FAQ
by Quinn
Some of the answers are the result of a lot of discussions amongst various people. Some of them are just my personal opinions and not widely held.
Why do people get taken in by Dave’s deception?
He mixes in legitimate value – for example, accurate and insightful scriptural teachings, and a strong sense of community at Friday Night where people truly know one another well and go out of their way for each other.
Culture of secrecy. People who have bad experiences generally don’t talk about it, they just leave. They may be afraid of losing friends or not being believed.
People are mistreated and then gaslit (or they gaslight themselves) into thinking they’re the problem or whatever happened was normal. This is because the community reinforces the perception that Dave is a godly man and a prophet. Individual cases are typically viewed by the witness/victim in isolation from the broader patterns.
Why are people secretive about things?
Fear of falling into gossip. See On Gossip and Slander.
They may have had a bad experience but assume that it’s not common and Dave is mostly doing good things. They don’t want to ruin the value other people are getting out of the group by bringing their concerns forward.
They may fear they won’t be taken seriously. One of the reasons I felt strongly in the beginning of this process that I was going to be able to make a big difference was that I was a long-time Friday Nighter, part of the inner circle, a man, a highly educated professional, and known for being level-headed. I thought: what if I was a woman? Would I be dismissed as “hysterical” or taking out my issues with my father or other men on Dave? What if I was bipolar or had PTSD? Would people blow off my testimony?
Did you give Dave a chance to repent?
As can be seen in the testimonies, Dave has had many chances over the years to take responsibility for his actions. While there were isolated occasions when he admitted fault, the broad pattern is that he dodges accountability through lying, slander, trying to skate by on technicalities, etc.
Nonetheless, we confronted him in private, via a letter that was hand-delivered as well as emailed. The letter contained a list of accusations and asked him to either admit fault or defend himself on each one. We only permitted a written response. He originally had seven days. We provided two extensions, so that he had a total of thirteen days. In the end, he provided no response.
Why didn’t you offer him an in-person meeting? Why was it over email?
First, I did have a long in-person meeting with Dave on 3/17/25. I confronted him about a wide variety of issues and he admitted no fault. Many other people have confronted Dave in-person and had similar experiences of him deflecting, blame-shifting, trying to justify his actions on technicalities, etc.
The testimonies bear witness to Dave’s lying and manipulation. Because of this we decided to only allow written communication. This gives both parties time to think carefully about what they chose to write. Plus, the written record can be used to compare against other statements to help determine the facts. Additionally, subtle manipulation tactics are not typically something people are able to decipher and understand in real-time. They have to go back and think about what the person said and realize how it was manipulative.
He is also very good at manipulating conversations the way he wants them to go – changing the topic, going on long monologues, avoiding providing straight answers to questions, etc.
Why can’t this be handled behind closed doors?
See Church Discipline in Matthew 18 and 1 Timothy 5.
Why did you publish a website? Why not just rebuke Dave in front of Friday Night or circulate a set of documents?
While those options would have been significant, they would have kept a lot of people in harm’s way.
Dave has significant influence and ministry leadership roles outside of Friday Night.
CRU staff, specifically with Family Life. If you read the testimonies, I think you will see that Dave being in marriage ministry is a worst-case scenario.
We know of two couples who to our knowledge have never been to Friday Night who received marriage counseling from Dave and Kathy. We have no way of knowing how many others have as well.
Dave has a Tuesday Night group called “Church at Cane’s” that includes people who don’t attend Friday Night.
Dave is on the board of directors for multiple ministry organizations.
Dave has been known to have 1-on-1 discipleship relationships with people who do not attend Friday Night at all. We have no way of knowing how many of these exist.
If we were to rebuke Dave in front of Friday Night, those who didn’t happen to attend that night would have to rely on hearsay, as would any newcomers.
The accusations are far too extensive and detailed to possibly be dealt with at one Friday Night meeting. The details are important. People deserve to be heard.
Because of how Dave deals in plausible deniability, people really need to be able to sit down and examine a range of stories to see patterns.
