I am currently teaching different attributes during the Sunday school, and during this time someone asked me whether or not the King James Version was the only reliable version. I must confess that I have not heard this question in all seriousness in all my years in ministry. I have looked at the arguments during my time in Seminary, but I have not run into anyone that actually holds this view. That is until this young lady asked the question.
I first asked if that is what she believed, and she said no, but her employer believes that the KJV is the only inspired version of the Bible. I do believe that the KJV is a beautiful translation and believe it to be a valuable translation, but it is not the only infallible translation, and definitely not the only inspired.
There are just too many questions that would need to be answered for the English version of the Bible to be considered the only inspired version and the only version to be used. There are at least 1,200 versions of the Bible out there in many languages, so why not the Latin version, or the African version, or the Greek version?
If we were going to pick based on the longest enduring version then we would have to use the Latin Vulgate and if we were going to use the most widely available and used today it would then be the New International Version.
Why do they consider the recent KJV to be the inspired version and not the 1611 version? One reason would be because the 1611 version had many errors in it. Not just simplistic errors either, but serious errors. One was in Matthew 26:36 where Jesus’ name was replaced with Judas’ name in the verse. Or what about the second edition where 20 words are repeated in Exodus 14:10? In 1611 there were two different editions that differ from one another. Which one should be used?
The errors mentioned above are just some of the problems over the years that the KJV has been distributed. There is the wicked version where one of the commandments says, “though shalt commit adultery” in Exodus 20:14. In the 1659 version there was a claim of 20,000 errors, and I did not mistype that number, it is 20, 000. Not to mention the original KJV version had the apocryphal books in it, and those are not considered part of the canonical books.
Now, if you pick the KJV in the original as the inspired version then you have to admit that some things are meaningless and false. What do you think is meant by “We do you to wit” in 2 Corinthians 8:1 (KJV)? How about “I trow not” in Luke 17:9 (KJV)? How is possible that words are continuously changed in the inspired version? Just in case you are wondering the “We do you to wit” means “We want you to know,” and “I trow not” means “I think not.” Other words now not in use: creeple, et, shalbe, middes and ioy. I have not even gotten into verses that would have the exact opposite meaning if we relied only on the original KJV today.
Taking the extreme view that the KJV is the only version to use can be seen as anti-intellectual as it fails to carefully and insightfully respond to language changes and thus culture. They tend to isolate themselves instead of engaging culture as Paul did (Acts 17). How can one preach the Word effectively to other societies and cultures if one does not understand to whom they are preaching it and their surroundings? Must we teach everyone the English language before they can understand the Saving grace of Christ?
Below is a list taken from Dr. Norman Geisler’s Theology, Volume 1 that gives some reasons for not accepting that the KJV is the only version that is inspired and all others should be compared to it. We forget that Christ was fully God and fully man, and to place one version of the Bible diminishes the human side of the Bible.
The Bible had forty human authors utilizing their own writing style and personality to proclaim the words within the Bible.
The Bible was written in Greek, Hebrew and Aramiac, which are all human languages and not a spiritual one.
Poetry, allegory, parables and symbols are all used within the Bible as literary forms.
There is simplistic to very extravagant language used in the Bible, demonstrating different human literary forms.
Shepherds, prophets, historians, and the apostles all used their different human perspectives to write the truths contained in the Bible.
Human thought processes are revealed within the pages of the Bible. Just read Psalms sometime.
Joy, pain, anger, vengeance, forgiveness and many more human emotions are seen within the text of the Bible.
Different human cultures are seen within the Bible.
Josh. 10:13; Numbers 21:14; Acts 17:28; 1 Cor. 15:33; Titus 1:12 are all other written sources used within the Bible.
Again, I do not believe there is any version better then the other in a fashion where one is “more” inspired, but believe we can utilize many different versions from all the different languages out there today. One should not place the Bible on a pedestal above God, as that becomes Bibliolatry.
The KJV Bible is a wonderful version, and should be read for its’ beauty, but it should not be considered as the only inspired version out there today. A new Christian today would have many struggles reading the KJV version as compared to the NIV or even the New King James Version. As long as the truths are not changed then we need to allow these versions that will help someone from America and from Africa to understand the saving grace of Christ and how to live out that life in their daily lives.
