This article discusses advanced hermeneutics. I say "advanced" because I have yet to hear seminaries or read commentaries that demonstrate that they can think boldly outside-the-box, stop making excuses for the Word of God being difficult or seemingly contradictory, and make theology truly a study of WHAT GOD SAYS instead of developing their personal opinions about God and making Scripture adjust to it. This is not for the faint of heart, but any true Wesleyan with some flavor of Openness will easily grasp the concepts.
Isaiah 37: Did God know the future when he said what would happen to Rabshekah?
Right after King Hezekiah's prayer for deliverance, God sent Isaiah to relay to the king what would happen to the forces of the Assyrians. Was this a demonstration of God's foreknowledge? or, was it something else.
The hyper-Grace or hyper-Sovereignty people would immediately assume that foreknowledge or predestination come into play here. Despite their good intentions to maintain the doctrine of the Sovereignty of God, they are actually falsely elevating it to a level that is both unrealistic, unreasonable and primarily unbiblical.
Luke 10:20-23. Did Jesus know that Judas would betray him when he said these words?
Jesus clearly addressed his disciples, which included Judas Iscariot in verse 20, "...do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.”" Then again in verse 23, Jesus told his disciples (which included Judas Iscariot), "Blessed are the eyes that see what you see!"
It is quite easy to see that Jesus could not have waited for Judas to be absent to speak these words. Obviously, Judas was present in this remarkable events. So how can someone who would eventually betray Jesus be blessed by Jesus with these words. Note especially, "rejoice that your names (including Judas Iscariot who was part of those being addressed by Jesus) are written in heaven".
Wow, what an affront to the "once saved, always saved" believers.
The hyper-Grace/hyper-Sovereignty perspective would have no logical interpretation for this as it obviously points to the Son of God making a clear mistake based on their theology of Sovereignty, predestination and God-in-total-control. Yes, they can make excuses and work around the actual truth of the event but whatever it is, it will not sound logical, reasonable nor biblical.
From our perspective, however, there is logic and consistency with our established doctrines of God's love and man's free will. Judas Iscariot clearly desired to be a disciple of Christ under the belief (as ALL the other disciples) that Christ was indeed the Messiah and Son of God. So he was indeed initially blessed. Do not forget that JUDAS WAS CHOSEN by Christ Himself! He joined primarily for political power. He wanted to rule with the Messiah when he delivers Israel from Roman rule! Unfortunately, however, Judas later found out that Christ was not a political messiah and this greatly disappointed him. We later find out that he also had minimal intention for life transformation as evidenced by his stealing from their moneybag (John 12:6). Only after he witnessed the suffering of the Christ he betrayed that he seemed to have gotten the point of Christ's incarnation and clearly got convicted of sending an innocent man to his death. Disgusted with himself and the repercussions of what he had done, he committed suicide. Quite common sense and logical, right? ....and nothing in the written word to contradict this interpretation!
None of Christ's disciples did get the point of his incarnation until after the resurrection and Christ's re-opening of the Scriptures to them. Unfortunately, Judas was already gone and never got a hold of the divine perspective on Christ's incarnation, death and resurrection.
Was Judas' betrayal of the Christ purely his accountability, or did God have a part by ordaining this to happen and choosing Judas for the role (poor Judas?).
The hyper-Sovereignty perspective would predictably choose the predestination angle of a "God who controls everything". They may seem logical for a "sovereign God" to do but it remains inconsistent with the unfailing Love of God which King David praises over and over again in his Psalms, "The steadfast love of God endures forever and his faithfulness to all generations". RARELY, if ever, did David praise God for his so-called "absolute sovereignty" or aspects of it. And even the aspects of sovereignty that David praised was mostly in the context of God's KHECED and EMETH.
These qualities or attributes of God of love and faithfulness cannot be logically and soundly defended under the premise of hyper-sovereignty if we erroneously stick to the claim that God pre-ordained Judas to betray the Christ. It just does not make sense in any language, in any world, in any context other than a direct contradiction of the main attribute of God which is love.
Now, re-read our alternative interpretation in the previous section and you find consistency, logic, reason and even SIMPLICITY of doctrine of the level that can be revealed to "little children". Luke 10:21, "In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will".
