher.”
That type of reaction by KK sans any observations about other books published by Remnant Publications supporting KK’S dismissive attitude seems to be a bit unreasonable.
In what field is you doctorate, KK?
The analysis by Dave Fiedler of this book was both judicious and appropriate. This volume is a typical production of Remnant Publications. Those who object to the nature of this review appear to be sympathetic to the ethos projected by such organizations as Remnant Publications. I will look forward to future reviews by Dave Fiedler on the Adventist Today website.
I’m again reading the book by Fiedler and hope many others will as well.
I think the book is great, it is actually the thing we need to wake up and be ready for everything is about to come. I’ve been fallowing Fiedler for a while, and the information he presets is the one we need to reach the cities, to get involve in medical missionary work and finish the work. Why? because they are facts, facts from the past. God wanted this, He wants this today, and sure, Satan will do everything to put our minds away from the very work we have to do. that’s why this book, (tremble)is o important today… 2Co 2:11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.