These rebukes are supposed to inspire fear (see 1 Tim 5:19-22). If you look in the news, you will see there are a lot of corrupt church leaders being exposed. There is undoubtedly much more abuse that has not yet been exposed. All of this needs to come to light. Leaders need to know that if they use their spiritual authority to take advantage of people, the consequences for them could be dire. The church should not be a place that predators look to as an opportunity to exploit people.
We think it’s likely that Dave will try to sweep his sins under the rug and start over with another group. A website is far more effective for preventing that than documents circulated via email.
It is important to validate the experiences of other victims we have not yet made contact with. Sometimes people have negative experiences (even severe cases) and have a bad feeling that they are somehow being mistreated but can’t put their finger on it. Hearing others’ stories validates their own experience and basically lets them know that they weren’t crazy, and that it wasn’t their fault.
We wanted to inspire people who are victims of spiritual abuse to know that you don’t need an external organization to come in and do a formal investigation to get anything done. Not that what we did is ideal. A board of qualified elders investigating Dave without bias and following Biblical principles would’ve been far preferable.
Why did you go around gathering stories? Why not just tell your story and call it good?
Dave could probably explain away our story and some people would believe him. There have been people over the years (including me) who have known about a few isolated incidents and gave Dave the benefit of the doubt because they didn’t have enough information to spot patterns. He always leaves himself some amount of plausible deniability, no matter how miniscule. It’s when you see all the cases together that the truth is very clear.
Why did you send Dave a letter with only a subset of the accusations, and then when he did not repent, publish the full set of accusations?
The main purpose of the letter was to give Dave a chance to repent or defend himself when faced with very serious allegations of spiritual abuse. The letter included some of the most serious allegations.
Had he shown himself either repentant or having a satisfactory defense on each case, we likely would have confronted him with the additional allegations as the next step in the process.
The letter focused on relatively black-and-white situations.
If Dave did not repent in response to a handful of serious allegations, we don’t think he would’ve suddenly repented when faced with several more.
Once it’s established Dave is unwilling to repent, the priority is to protect the body of Christ, which means sharing all the evidence the witnesses were willing to share publicly. Sparing an unrepentant abusive leader from public embarrassment is not a priority next to the wellbeing of the church.
Is Dave a false prophet?
Jesus said you’ll know them by their fruit.¹ Fruit is another word for results.
Some people ask what kind of fruit is being talked about in these verses. I would suggest that given the context is prophecy, it’s talking about the results of prophecy, both in terms of whether the predictions come true and whether people incur benefit or harm when they believe his prophetic utterances.
What about the fruit of the Spirit? Dave has said “you can’t fake the fruit,” but scripture doesn’t say that. The entire idea of a whitewashed tomb is that someone can falsely appear righteous on the outside.²
So, is he a false prophet? Take a look at the evidence as well as your own experience and decide for yourself.
But, a word of caution: Jesus did not say that the Holy Spirit would testify internally about who’s a true or false prophet. The test he gave us is fruit, which is external. You cannot simply pray about it and expect God to tell you the answer.
¹ ““Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. “You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? “So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. “A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. “So then, you will know them by their fruits.”
(Matthew 7:15–20 NAS95)
² ““Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness. “So you, too, outwardly appear righteous to men, but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.”
(Matthew 23:27–28 NAS95)
Suppose Dave is a false prophet / wolf in sheep’s clothing. Does that mean other people at Friday Night are fake / not real Christians?
No. Jesus portrays false prophets as “ravenous wolves” who come “to you” (i.e. come to the sheep). A wolf being among sheep does not delegitimize them as sheep.
What do I do now? I feel like without Friday Night I don’t have anything. Or I feel like if I leave Friday Night I’m abandoning God.
If you feel those ways, that is evidence that you have an unhealthy attachment to Friday Night. If that’s where you are, I want you to know that it’s not your fault and you are not alone. Friday Night is very good at subtly inculcating the idea that it is superior to most other churches out there. Friday Night is also just a very tight community where a lot of the people know each other really well. That’s a positive aspect that you may not experience as strongly elsewhere.