The only biblical hints that Christ knew in advance that Judas would betray him are in John 6:70-71. However, this could alternatively be timed close to the end of His ministry in which case the Christ's knowledge of human nature and months of history observing the behavior of Judas made him aware that this was the bad apple. Then Jesus knowledge of prophecy would make even a wise human guess that Judas was going to fulfill it. We are not discounting the work of the Holy Spirit or the closeness of the Son to the Father. However, this could be alternatively interpreted to say that Jesus' certainty was caused by the confirmation of the either the Holy Spirit, the Father or both.
The other reference is in the book of Acts 1:16 where Peter mentions that Judas was the fulfillment of David's prophecy. Again, this is not necessarily predestination. Even foreknowledge is not involved as Peter was stating these AFTER THE FACT and based on his "new" incite on prophecy, but I would boldly ascertain that there was no specific human in mind when these prophecies were uttered or written.
It simply means that "in the fullness of time", Judas came into the picture and developed into the traitor. We are not ignoring divine intervention here. In fact we believe that there is always divine intervention when timing of fulfillment is perfect. However, NOT in the way that classical theology or the hyper-Sovereignty perspective proposes. This is because we believe in God who does not manipulate hearts directly because of his creation of true free will. Instead, we see a God who may be creating circumstances that would coax or even exploit what was already developing in Judas to the point of betrayal. But pre-ordaining or manipulating hearts directly is inconsistent with the nature of YHWH. In fact, even the devil cannot manipulate hearts, so he works in the mind, distorting truths and tempting man towards anything that would displease God and even make him pull away voluntarily from the Kingdom of God.
The Hardening of Pharoah's heart
This has been another biblical statement that the hyper-Sovereignty people believe confirms specific predestination. May I remind them that such falsehood undermines the true nature of God and the KHECED of God. If such falsehood is to be accepted as truth, then the whole Word of God collapses. It is no longer revelation as it confuses as about the nature and love of God. This is one obvious logical point that I am completely surprised that many classical scholars CANNOT or REFUSE to see. How can God say that he loves us when he defines it as KHECED or AGAPE in 1 Corinthians 13 but demonstrates it in an OBVIOUSLY CONTRADICTORY MANNER even if it is just one case (in fact MORE THAN TWO cases, Pharoah, the Egyptiians, Judas, etc.). THERE SHOULD BE ABSOLUTELY NO EXCEPTION IN SCRIPTURE TO THE DEFINITION AND DEMONSTRATION OF LOVE BY GOD!!!
If there is any exception then God loses his EMETH or FAITHFULNESS TO HIS WORD. God says he is Love but that statement can no longer be trusted if there is even one exception, because who knows if one of us could be the next exception???
Praise be to God! There is an alternative logical, reasonable and biblical interpretation that is simple enough for "little children".
The word of God is written in Hebrew in the Torah and Koine Greek in Romans 11 where Paul mentions the hardening of Pharoah's heart again in Romans 9:17.
First we analyze the Hebrew part where in Exodus chapters 4 to 14 where we have 19 occurrences of the word or phrase that declares that God hardened pharoah's heart. There is another reference to God hardening Sihon's heart in Deuteronomy and there may be more.
Now we have to note that the ancient language of Hebrew was like Chinese characters. They were more like pictures than words unlike the Greek which is closer to English. When speaking in pictures, the only way you can really communicate is by knowing the context of what is being written or spoken. This was the best, shortest way to describe in the simple Hebrew language that God worked it out so that the Egyptians and Pharoah would harden their hearts. God may well have arranged the circumstances to challenge Pharoah's very proud ego, provoking Pharoah to harden is heart more. This is a more logical explanation that is consistent with the nature of God as declared and demonstrated in the rest of the Bible record.
However, the last judge and prophet of Israel, Samuel, explicitly declares the CORRECT interpretation of these events when he questioned Israel's faithfulness in 1 Samuel 6:6, "Why should you harden your hearts as the Egyptians and Pharaoh hardened their hearts?"
So why do we listen to those loquacious and long-winded expositors who say otherwise? The hardening of heart was entirely Pharoah's accountability. This is our AHA moment. Samuel was comparing what the people of Israel both individually and as a group to that of the Egyptians and Pharoah's hardening of the heart. Clearly, Pharoah was entirely responsible for the hardening of his heart! No buts, ifs nor any other faulty assumptions. Need I explain more?
