Ghost stories fascinate me. I'm not sure why. But I love to hear them. I am intrigued to hear about people (or animals) who have passed on from this life but are not resting. Maybe I want to help them? Maybe I fear I will be one? I know I don't actually want to meet one. I'm not sure how to tell the difference between a ghost and a demon, and I don't think it would be fun to figure out. (We can look at demons in the bible another day.)
But these are just fairy tales, strange EMF readings, echoes of another time, energy trapped by certain physical objects... Perhaps...
Ghost Hunters is now a popular SyFy show, where they use science to try to prove or disprove hauntings and echoes. I spent several hours watching this show, criticizing their methods, the drama, I like doing that. But you don't see me looking for ghosts. It's really easy to criticize from the couch.
But did you know there are ghosts in the bible? And not just the Holy Ghost (Spirit). Full on ghosts. Cause people to faint from terror ghosts.
Read with me in 1 Samuel. The woman could see Samuel, but Saul could not. Then Samuel speaks to Saul (and I assume it was because his spirit possessed the woman, look closely at 1 Samuel 28:21. That, or she got so frightened she ran away?) I would argue that Saul "fainted" in 1 Samuel 28:20.
Jesus' disciples believed in ghosts. They accused him of being one when he was walking on water.
Leviticus has many laws about avoiding people who commune with ghosts.
Why so harsh? Some of my favorite theories on why God said "Kill, Kill, Kill" are a) the word came through Moses, and as the word came
through Adam, we see that man likes to set the line back much further than God sets it - God incorporated Rahab into the nation after all, b) the nation wasn't very sophisticated yet, they were just freed slaves with not much education, and to learn the heart of God they needed to remove all temptation in the most drastic way possible. Perhaps I will examine this in more detail in another post.
There are also many references to evil spirits and demons. We'll tackle that in yet another post.
Friday, February 24, 2012
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Raiders of the Lost Ark claims examined - Part 3
There is a lot of story in the movie I will skip, because I'm focusing on the ark and validating the story against the bible.
Fast forward in the movie to the well of souls. Snakes. Why did it have to be snakes? (I think it should have been rats, unless, we assume the snakes were spawned from Aaron's staff?)
<tangent>Jones and Sallah come up to a stone box with lightning flashing outside... And then somehow, they are able to lift the lid? You know what that should weigh? A LOT... But I can tell from the way it moves and then breaks when they throw it down the stairs that it was really just made of styrofoam. Mystery solved.</tangent>
I am glad they used wooden poles to lift the Ark out of the odd shaped box and carry it. Good thing they didn't touch it, like Uzzah! But through out the movie, I see just two men carrying it, even though, in the bible, 4 is recommended.
<tangent>God didn't like his ark being carried on a cart, I doubt he liked it in a truck much more. Luckily, it's in a box, but...</tangent>
When it's on the ship, there is a scene when the ark burns the symbol of the third reich. Interesting touch, nothing supports or refutes that claim that I saw.
When they get to the convenient island in the Mediterranean, there is an interesting exchange among the Germans and Rene.
When the Nazi party is proceeding with the ark to the altar site, they have 4 guys carying it, and it is under a purple cloth. Good idea, I like that.
Next, Jones threatens to blow up the Ark. I don't think God would mind, it's been missing for centuries, and even though it's mentioned in Revelation it is probably just an earthly representation of the one in heaven. But the explosion should be remarkable.
<tangent>Um... why are they taking the girl (Marion) in a white dress? God doesn't like human sacrifices (except the occasional willing sacrifice). Luckily, Rene talks Jones out of it or we would never get to see wax melting quite like it does later.</tangent>
Once at the destination, two soldiers carry it to the top to the "altar", albeit not much of an altar, more like an amphitheater.
<tangent>Is Rene speaking Hebrew? Is he secretly Jewish? Did the Nazis not notice? And what is he wearing? A turban? I only remember a turban from the book of Daniel. A linen ephod? The urim and thummim? Holding a gold scepter? </tangent>
But what is great is that the two soldiers lift the lid. Just lift it. Nothing happens to them. I wonder what Uzzah would have to say about that.
Jones watches while this happens and is secretly happy nothing is in the box. The main German soldier takes his glove off to feel the sand inside.
<tangent>I think they are trying to imply that either 1) this isn't the real Ark, or 2) time has reduced the fragments to dust or 3) the commandments were never written on stone, it was a hoax. But perhaps the pharaoh who took it to Tanis opened it and removed the good stuff? Bummer, I'd really like to see manna.</tangent>
When the electronics go wiggy and electrical stuff explodes and smoke and light pours out of the ark Jones turns his head towards Marion.