For more information on this debate you can pick up Dr. Norman Geisler’s theology work mentioned above or D.A. Carson, “The King James Debate.”
Sunday, July 30, 2006
Sunday, July 23, 2006
A New Kind of What?
I was told continually by a few people that I should read this book by Brian McLaren called, ‘A New Kind of Christian.’ It is becoming popular among the college and young professional population. Being a College Minister I figure I better read it to see what new enlightenment this book could bring to my ministry. Unfortunately, for me, it would only bring frustration and confusion, as it was not what I thought it was going to be at all. I found this book to be dangerous and leading down a slippery slope that could throw those who follow its principles into heresy and unorthodox Christianity very quickly.
I think one of the reasons this book is popular is because everyone thinks that since “everyone” else thinks it is good then so should they. It is to me a fad book, and has no more quality to me then Dan Browns ‘Da Vinci Code’ story. Both are written the same way, in story form and claiming truth within the tales they are telling. Both have literary backgrounds and would know that the best way to tell what you believe as truth and to get others to buy into it is to wrap it around a well written story, which they have both done. I know it seems to be an unfair and poor comparison, but they are both spreading information that can be damaging to the Christian that reads them and is not founded in Biblical truth. To me McLaren’s could be worse, as he writes under the umbrella of being a Christian and a pastor as well. His could be more far reaching, as those who read it will just accept his convoluted ideas about Christianity and the truths found in the Bible because he is a Christian.
With that warning said, I do want to start with the positive about the book, as I think it could still be a book worth reading. It just needs read with a critical mind. Test what he is saying and see if it does line up with Biblical truth. I do like that McLaren challenges how we think about God and Christianity and that we need to be more engaged in our communities. And I would agree with those challenges, but not with his answers to a lot of those challenges, in particular to how it pertains to the Bible and our faith. I want to keep these blogs at a readable length. I will only talk about a couple of issues within the book, but there are many more than I will mention below.
The first flag went up for me when the two antagonists, Daniel and Neo were talking and they were discussing what will be the future of Christianity. Neo ends up telling a story about being at a stop light and seeing a crucifix with a dream-catcher on the rear view mirror of another car. He said that some would see this as, “. . . syncretism, a Samaritan mix of Christianity with a pagan religion. . . .” I would agree with this definition, but he did not. This is what he wrote he perceived, “I would interpret that scene very differently. My guess would be that this driver respects Christianity but finds something lacking in the modern version. . .” He goes on to say that the dream catcher is holistic and fulfills that need that is missing in Christianity. That may be correct in that the driver is missing something in his life, but it should be found through building his relationship with Christ through prayer, worship, discipleship and meditating on the word. If his church is not supplying this then he needs to find another church. Then again maybe the guy is just superstitious and has no interest at all in either religion, but in any regards to allow this would be just the same issue Paul was dealing with in the 1 Corinthians church. It would lead to a pagan influenced Christianity and thus would end up negating many doctrines of the Bible.
Some would say, “Now come on, he was just using it as an example, but he does not necessarily believe that one should be allowed to do it.” I would say there are two problems with that, because for one McLaren says on page 36, “Well, there really isn’t such a thing as the Christian worldview.” He has the main character who is influencing the pastor say this, and then he goes on to give a poor reasoning behind its’ truth. Again on page 75 he has Neo say, “That’s why, in my mind, it should be possible to be a Christian and yet be culturally Buddhist, Muslim, or Navajo.” It is nearly impossible to be culturally any of those, as these three above intertwine everything through their customs. One could be culturally Indian, Palestinian, American, or Canadian, but not still part of a religious culture. However, Buddhists, Muslims and Navajos all intertwine their religious beliefs with everything they do in life, whether it is politics or home life. Does McLaren mean that we can sit in a sweat tent until we hallucinate (actually he goes on to say we can in another book), or have more than one wife and just add Jesus to a list of other gods out there? That is part of the culture of Buddhism, Muslim and Navajo. This is not Biblical and we are not to live that way. “Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power” (Col. 2:8). Anything else added to the Christian faith other than what is laid down by the Bible, where Christ communicated with us, is communicating a false doctrine and thus should not be followed. We do not need to add to our faith, as Christ is all we need. The problem is that we just do not believe it at times, nor seek Him as we should.