Let us focus on the hermeneutic lesson here:
The context is ALWAYS the basis of the individual words or phrases of Scripture.
There is always the bigger picture. The view of the forest should explain the individual trees and each tree must confirm our view of the forest. Which brings us to the next hermeneutic point...
The big picture enables a better understanding of the smaller pictures.
The correct theological framework enables a better understanding of the chapters and passages of Scripture AND the smaller verses should not contradict the small contexts and the small contexts should not contradict the bigger contexts, etc.
Here is why we see that the hyper-Sovereignty perspective has a faulty theological framework as it breeds contradictions in the individual passages of Scripture or passages that cannot be logically interpreted.
Our theological framework so far seems solid:
"God's purpose/project in history is to create a people of faith he would call his "kingdom" comprised of people who would love him back out of their own free will in the same way that God loves them out of His own free will. Since Love and Relationship is God's primary concern, he has to RISK creating GENUINELY autonomous and unrestricted free-will. Since free will has to be genuine and autonomous, God gives up control over the heart of man. Otherwise, common sense tells us that love or relationship is a FAKE. Because Love and Relationship is God's primary concern, he looks on the heart of man and the condition of man's heart is the only basis for determining his eternity, whether he goes to heaven (kingdom extension) or hell. Salvation starts with surrendering our free will back to God by acknowledge Him as our Lord. Only then may we accept Him as Savior. This renders utterly useless any lip service or insincere ceremonial activities to the all-knowing and highly intelligent YHWH."
This alone is the reason WHY the Chief End of Man (non-Calvinist) is none other than the Greatest commandment (Loving God truly and loving others truly the way God loves) mentioned 4 times in Scripture and explained 3 times by the Son of God Himself! That seems more authoritative than the Westminster Confession or the Heidelberg Cathecism. Now, try to use this framework to analyze why God does what he does in any Scripture passage.
How will God derive his 144,000 in Revelations 7 and 14
This question was asked in one of our inductive Bible study lessons. The expected answer, of course, was that the Sovereign God had already chosen the individuals comprising the 144,000 even before they were born. The surprising response I gave was more logical and closer to the nature of God and here it is.
"God has determined that there will be 144,000 from the twelve tribes who will be like Billy Graham in the last days. No contest there. However, he has not chosen who they are. He has only planned that they will be Jews from the twelve tribes. Since a thousand years is like one day to God, this means that God will patiently wait for the 144,000 Jewish hearts to mature to the level he desires. Only at that point will he inspire these thousands to deliver his gospel message to the rest of the world. Of course we do not deny that there will be some divine intervention since the timing has to be perfect BUT NOT NECESSARILY TO THE POINT THAT GOD HAS PRE-SELECTED AND WILL MANIPULATE LIKE MAGIC THE HEARTS OF 144,000 specific JEWS with their names already known TO DO HIS WILL. Such a view will make us doubt if God's revelation of his nature through the Bible is reliable or not!"
CONCLUSION:
When we attempt to read or study Scripture, we should recognize the following:
Isaiah 37: Did God know the future when he said what would happen to Rabshekah?
Right after King Hezekiah's prayer for deliverance, God sent Isaiah to relay to the king what would happen to the forces of the Assyrians. Was this a demonstration of God's foreknowledge? or, was it something else.
The hyper-Grace or hyper-Sovereignty people would immediately assume that foreknowledge or predestination come into play here. Despite their good intentions to maintain the doctrine of the Sovereignty of God, they are actually falsely elevating it to a level that is both unrealistic, unreasonable and primarily unbiblical.
- If foreknowledge or predestination was in play here, then why are God's declarations a RESPONSE by God instead of an INITIATION of the event, i.e., God making the exact same declaration as soon as Rabshekah entered the territory of Israel so that the hyper-Sovereignty people would be more impressed?
- If God truly had foreknowledge or would predestine these events, why didn't he do it even before Rabshekah's threats? Why would he even permit Rabshekah to invade the area in the first place, why not send him to China instead so Jerusalem would have peace and Rabshekah would not even be in their consciousness? Where is the wisdom there?