While there are many good churches out there, groups with cult-like traits have a way of making people feel like they are spiritual marines. If you attend a healthy church, you might lose that emotional high. That might be painful, but it’s better in the long run.. I found for myself that after I left Friday Night, it felt much more natural to see non-Friday Nighters as spiritual equals with just as much to teach me as I might have to teach them.
Is everything I learned from Dave wrong?
No. In my opinion, a lot of Dave’s takes on Scripture are accurate and very insightful.
Quick side note on Dave’s Biblical knowledge: I came to Friday Night already having an advanced degree in theological studies, so I think I’m in a good position to make this assessment. If I were to compare Dave to a typical doctoral-level Bible scholar, I would say his breadth of knowledge and ability to accurately recount Bible stories in detail off the top of his head (including obscure ones) easily exceeds the typical scholar. On the other hand, he lacks knowledge of the original languages, though he knows how to use some of the tools available and has done so with mixed accuracy. He would be weaker on cultural / historical background and other important topics not directly related to Bible study like the history of doctrine and church history, but again, that’s comparing to doctoral-level scholars. All that said, his ability to read the Bible in an English translation while utilizing some external tools and come to accurate interpretations is very strong.
It tends to shock people when they find out that a gifted teacher is abusive, but it shouldn’t. At the beginning of Matthew 23, Jesus told people to do what the scribes and the Pharisees told them,³ which implies they were teaching accurately. The rest of the chapter is a scathing rebuke.
In case it’s helpful, I’ll give you my opinion about some of his teachings. Many of you know a lot of scripture yourselves and don’t need to hear this from me.
The Good
Faith without works is dead / obedience to God is an integral part of real faith
Every believer is called to ministry, not just paid professionals
The Bad
Prophets can get prophecies wrong and still be real prophets. This is an argument from silence, resting on the fact that the New Testament never explicitly says that if you get one wrong, you’re a false prophet. I cannot think of a single example in the New Testament of someone getting a prophecy wrong and still being considered legitimate.
The Agabus example⁴ is interesting because if you read what happens later he appears to get the prophecy technically wrong on a minor detail, but his overarching message is accurate. Dave’s Coin of the Realm and Belarus prophecies are false in their core meaning, not just on a technicality.
Not believing in any kind of original sin – this is an extremely fringe belief. The Council of Ephesus (431 AD) supported the doctrine of original sin. This was an ecumenical council, meaning it was supported by both the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic (and Protestants didn’t exist back then). There was widespread agreement among the Protestant reformers that original sin exists, even if they did not all agree on the details.
The Ugly
Polygamy is not a sin
Watching porn isn’t necessarily always a sin <— Note: he may not say this outright, but he has hinted at it many times.
Lust doesn’t count until you hatch a plan to actually commit the sin
The Debatable
Sinless perfection. This idea is not completely out of left field, but it’s still fairly fringe. It seems like an extremely dangerous idea to toy with, given 1 John 1:8.⁵
You can be truly saved and then choose to walk away from God. I agree with Dave on this one. But there are also plenty of knowledgeable people who fall on the other side.
No divorce / remarriage. While there is a biblical case to be made for divorce not being permitted even in case of adultery, it is not the only way to read those verses, and the end result of it can seem at odds with God’s mercy and kindness. In Luke 6:6-11, Jesus heals a man with a withered right hand on the Sabbath. You have a rule to abide by (not working on the Sabbath) coming into apparent conflict with restoring this man’s basic wellbeing. And Jesus says: “is it lawful to do good or to do harm on the Sabbath, to save a life or destroy it?” I’m not saying case closed, now you can divorce for adultery and abuse. I’m saying it’s debatable and you should not feel like Dave or any other individual person is so spiritually exalted that you have to believe their interpretation.
³ “Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them.”
(Matthew 23:1–3 NAS95)
⁴ “As we were staying there for some days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. And coming to us, he took Paul’s belt and bound his own feet and hands, and said, “This is what the Holy Spirit says: ‘In this way the Jews at Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.’””
(Acts 21:10–11 NAS95)
⁵ “If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.”
(1 John 1:8 NAS95)
If Dave is a false prophet, is he led by a bad spirit or is it just his own intuition?