Through out the book he challenges Biblical truths and concepts. In the beginning he challenges the creation account with Neo’s belief in evolution. He later challenges the belief of a literal hell, and he continues to do this in his book ‘Generous Orthodoxy.’ But this one also put up a red flag to me, which can be found on page 56, “Sure, there was history, but not with all the modern trimmings like concern for factual accuracy, corroborating evidence, or absolute objectivity.” Luke tells us that, “it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed” (1:3-4). Either Luke is lying or McLaren is lying in his story. I am going to lay my cards on McLaren. Again, we see false information being passed as truth in a story form and people will believe it without even questioning whether it is true or not, because a pastor said it was so. We need to test everything by Scripture.
This is ridiculous on all accounts, as is seen from the beginning of Luke just quoted. The apostles talk about what they saw, and there are writers in ancient history that account for things that happened, making corroborating evidence. My question then would be, “Why should I believe anything else about the Bible if I cannot even believe the history or accounts of what happened?” Our faith is based on the evidence of things not seen, as Hebrews 11:1 put it so eloquently. Meaning the evidence of history, including the eye witness accounts, creation, and everything else all points to God. Hebrews 6:18 says, “that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie. . . .” If the Bible is the Word of God and God cannot lie then how can any historical mistakes be in it? God can use a crooked stick to make a straight line, meaning God can use a sinful man to still write an inerrant book. Questioning the very reliability of Scripture in the fashion he does with no evidence to support it and a plethora of evidence against his premise, both Biblically and secularly, makes me wonder what the motive really is.
I find this book to be dangerous and not a book that should be read by a Christian who is not founded in their faith. If one wants to read a book about how to take your church into heresy and into a watered down faith, then this book is for you. There are many other issues that could be challenged about this book, but the two mentioned should be enough to demonstrate the dangers of such a belief system. I can see now why so many churches are struggling with the homosexuality issue and the Trinity and the atonement. They have fallen into this thought process that there is not a Christian worldview and that we can incorporate unbiblical cultural beliefs into Christianity. If the ideas that McLaren is spouting take root we could be in serious trouble in the next few years.
I believe that the church has to be relevant to whom they are trying to reach without ever watering down the Gospel or challenging the truths within it. It is not the Bible or God that needs to change; it is us if we do not agree with what was being said. We are either reading incorrectly or we are not willing to fall under the rule of God. The question is, “Do you control God and how you are going to worship Him? Or is He the ruler of all and you are going to fall down and worship Him, following what He commands in Scripture?” If there is a historical fact that one cannot prove that does not mean it is not true, it just means we need to keep searching and I guarantee that we will discover the truth one day. My God does not lie, and He would not use His word to purposely deceive His children. My God is all-powerful and can write an inerrant book even through the sinners He chose as apostles.
This book fails as a challenge to the modern world and is counterproductive to anyone who reads it. I am frightened that Brian is going to lead a lot of Christians astray through his books and concepts. If anyone asks you to read this book, then run away. Don’t look back don’t ask any questions, just run. Remember, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16). Unfortunately Mr. McLaren would have you believe otherwise by the tone of his books.
I think one of the reasons this book is popular is because everyone thinks that since “everyone” else thinks it is good then so should they. It is to me a fad book, and has no more quality to me then Dan Browns ‘Da Vinci Code’ story. Both are written the same way, in story form and claiming truth within the tales they are telling. Both have literary backgrounds and would know that the best way to tell what you believe as truth and to get others to buy into it is to wrap it around a well written story, which they have both done. I know it seems to be an unfair and poor comparison, but they are both spreading information that can be damaging to the Christian that reads them and is not founded in Biblical truth. To me McLaren’s could be worse, as he writes under the umbrella of being a Christian and a pastor as well. His could be more far reaching, as those who read it will just accept his convoluted ideas about Christianity and the truths found in the Bible because he is a Christian.