- The declaration is simply God's INTENTION of what He would do IN RESPONSE (v.21 "Because you have prayed to me concerning Sennacherib king of Assyria") to Rabshekah's threats. "I will defend this city to save it, for my own sake and for the sake of my servant David" (v.35). Note the phrase, "I will"!!!
- God fulfills his promise that if those who fear Him call upon His Name, He will deliver them from their troubles.(Psalm 34:17 and many other related verses).
- God proves both his steadfast love (for the sheep of His pasture) and faithfulness (to his word or promises).
- God exercises biblical Omni-competence, that he can handle anything even any surprising thing that arises even if he is blind-folded and with his hands tied behind his back and still come out victorious!
- Just based on those three points above, we get revelation and blessing in a way which the hyper-Sovereignty interpretation does NOT give in a clear logical way.
Luke 10:20-23. Did Jesus know that Judas would betray him when he said these words?
Jesus clearly addressed his disciples, which included Judas Iscariot in verse 20, "...do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.”" Then again in verse 23, Jesus told his disciples (which included Judas Iscariot), "Blessed are the eyes that see what you see!"
It is quite easy to see that Jesus could not have waited for Judas to be absent to speak these words. Obviously, Judas was present in this remarkable events. So how can someone who would eventually betray Jesus be blessed by Jesus with these words. Note especially, "rejoice that your names (including Judas Iscariot who was part of those being addressed by Jesus) are written in heaven".
Wow, what an affront to the "once saved, always saved" believers.
The hyper-Grace/hyper-Sovereignty perspective would have no logical interpretation for this as it obviously points to the Son of God making a clear mistake based on their theology of Sovereignty, predestination and God-in-total-control. Yes, they can make excuses and work around the actual truth of the event but whatever it is, it will not sound logical, reasonable nor biblical.
From our perspective, however, there is logic and consistency with our established doctrines of God's love and man's free will. Judas Iscariot clearly desired to be a disciple of Christ under the belief (as ALL the other disciples) that Christ was indeed the Messiah and Son of God. So he was indeed initially blessed. Do not forget that JUDAS WAS CHOSEN by Christ Himself! He joined primarily for political power. He wanted to rule with the Messiah when he delivers Israel from Roman rule! Unfortunately, however, Judas later found out that Christ was not a political messiah and this greatly disappointed him. We later find out that he also had minimal intention for life transformation as evidenced by his stealing from their moneybag (John 12:6). Only after he witnessed the suffering of the Christ he betrayed that he seemed to have gotten the point of Christ's incarnation and clearly got convicted of sending an innocent man to his death. Disgusted with himself and the repercussions of what he had done, he committed suicide. Quite common sense and logical, right? ....and nothing in the written word to contradict this interpretation!
None of Christ's disciples did get the point of his incarnation until after the resurrection and Christ's re-opening of the Scriptures to them. Unfortunately, Judas was already gone and never got a hold of the divine perspective on Christ's incarnation, death and resurrection.
Was Judas' betrayal of the Christ purely his accountability, or did God have a part by ordaining this to happen and choosing Judas for the role (poor Judas?).
The hyper-Sovereignty perspective would predictably choose the predestination angle of a "God who controls everything". They may seem logical for a "sovereign God" to do but it remains inconsistent with the unfailing Love of God which King David praises over and over again in his Psalms, "The steadfast love of God endures forever and his faithfulness to all generations". RARELY, if ever, did David praise God for his so-called "absolute sovereignty" or aspects of it. And even the aspects of sovereignty that David praised was mostly in the context of God's KHECED and EMETH.
These qualities or attributes of God of love and faithfulness cannot be logically and soundly defended under the premise of hyper-sovereignty if we erroneously stick to the claim that God pre-ordained Judas to betray the Christ. It just does not make sense in any language, in any world, in any context other than a direct contradiction of the main attribute of God which is love.
Now, re-read our alternative interpretation in the previous section and you find consistency, logic, reason and even SIMPLICITY of doctrine of the level that can be revealed to "little children". Luke 10:21, "In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will".