I believe Dave prophesies by his own spirit. This is described in Ezekiel 13 and Jeremiah 23:16ff. Interestingly, these are texts which I have never heard discussed at Friday Night or the Monday Night Inner Circle.
It’s very important to understand that false prophecies do not always have a supernatural explanation, though one might come to that conclusion if they only read 1 John 4 to the exclusion of Ezekiel 13 and Jeremiah 23. False prophecies can simply be the person’s imagination run amok. This is not simply a modern idea used to explain away spiritual realities.
If Dave were prophesying by a false spirit, I would expect him to have real spiritual power (signs and wonders) in line with Deuteronomy 13.
If you’re interested in learning about a cult leader who claimed to be Christian and may have actually wielded spiritual power via witchcraft, see this podcast:
Tyler Deaton Cult: A Survivor’s Story, Part 1
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-roys-report/id1470242499?i=1000705457364
Does Dave himself actually believe he hears God, or is it all one giant lie?
Certain prophecies indicate he does believe he is hearing from God:
The Coin of This Realm prophecy. If he was consciously making stuff up out of nowhere to manipulate people, he would not prophesy things that can easily be shown false in the future.
Belarus prophecy (see Cara’s Testimony). Same logic.
Another prophecy I am not at liberty to share.
That said, the rough timeframe for the above three prophecies is ~2005-2015. It is possible he realized post-2015 that he was a false prophet and then began consciously deciding to con people. But knowing Dave, that just feels unlikely to me.
Are you saying you don’t believe in prophecy?
No, but I would guess the majority of “prophecy” that went on at Friday Night was from people’s own spirits. If people are just prophesying by their own intuition but mistakenly thinking they are hearing God, you would expect them to be hit-and-miss, which is exactly what happens at Friday Night. The problem is that when people miss, instead of recognizing that the hit-and-miss nature is indicative of prophesying by intuition, people are encouraged to “keep trying.” Yet the highest regarded prophet in the group (Dave) has been wrong and continues to be wrong in major ways, which indicates the less experienced “prophets” being trained under him are not on a path to accuracy.
We need to measure prophets the way Jesus told us to (by their fruit). I would suggest that involves looking at the tangible results of their prophetic utterances (are the results life-giving or destructive?), including whether their future predictions come true, as well as examining their character / lifestyle. If you simply brush off / forget about / reinterpret inaccuracies in the name of being “encouraging” and then keep talking about the small handful of times someone got it right, you’re approaching it with bias and finding the conclusion you desire. A broken clock is right twice a day. This is especially dangerous if you have an ego about it / you feel a sense of self worth from being God’s mouthpiece.
Some people think we should expect God to do lots of supernatural things (like prophecies) and that perhaps part of the reason it doesn’t happen more is that people aren’t believing. But 1 Samuel indicates that, at least during the Old Covenant, there were periods of time when word from the Lord was rare:
1Sam. 3:1 ¶ Now the boy Samuel was ministering to the LORD before Eli. And word from the LORD was rare in those days, visions were infrequent.
Similarly, in the New Testament, the early chapters of Acts are full of intense supernatural experiences – Pentecost itself, people being healed simply by coming in contact with Peter’s shadow, Ananias and Sapphira being struck dead after lying in order to appear holier than they were, two angelic jailbreaks (Acts 5:17ff; Acts 12:1ff), etc. Supernatural events don’t disappear by any means in the later chapters, but for the most part they seem less frequent / concentrated / intense.
Lastly, Jesus’ own life is a good example. How many miracles do you think He performed in the first ~30 years of His life versus during His public ministry?
What about the idea that prophets should just avoid prophesying about who someone should marry, where they should live, etc.? Simply because it’s so damaging if it’s wrong?
The problem is scripture doesn’t teach this. Scripture puts things in terms of true prophets and false prophets. If you’re prophesying by your own intuition and telling people it’s the Holy Spirit, then you are misrepresenting God, even if you are well-intentioned and what you say doesn’t end up harming someone.