Fast forward in the movie to the well of souls. Snakes. Why did it have to be snakes? (I think it should have been rats, unless, we assume the snakes were spawned from Aaron's staff?)
<tangent>Jones and Sallah come up to a stone box with lightning flashing outside... And then somehow, they are able to lift the lid? You know what that should weigh? A LOT... But I can tell from the way it moves and then breaks when they throw it down the stairs that it was really just made of styrofoam. Mystery solved.</tangent>
I am glad they used wooden poles to lift the Ark out of the odd shaped box and carry it. Good thing they didn't touch it, like Uzzah! But through out the movie, I see just two men carrying it, even though, in the bible, 4 is recommended.
<tangent>God didn't like his ark being carried on a cart, I doubt he liked it in a truck much more. Luckily, it's in a box, but...</tangent>
When it's on the ship, there is a scene when the ark burns the symbol of the third reich. Interesting touch, nothing supports or refutes that claim that I saw.
When they get to the convenient island in the Mediterranean, there is an interesting exchange among the Germans and Rene.
- German soldier peon: The altar has been prepared with your radio instructions sir.
- Rene: Good, get the ark there immediately.
- German main soldier fellow: Monsieur, I'm uncomfortable with the thought of this Jewish ritual. Are you sure it's necessary? <tangent>What ritual? The bible has no rituals like this that don't involve death. Didn't Rene read the bible either?</tangent>
- Rene: Let me ask you this: Would you be more comfortable opening the ark in Berlin? For your furor? Finding out only then if the sacred pieces of the covenant are inside? Knowing only then whether you have accomplished your mission, and obtained the one true ark.
When the Nazi party is proceeding with the ark to the altar site, they have 4 guys carying it, and it is under a purple cloth. Good idea, I like that.
Next, Jones threatens to blow up the Ark. I don't think God would mind, it's been missing for centuries, and even though it's mentioned in Revelation it is probably just an earthly representation of the one in heaven. But the explosion should be remarkable.
<tangent>Um... why are they taking the girl (Marion) in a white dress? God doesn't like human sacrifices (except the occasional willing sacrifice). Luckily, Rene talks Jones out of it or we would never get to see wax melting quite like it does later.</tangent>
- Rene: Inside the ark are treasures beyond your wildest aspirations. You want to see it opened as well as I. Indianna, we are simply passing thru history. But this, (he doesn't touch it) this is history.
Once at the destination, two soldiers carry it to the top to the "altar", albeit not much of an altar, more like an amphitheater.
<tangent>Is Rene speaking Hebrew? Is he secretly Jewish? Did the Nazis not notice? And what is he wearing? A turban? I only remember a turban from the book of Daniel. A linen ephod? The urim and thummim? Holding a gold scepter? </tangent>
But what is great is that the two soldiers lift the lid. Just lift it. Nothing happens to them. I wonder what Uzzah would have to say about that.
Jones watches while this happens and is secretly happy nothing is in the box. The main German soldier takes his glove off to feel the sand inside.
<tangent>I think they are trying to imply that either 1) this isn't the real Ark, or 2) time has reduced the fragments to dust or 3) the commandments were never written on stone, it was a hoax. But perhaps the pharaoh who took it to Tanis opened it and removed the good stuff? Bummer, I'd really like to see manna.</tangent>
When the electronics go wiggy and electrical stuff explodes and smoke and light pours out of the ark Jones turns his head towards Marion.
- Jones: Marion, don't look at it. Shut your eyes, Marion, don't look at it no matter what happens.
Perhaps this was Jones' act of faith? God likes faith. Maybe that is why they were spared? I think the reason Jones decided to stop looking was from the verse where 70 men were killed for looking into the ark. <tangent>No women are mentioned, always curious.</tangent>
After the terror, fire comes out in a pillar and drills holes in the soldiers, melts and explodes the guys closest to the ark, then the fire sucks everything up into heaven, and the lid lands firmly back in place. I wonder if this is what the 70 also saw?
Lucky for Marion and Jones, the ropes were burned off, somehow, by the fire of God. But how did Jones and Marion get the Ark off the island? Another unsolved mystery.
<tangent>I love that it goes to Warehouse 13. Even if the box is not to scale as the fellow pushes it down the aisle...</tangent>
In conclusion, I think that the writers of the Raiders of the Lost Ark partially paid attention to the stories they heard in Sunday School. There are many little details in the story that could have easily been made authentic with just a few minor changes.