The only biblical hints that Christ knew in advance that Judas would betray him are in John 6:70-71. However, this could alternatively be timed close to the end of His ministry in which case the Christ's knowledge of human nature and months of history observing the behavior of Judas made him aware that this was the bad apple. Then Jesus knowledge of prophecy would make even a wise human guess that Judas was going to fulfill it. We are not discounting the work of the Holy Spirit or the closeness of the Son to the Father. However, this could be alternatively interpreted to say that Jesus' certainty was caused by the confirmation of the either the Holy Spirit, the Father or both.
The other reference is in the book of Acts 1:16 where Peter mentions that Judas was the fulfillment of David's prophecy. Again, this is not necessarily predestination. Even foreknowledge is not involved as Peter was stating these AFTER THE FACT and based on his "new" incite on prophecy, but I would boldly ascertain that there was no specific human in mind when these prophecies were uttered or written.
It simply means that "in the fullness of time", Judas came into the picture and developed into the traitor. We are not ignoring divine intervention here. In fact we believe that there is always divine intervention when timing of fulfillment is perfect. However, NOT in the way that classical theology or the hyper-Sovereignty perspective proposes. This is because we believe in God who does not manipulate hearts directly because of his creation of true free will. Instead, we see a God who may be creating circumstances that would coax or even exploit what was already developing in Judas to the point of betrayal. But pre-ordaining or manipulating hearts directly is inconsistent with the nature of YHWH. In fact, even the devil cannot manipulate hearts, so he works in the mind, distorting truths and tempting man towards anything that would displease God and even make him pull away voluntarily from the Kingdom of God.
The Hardening of Pharoah's heart
This has been another biblical statement that the hyper-Sovereignty people believe confirms specific predestination. May I remind them that such falsehood undermines the true nature of God and the KHECED of God. If such falsehood is to be accepted as truth, then the whole Word of God collapses. It is no longer revelation as it confuses as about the nature and love of God. This is one obvious logical point that I am completely surprised that many classical scholars CANNOT or REFUSE to see. How can God say that he loves us when he defines it as KHECED or AGAPE in 1 Corinthians 13 but demonstrates it in an OBVIOUSLY CONTRADICTORY MANNER even if it is just one case (in fact MORE THAN TWO cases, Pharoah, the Egyptiians, Judas, etc.). THERE SHOULD BE ABSOLUTELY NO EXCEPTION IN SCRIPTURE TO THE DEFINITION AND DEMONSTRATION OF LOVE BY GOD!!!
If there is any exception then God loses his EMETH or FAITHFULNESS TO HIS WORD. God says he is Love but that statement can no longer be trusted if there is even one exception, because who knows if one of us could be the next exception???
Praise be to God! There is an alternative logical, reasonable and biblical interpretation that is simple enough for "little children".
The word of God is written in Hebrew in the Torah and Koine Greek in Romans 11 where Paul mentions the hardening of Pharoah's heart again in Romans 9:17.
First we analyze the Hebrew part where in Exodus chapters 4 to 14 where we have 19 occurrences of the word or phrase that declares that God hardened pharoah's heart. There is another reference to God hardening Sihon's heart in Deuteronomy and there may be more.
Now we have to note that the ancient language of Hebrew was like Chinese characters. They were more like pictures than words unlike the Greek which is closer to English. When speaking in pictures, the only way you can really communicate is by knowing the context of what is being written or spoken. This was the best, shortest way to describe in the simple Hebrew language that God worked it out so that the Egyptians and Pharoah would harden their hearts. God may well have arranged the circumstances to challenge Pharoah's very proud ego, provoking Pharoah to harden is heart more. This is a more logical explanation that is consistent with the nature of God as declared and demonstrated in the rest of the Bible record.
However, the last judge and prophet of Israel, Samuel, explicitly declares the CORRECT interpretation of these events when he questioned Israel's faithfulness in 1 Samuel 6:6, "Why should you harden your hearts as the Egyptians and Pharaoh hardened their hearts?"
So why do we listen to those loquacious and long-winded expositors who say otherwise? The hardening of heart was entirely Pharoah's accountability. This is our AHA moment. Samuel was comparing what the people of Israel both individually and as a group to that of the Egyptians and Pharoah's hardening of the heart. Clearly, Pharoah was entirely responsible for the hardening of his heart! No buts, ifs nor any other faulty assumptions. Need I explain more?
Let us focus on the hermeneutic lesson here:
The context is ALWAYS the basis of the individual words or phrases of Scripture.