With that warning said, I do want to start with the positive about the book, as I think it could still be a book worth reading. It just needs read with a critical mind. Test what he is saying and see if it does line up with Biblical truth. I do like that McLaren challenges how we think about God and Christianity and that we need to be more engaged in our communities. And I would agree with those challenges, but not with his answers to a lot of those challenges, in particular to how it pertains to the Bible and our faith. I want to keep these blogs at a readable length. I will only talk about a couple of issues within the book, but there are many more than I will mention below.
The first flag went up for me when the two antagonists, Daniel and Neo were talking and they were discussing what will be the future of Christianity. Neo ends up telling a story about being at a stop light and seeing a crucifix with a dream-catcher on the rear view mirror of another car. He said that some would see this as, “. . . syncretism, a Samaritan mix of Christianity with a pagan religion. . . .” I would agree with this definition, but he did not. This is what he wrote he perceived, “I would interpret that scene very differently. My guess would be that this driver respects Christianity but finds something lacking in the modern version. . .” He goes on to say that the dream catcher is holistic and fulfills that need that is missing in Christianity. That may be correct in that the driver is missing something in his life, but it should be found through building his relationship with Christ through prayer, worship, discipleship and meditating on the word. If his church is not supplying this then he needs to find another church. Then again maybe the guy is just superstitious and has no interest at all in either religion, but in any regards to allow this would be just the same issue Paul was dealing with in the 1 Corinthians church. It would lead to a pagan influenced Christianity and thus would end up negating many doctrines of the Bible.
Some would say, “Now come on, he was just using it as an example, but he does not necessarily believe that one should be allowed to do it.” I would say there are two problems with that, because for one McLaren says on page 36, “Well, there really isn’t such a thing as the Christian worldview.” He has the main character who is influencing the pastor say this, and then he goes on to give a poor reasoning behind its’ truth. Again on page 75 he has Neo say, “That’s why, in my mind, it should be possible to be a Christian and yet be culturally Buddhist, Muslim, or Navajo.” It is nearly impossible to be culturally any of those, as these three above intertwine everything through their customs. One could be culturally Indian, Palestinian, American, or Canadian, but not still part of a religious culture. However, Buddhists, Muslims and Navajos all intertwine their religious beliefs with everything they do in life, whether it is politics or home life. Does McLaren mean that we can sit in a sweat tent until we hallucinate (actually he goes on to say we can in another book), or have more than one wife and just add Jesus to a list of other gods out there? That is part of the culture of Buddhism, Muslim and Navajo. This is not Biblical and we are not to live that way. “Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power” (Col. 2:8). Anything else added to the Christian faith other than what is laid down by the Bible, where Christ communicated with us, is communicating a false doctrine and thus should not be followed. We do not need to add to our faith, as Christ is all we need. The problem is that we just do not believe it at times, nor seek Him as we should.
Through out the book he challenges Biblical truths and concepts. In the beginning he challenges the creation account with Neo’s belief in evolution. He later challenges the belief of a literal hell, and he continues to do this in his book ‘Generous Orthodoxy.’ But this one also put up a red flag to me, which can be found on page 56, “Sure, there was history, but not with all the modern trimmings like concern for factual accuracy, corroborating evidence, or absolute objectivity.” Luke tells us that, “it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed” (1:3-4). Either Luke is lying or McLaren is lying in his story. I am going to lay my cards on McLaren. Again, we see false information being passed as truth in a story form and people will believe it without even questioning whether it is true or not, because a pastor said it was so. We need to test everything by Scripture.
This is ridiculous on all accounts, as is seen from the beginning of Luke just quoted. The apostles talk about what they saw, and there are writers in ancient history that account for things that happened, making corroborating evidence. My question then would be, “Why should I believe anything else about the Bible if I cannot even believe the history or accounts of what happened?” Our faith is based on the evidence of things not seen, as Hebrews 11:1 put it so eloquently. Meaning the evidence of history, including the eye witness accounts, creation, and everything else all points to God. Hebrews 6:18 says, “that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie. . . .” If the Bible is the Word of God and God cannot lie then how can any historical mistakes be in it? God can use a crooked stick to make a straight line, meaning God can use a sinful man to still write an inerrant book. Questioning the very reliability of Scripture in the fashion he does with no evidence to support it and a plethora of evidence against his premise, both Biblically and secularly, makes me wonder what the motive really is.