Still, it is a great, fun, adventure movie. I know I will watch it again.
Raiders of the Lost Ark claims examined - Part 2
Continuing on with our exploration of the claims from the Raiders of the Lost Ark, we come again to the scene where Indiana Jones and his buddy Marcus Brody are chatting with some g-men about hit'er's interest in the Ark of the Covenant.
- Large G-man: What does this ark look like?
- Jones: well, there's a picture of it right here. That's it.
- Small G-man: My God.
- Brody: Yes, that's just what the Hebrews thought.
- Large G-man: Well uh, now, what's that supposed to be coming out of there?
- Jones: Lightning, fire, power of God or something.
- Small G-man: I'm beginning to understand Hitler's interest in this.
- Brody: The bible speaks of the ark leveling mountains and laying waste to entire regions. An army which carries the ark before it is invincible.
Really, Brody, you think the army is invincible because it has the ark? That's what Hophni and Phinehas thought too. If the writers had read this story, they may have changed Brody's wording slightly. It seems to me that they would do well to let Hitler have the ark, it would be more dangerous to his own army than anyone else (but I'm getting ahead of myself).
But Brody makes some serious claims about the Ark of the Covenant. But what do we know it actually did?
- It can part the river Jordan at flood stage
- It can level city walls
- It can break statues
- It can ruin your day, cause people close by to die and also give them tumors in the groin
- It can cause an out break of rats to accompany the tumors
- It can override mother instincts
- It can strike you down for looking in
- It can strike you down for touching it
- It can make kings spare your life
Raiders of the Lost Ark claims examined - Part 1
I love Indiana Jones. Agile and daring, dashing and handsome, quick witted and good with a whip or a gun, solving the riddles of the ancients. And he takes on the Ark of the Covenant.
I first watched this movie when I was atheist, so I didn't worry about the claims they made about the bible. Later, when I watched it again, I was irritated at the little things. Why? Well, how accurate was the movie to what we see in the bible? Here is a snippet of dialog I copied down while watching my DVD version of the movie.
<tangent>A calf... really? Some day, I need to investigate the meaning behind the golden calf, it's all over the old testament and brought down the nation of Israel. But I digress</tangent>
But we never see those pieces again. Deuteronomy lays out the instructions for us nicely, this was missed by the script writer(s). But the instructions for the ark creation are pretty explicit.
Also, according to Hebrews and a other sources in the OT, there were other things in the ark as well. A jar of manna, Aaron's staff (not only does it turn into a snake and swallow other staffs, but it sprouted almonds) and the two tablets. Details, details, details...
But
I also know I am not easy to watch movies with. Hollywood should hire me to
check the consistency of the script before they make the movie. My suspension
of disbelief is broken when the movie breaks any of it's own rules.
I first watched this movie when I was atheist, so I didn't worry about the claims they made about the bible. Later, when I watched it again, I was irritated at the little things. Why? Well, how accurate was the movie to what we see in the bible? Here is a snippet of dialog I copied down while watching my DVD version of the movie.
- Jones: The City of Tanis is one of the possible resting places of the lost ark.
- Small G-man: The lost ark?
- Jones: Yeah, the ark of the covenant, the chest that the Hebrews used to carry around the 10 commandments in
- Large G-man: What, what do you mean, 10 commandments, are you talking about THE 10 COMMANDMENTS?
- Jones: Yes, the actual 10 commandments, the original stone tablets that Moses brought down out of Mount Herob and smashed, if you believe in that sort of thing. Didn't you guys ever go to Sunday school?
- Small G-man: Well I...
- Jones: Well look, the Hebrews took the broken pieces and put them in the Ark and when they settled in Caanan, they put the ark in a place called the Temple of Solomon.
- Brody: In Jerusalem
- Jones: Where it stayed for many years until all of a sudden, whoosh, it's gone.
- Large G-man: Where?
- Jones: Well, nobody knows where, or when
- Brody: However, an egyptial pharoh
- Jones: Shishen
- Brody: Yes, invaded Jerusalem round about 980 BC and he may have taken the ark back to the city of Tanis and hidden it in the secret chamber called the well of souls.
<tangent>A calf... really? Some day, I need to investigate the meaning behind the golden calf, it's all over the old testament and brought down the nation of Israel. But I digress</tangent>
But we never see those pieces again. Deuteronomy lays out the instructions for us nicely, this was missed by the script writer(s). But the instructions for the ark creation are pretty explicit.