That said, we do not see prophecies about personal life decisions like marriage, moving, or jobs in the New Testament, unless by “job” you mean a specific ministry role (for example, in Acts 13:2). We see those kinds of specific directions come up in ministry contexts – for example, the series of supernatural events in Acts 16:6-10 which led to Paul preaching the gospel in Macedonia, or Peter’s vision in Acts 10 which had implications for the inclusion of Gentiles into the church.
However, where we DO see groups controlling the personal life decisions of their members is in cults. Some examples:
Mass arranged marriages in the Unification Church⁶
Placement marriage in FLDS Church (Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints)⁷
The Twelve Tribes – “If a brother is interested in dating a sister, then he reports his desire to the Council of Elders…”⁸
There are many more examples.
⁷ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placement_marriage
Do some people just have a harder time seeing their own faults, and we should cut them some slack?
Recognizing your own sin is one of the most basic things about being a Christian. I’m not saying we never have situations where we’re in the wrong and have trouble seeing it. But that’s not what we’re talking about with Dave. It’s the Pharisee in Luke 18:9-14 who doesn’t see his own sin and goes away unjustified.⁹ So no, it is not okay for any Christian to be clearly in the wrong but simply too proud to admit fault, much less a leader.
Matthew 18 outlines a process for disciplining a brother in sin. The brother gets three chances to listen, and if he refuses to listen all three times, he is excommunicated. Why would we hold a leader to a lower standard than the rest of the church?
⁹ See also John 9:41
What could’ve stopped all this bad stuff from happening?
Most obviously, Dave had many chances to humble himself when confronted with his sin. Dave is the main problem. It is important to not just jump to “the system” or the enablers. Dave is responsible for his legacy of spiritual abuse.
At the same time, there will always be untrustworthy people who desire positions of spiritual leadership for personal gain.
The best way to systematically protect people is to have accountability structures in place, to educate leaders on abuse dynamics, and to create safe ways for people to report their experiences. Friday Night failed in all of these. Because of these failures, many people have been afraid to share their stories. We have found it was common for people to think that whatever they shared wouldn't make a difference. Sometimes people shared their stories and were ignored. We are also encouraged though because this is changing. Now as we share our stories and the evidence, people are learning that Dave cannot be trusted.
No system will be perfect, thus it is important for people to speak up when they are able.
Isn’t the real problem that people just put too much stock in what Dave says?
This is a form of victim blaming that downplays a number of key dynamics:
Dave’s genuine scriptural knowledge that creates a convincing appearance of legitimacy as a spiritual leader.
Dave’s connection (past or present) to mainstream churches and ministry organizations like Scottsdale Bible Church and CRU, adding to the image of legitimacy.
Dave’s positioning himself as a surrogate father figure to emotionally vulnerable people, creating emotional dependency.
Dave’s long history of successfully sweeping his offenses and false prophecies under the rug.
Dave’s ability to weave narratives that explain away people’s issues with him as anything but his fault (for example, saying that someone only responded negatively to his actions because of past trauma from their father).
The culture of secrecy around Friday Night that prevents the kind of free flow of information that would help people see through Dave.
In short, the people inside Friday Night are not stupid, and there are very good reasons why they trust him. They simply do not have the information necessary to break free.
Scripture does not blame the victims. It doesn’t happen in 1 Samuel 2. We know Jesus condemned corrupt religious leaders, but we have no record of Jesus blaming the widows and orphans for falling prey to their schemes. Paul condemns hypocritical Jews in Romans 2:17-24 and tells them God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of them. Paul does not blame the Gentiles for failing to make a distinction between God Himself and the people who take His name in vain. Scripture puts the blame first on the abusers, second on the enablers (see 1 Samuel 2 again).
That’s not to say we should not be wise. We are to be shrewd as serpents.¹⁰ But there is a difference between talking about that calling in general, and using it to deflect blame away from the perpetrators of abuse.
¹⁰ ““Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be shrewd as serpents and innocent as doves.”
(Matthew 10:16 NAS95)
Won’t there be lots of damage to the body of Christ because you are airing Dave’s dirty laundry?
See Why Air the Church’s ‘Dirty Laundry’? on the Resources page.