I find this book to be dangerous and not a book that should be read by a Christian who is not founded in their faith. If one wants to read a book about how to take your church into heresy and into a watered down faith, then this book is for you. There are many other issues that could be challenged about this book, but the two mentioned should be enough to demonstrate the dangers of such a belief system. I can see now why so many churches are struggling with the homosexuality issue and the Trinity and the atonement. They have fallen into this thought process that there is not a Christian worldview and that we can incorporate unbiblical cultural beliefs into Christianity. If the ideas that McLaren is spouting take root we could be in serious trouble in the next few years.
I believe that the church has to be relevant to whom they are trying to reach without ever watering down the Gospel or challenging the truths within it. It is not the Bible or God that needs to change; it is us if we do not agree with what was being said. We are either reading incorrectly or we are not willing to fall under the rule of God. The question is, “Do you control God and how you are going to worship Him? Or is He the ruler of all and you are going to fall down and worship Him, following what He commands in Scripture?” If there is a historical fact that one cannot prove that does not mean it is not true, it just means we need to keep searching and I guarantee that we will discover the truth one day. My God does not lie, and He would not use His word to purposely deceive His children. My God is all-powerful and can write an inerrant book even through the sinners He chose as apostles.
This book fails as a challenge to the modern world and is counterproductive to anyone who reads it. I am frightened that Brian is going to lead a lot of Christians astray through his books and concepts. If anyone asks you to read this book, then run away. Don’t look back don’t ask any questions, just run. Remember, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16). Unfortunately Mr. McLaren would have you believe otherwise by the tone of his books.
Thursday, July 20, 2006
Blue Like Jazz
I am sure you are picking up on why I am writing this with blue lettering, but if not just reread the name of the title. ‘Blue Like Jazz’ is a book written by Donald Miller. It is a very well written and thought provoking. If you have not read this book, it is well worth the price. Warning: this book is not written like any book I have read in a long time, as it reads like jazz, where at times the book flows naturally and elegantly and then it can take an abrupt change. The change though somehow fits perfectly within the context of the story, making it an even better read in my opinion.
I was first apprehensive about reading this book when I saw that Brian McLaren had written a recommendation for the book on the back cover. As I am very leery of the Emergent Church movement, which Mr. McLaren is considered one of the founding fathers. I have read his book ‘A New Kind of Christian’ and ‘Generous Orthodoxy.’ I would have to say both of the books are “as deep as a mud puddle,” as my friend can so eloquently describe something that is lacking. I will post more detailed thoughts on the Emergent Church and McLaren at later postings, but for now let’s focus on ‘Blue Like Jazz.’
Like I said, I was apprehensive, but as I read I became more and more engrossed in the book and the story behind Donald’s spiritual walk. He presents a very compelling story that draws you in and at the same time gives thought provoking commentary that will convict and challenge any Christian no matter where they are in their journey today. “This is the hardest principle within Christian spirituality for me to deal with. The problem is not out there; the problem is the needy beast of a thing that lives in my chest.” This is just one challenging quote of many that you will find within the pages of ‘Blue Like Jazz.’
During an interview Mr. Miller was asked about how some of the Christians were acting, and whether or not that was appropriate. His response is very sufficient for the only warning I would have prior to reading the book. He basically said that he is just reporting the truth and not abdicating or rationalizing any behavior that is described. It is just what happened during his spiritual journey. There is no language that I can remember and nothing a reader would have to worry about, but he does talk about drug use, drinking and smoking, though he never condones the behavior. The behavior actually helped me to intermix with the characters, making me get a better sense of what Donald was going through.
It was a challenge to me because the book in essence, and as stated on the book, is a book about spirituality without the religion. It is that, but also about how a man seeking a true relationship with Christ. He drew closer to Christ and was able to see what it meant to follow Him, even from tree hugging, pot smoking hippies who lived in the woods. You would not think you could learn anything from tree hugging, pot smoking hippies, but Donald clearly demonstrates that even in this situation there is a lesson to learn.