Also, according to Hebrews and a other sources in the OT, there were other things in the ark as well. A jar of manna, Aaron's staff (not only does it turn into a snake and swallow other staffs, but it sprouted almonds) and the two tablets. Details, details, details...
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Original Sin(s)
That sinful woman, Eve. If not for her, we'd still be living in the Garden. That is a paraphrased conversation I've heard many times from various folks about Genesis. But what exactly happened there?
You know the story, in Genesis 3 the human race is expelled from the Garden for eating forbidden fruit. What is the first sin? Look at Genesis 3:6.
When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food (gluttony) and pleasing to the eye (lust/idolatry), and also desirable for gaining wisdom (envy/distrust), she took some and ate it (rebellion/disobedience). She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. (enticement)
I am sure there are other interpretations of the sin there, but wow, all those sins mixed up in one act. Shame on Eve!
<Tangent>I think this is why God pays attention when we fast. It makes a special statement to him that we would forego food!</Tangent>
But what was the rule that she broke here? The woman told the serpent in Genesis 3:3 "God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’"
Oh really? That's not what I read in Genesis 2:16-17, when God told Adam "And the LORD God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.” Eve wasn't around yet, she wasn't created until verse 22 of that chapter. So, Adam was told "don't eat" by God, but Eve was told "don't eat, don't touch" by Adam.
<Tangent>A friend of mine (LB) observed that so often we attempt to improve on God's laws, and set the boundary much farther back than God does. In Exodus 23:19, 34:26 and Deuteronomy 14:21 we see "Do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk" and several thousand years later milk and meat can't be in the same refrigerator in some households.</Tangent>
I am sure Adam was doing his best to make sure they never got anywhere close to breaking God's one rule. But when Eve touched the fruit and didn't die, I posture that it was not a leap for her to bite into the fruit, since the first part of the rule was proven false (because it was). God not like it when we add to or take away from his word, perhaps this is why. <Tangent>Perhaps this was Adam's first sin?</Tangent>
But what I really find interesting is in the latter part of Genesis 3:6. It says "She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it."
Did you catch that? He was with her the entire time. He listened to the same speech given by the serpent. There is no dialog recorded with him in this situation. There was no "Hey Eve, hold up, have we really thought this through?" Another scripture, James 4:17 talks about knowing the good we ought to do and not doing it. Adam knew what Eve was about to do was wrong, but did not act to interfere.
I conclude that both of them sinned at the same time, neither is more to blame than the other. And I also see the first evidence for the cliche that "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".
You know the story, in Genesis 3 the human race is expelled from the Garden for eating forbidden fruit. What is the first sin? Look at Genesis 3:6.
When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food (gluttony) and pleasing to the eye (lust/idolatry), and also desirable for gaining wisdom (envy/distrust), she took some and ate it (rebellion/disobedience). She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. (enticement)
I am sure there are other interpretations of the sin there, but wow, all those sins mixed up in one act. Shame on Eve!
<Tangent>I think this is why God pays attention when we fast. It makes a special statement to him that we would forego food!</Tangent>
But what was the rule that she broke here? The woman told the serpent in Genesis 3:3 "God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’"
Oh really? That's not what I read in Genesis 2:16-17, when God told Adam "And the LORD God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.” Eve wasn't around yet, she wasn't created until verse 22 of that chapter. So, Adam was told "don't eat" by God, but Eve was told "don't eat, don't touch" by Adam.
<Tangent>A friend of mine (LB) observed that so often we attempt to improve on God's laws, and set the boundary much farther back than God does. In Exodus 23:19, 34:26 and Deuteronomy 14:21 we see "Do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk" and several thousand years later milk and meat can't be in the same refrigerator in some households.</Tangent>
I am sure Adam was doing his best to make sure they never got anywhere close to breaking God's one rule. But when Eve touched the fruit and didn't die, I posture that it was not a leap for her to bite into the fruit, since the first part of the rule was proven false (because it was). God not like it when we add to or take away from his word, perhaps this is why. <Tangent>Perhaps this was Adam's first sin?</Tangent>
But what I really find interesting is in the latter part of Genesis 3:6. It says "She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it."
Did you catch that? He was with her the entire time. He listened to the same speech given by the serpent. There is no dialog recorded with him in this situation. There was no "Hey Eve, hold up, have we really thought this through?" Another scripture, James 4:17 talks about knowing the good we ought to do and not doing it. Adam knew what Eve was about to do was wrong, but did not act to interfere.