There is always the bigger picture. The view of the forest should explain the individual trees and each tree must confirm our view of the forest. Which brings us to the next hermeneutic point...
The big picture enables a better understanding of the smaller pictures.
The correct theological framework enables a better understanding of the chapters and passages of Scripture AND the smaller verses should not contradict the small contexts and the small contexts should not contradict the bigger contexts, etc.
Here is why we see that the hyper-Sovereignty perspective has a faulty theological framework as it breeds contradictions in the individual passages of Scripture or passages that cannot be logically interpreted.
Our theological framework so far seems solid:
"God's purpose/project in history is to create a people of faith he would call his "kingdom" comprised of people who would love him back out of their own free will in the same way that God loves them out of His own free will. Since Love and Relationship is God's primary concern, he has to RISK creating GENUINELY autonomous and unrestricted free-will. Since free will has to be genuine and autonomous, God gives up control over the heart of man. Otherwise, common sense tells us that love or relationship is a FAKE. Because Love and Relationship is God's primary concern, he looks on the heart of man and the condition of man's heart is the only basis for determining his eternity, whether he goes to heaven (kingdom extension) or hell. Salvation starts with surrendering our free will back to God by acknowledge Him as our Lord. Only then may we accept Him as Savior. This renders utterly useless any lip service or insincere ceremonial activities to the all-knowing and highly intelligent YHWH."
This alone is the reason WHY the Chief End of Man (non-Calvinist) is none other than the Greatest commandment (Loving God truly and loving others truly the way God loves) mentioned 4 times in Scripture and explained 3 times by the Son of God Himself! That seems more authoritative than the Westminster Confession or the Heidelberg Cathecism. Now, try to use this framework to analyze why God does what he does in any Scripture passage.
How will God derive his 144,000 in Revelations 7 and 14
This question was asked in one of our inductive Bible study lessons. The expected answer, of course, was that the Sovereign God had already chosen the individuals comprising the 144,000 even before they were born. The surprising response I gave was more logical and closer to the nature of God and here it is.
"God has determined that there will be 144,000 from the twelve tribes who will be like Billy Graham in the last days. No contest there. However, he has not chosen who they are. He has only planned that they will be Jews from the twelve tribes. Since a thousand years is like one day to God, this means that God will patiently wait for the 144,000 Jewish hearts to mature to the level he desires. Only at that point will he inspire these thousands to deliver his gospel message to the rest of the world. Of course we do not deny that there will be some divine intervention since the timing has to be perfect BUT NOT NECESSARILY TO THE POINT THAT GOD HAS PRE-SELECTED AND WILL MANIPULATE LIKE MAGIC THE HEARTS OF 144,000 specific JEWS with their names already known TO DO HIS WILL. Such a view will make us doubt if God's revelation of his nature through the Bible is reliable or not!"
CONCLUSION:
When we attempt to read or study Scripture, we should recognize the following:
- God is present right in front of you immediately after you read the first word of Scripture or utter the first word of prayer. You are standing on holy ground in the presence of God.
- We have to be open to what God wants to say regardless of our cherished doctrines. Bible ALWAYS trumps doctrine. That is true wisdom and obedience.
- Doctrine should be revised to be consistent with the revealed Word, in the same way that the New Testament should be interpreted in such a way that it DOES NOT and SHOULD NEVER contradict the Old Testament which is the Word of God authenticated by the Lord Jesus Christ himself in Matthew 5:17-20
- When we meet contradictions or difficulties based on our doctrine, it may be time to revise it. Why? Because God's word is God's revelation. When we read it and are still confused, then either God has failed to reveal or we have failed to hear what God is saying. Take your pick which one is more logical!
What God wants is our participation in protecting his integrity by insisting that God's faithfulness to his Word endures to all generations. When Satan wins at either distortion of God's word or distortion of God's nature and attributes, then man is led astray from the narrow way that leads to priceless eternal life. The narrow way is already hard to find. Let us not complicate it farther by confusing those who desire to enter when they have found it.
Any man or even Christian, for that matter, who is confused by God's word or character cannot have true faith. For how can anyone have any solid faith on a confusing "truth"? Like the foolish man at the end of the Sermon on the Mount, his house is built on sand.
No comments:
Post a Comment