As you can see I am being detailed on my thoughts, but vague about what you can learn. I am doing this on purpose, as I do not want to ruin the book for anyone. You will not go wrong reading this book and you will come away with a new perspective on people different then yourself. Hopefully it will also dare you to look for Christ speaking to you in all situations that present themselves, as it has me. I will end with one more quote from this very provocative and stimulating book. “I can no more understand the totality of God than the pancake I made for breakfast understands the complexity of me. The little we do understand, that grain of sand our minds are capable of grasping, those ideas such as God is good, God feels, God loves, God knows all, are enough to keep our hearts dwelling on His majesty and otherness forever.”
I was first apprehensive about reading this book when I saw that Brian McLaren had written a recommendation for the book on the back cover. As I am very leery of the Emergent Church movement, which Mr. McLaren is considered one of the founding fathers. I have read his book ‘A New Kind of Christian’ and ‘Generous Orthodoxy.’ I would have to say both of the books are “as deep as a mud puddle,” as my friend can so eloquently describe something that is lacking. I will post more detailed thoughts on the Emergent Church and McLaren at later postings, but for now let’s focus on ‘Blue Like Jazz.’
Like I said, I was apprehensive, but as I read I became more and more engrossed in the book and the story behind Donald’s spiritual walk. He presents a very compelling story that draws you in and at the same time gives thought provoking commentary that will convict and challenge any Christian no matter where they are in their journey today. “This is the hardest principle within Christian spirituality for me to deal with. The problem is not out there; the problem is the needy beast of a thing that lives in my chest.” This is just one challenging quote of many that you will find within the pages of ‘Blue Like Jazz.’
During an interview Mr. Miller was asked about how some of the Christians were acting, and whether or not that was appropriate. His response is very sufficient for the only warning I would have prior to reading the book. He basically said that he is just reporting the truth and not abdicating or rationalizing any behavior that is described. It is just what happened during his spiritual journey. There is no language that I can remember and nothing a reader would have to worry about, but he does talk about drug use, drinking and smoking, though he never condones the behavior. The behavior actually helped me to intermix with the characters, making me get a better sense of what Donald was going through.
It was a challenge to me because the book in essence, and as stated on the book, is a book about spirituality without the religion. It is that, but also about how a man seeking a true relationship with Christ. He drew closer to Christ and was able to see what it meant to follow Him, even from tree hugging, pot smoking hippies who lived in the woods. You would not think you could learn anything from tree hugging, pot smoking hippies, but Donald clearly demonstrates that even in this situation there is a lesson to learn.
As you can see I am being detailed on my thoughts, but vague about what you can learn. I am doing this on purpose, as I do not want to ruin the book for anyone. You will not go wrong reading this book and you will come away with a new perspective on people different then yourself. Hopefully it will also dare you to look for Christ speaking to you in all situations that present themselves, as it has me. I will end with one more quote from this very provocative and stimulating book. “I can no more understand the totality of God than the pancake I made for breakfast understands the complexity of me. The little we do understand, that grain of sand our minds are capable of grasping, those ideas such as God is good, God feels, God loves, God knows all, are enough to keep our hearts dwelling on His majesty and otherness forever.”
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
Opening Day
As this is my first blog, and it seems to be the thing to do now, I have taken the jump and going into this new adventure. This will be short and sweet as I am just trying to set everything up and see how everything moves forward.
My intention for this blog is to allow those of you interested to read my thoughts on topics of interest to me, in particular Christianity. I will also look at a variety of issues that will typically centralize along the main theme of Christianity. I will attempt to look at the tougher issues of the day and some issues not so tense, but either way the attempt is to just put my thoughts on the blog and allow those who wish to comment or engage to do so.
My first thoughts of the day will be coming soon. . . .
My intention for this blog is to allow those of you interested to read my thoughts on topics of interest to me, in particular Christianity. I will also look at a variety of issues that will typically centralize along the main theme of Christianity. I will attempt to look at the tougher issues of the day and some issues not so tense, but either way the attempt is to just put my thoughts on the blog and allow those who wish to comment or engage to do so.
My first thoughts of the day will be coming soon. . . .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)