I conclude that both of them sinned at the same time, neither is more to blame than the other. And I also see the first evidence for the cliche that "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".
Monday, February 13, 2012
Here there be dragons
On the Chinese calendar, there are 12 years, corresponding to 11 real animals and one "fantasy" animal. The dragon. Every culture seems to have a story of at least one dragon, usually being killed by some valiant person or ogre. Common things about dragons are:
Wow. That does sound fantastic. I've seen that in movies. And yet, this sounds familiar. Remember Job 41:12-34?
Perhaps the creature is just extinct. Or hiding.
- It's very serpent like or lizard like
- It has scales close together it is nearly impossible to pierce
- It is quick, with menacing teeth
- It can breathe fire
Wow. That does sound fantastic. I've seen that in movies. And yet, this sounds familiar. Remember Job 41:12-34?
Perhaps the creature is just extinct. Or hiding.
Beam me up, Scotty
A few years ago some friends of mine were doing a study on the Holy Spirit. For my part, I went thru the bible looking for examples of what the Spirit of the Lord (or the Holy Spirit) did - how does He work? How do we know when he's been around?
I classified 68 references (yes, there are more) and discovered many interesting and faith building things, but I also found something I never expected to find. It's best described in the story of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch.
Look again at this verse: Acts 8:39 "When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away, and the eunuch did not see him again, but went on his way rejoicing."
From the scripture we see:
I think that is odd. Surely they must have said good-bye and thank you? But that is not implied. It was sudden. So I wonder, how could that be? Perhaps...
What? Star Trek teleportation you say? Take a look at the next verse. Acts 8:40 "Philip, however, appeared at Azotus and traveled about, preaching the gospel in all the towns until he reached Caesarea."
Um... he was just on a desert road leading to Gaza, and suddenly he is in Azotus? Azotus is likely Ashdod, a town in the Gaza Strip. Luckily, that is where Philip intended to go, as we saw from earlier in the story.
People in the old testament seemed to expect that the Spirit of the Lord would do such things as teleporting people from one place to another, as seen in 1 Kings 18:12 and 2 Kings 2:16. There are also first hand accounts of this happening directly to Ezekiel in Ezekiel 3:14, Ezekiel 11:1, Ezekiel 37:1, Ezekiel 43:5. Perhaps Ezekiel was in a trance for a couple of those, but I think this disputable matter warrants some consideration.
Besides, teleportation by the Holy Spirit is a fun theory to ponder.
I classified 68 references (yes, there are more) and discovered many interesting and faith building things, but I also found something I never expected to find. It's best described in the story of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch.
Look again at this verse: Acts 8:39 "When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away, and the eunuch did not see him again, but went on his way rejoicing."
From the scripture we see:
- Philip was suddenly taken away.
- It was immediate, as they were exiting the water
- The eunuch didn't see him again, but he wasn't concerned, kept on rejoicing
I think that is odd. Surely they must have said good-bye and thank you? But that is not implied. It was sudden. So I wonder, how could that be? Perhaps...
- Philip lost his mind and ran off like a crazy person (unlikely, as that behavior would have had a memorable impact on the eunuch's next actions)
- Philip quickly ran away (also unlikely, the eunuch would have seen him running)
- Philip was teleported from one location to another ala Star Trek (and the eunuch could have reasoned that Philip was an angel sent by God, even more reason to rejoice)
What? Star Trek teleportation you say? Take a look at the next verse. Acts 8:40 "Philip, however, appeared at Azotus and traveled about, preaching the gospel in all the towns until he reached Caesarea."
Um... he was just on a desert road leading to Gaza, and suddenly he is in Azotus? Azotus is likely Ashdod, a town in the Gaza Strip. Luckily, that is where Philip intended to go, as we saw from earlier in the story.
People in the old testament seemed to expect that the Spirit of the Lord would do such things as teleporting people from one place to another, as seen in 1 Kings 18:12 and 2 Kings 2:16. There are also first hand accounts of this happening directly to Ezekiel in Ezekiel 3:14, Ezekiel 11:1, Ezekiel 37:1, Ezekiel 43:5. Perhaps Ezekiel was in a trance for a couple of those, but I think this disputable matter warrants some consideration.
Besides, teleportation by the Holy Spirit is a fun theory to ponder.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
History and perspective
I enjoy science. I enjoy technology. I enjoy science fiction. I enjoy logic. I enjoy philosophy. I enjoy the bible. I enjoy a lot of things, life is full of wonder and mystery.
I once believed there was no god. I thought the people going to church were just playing an elaborate game with each other, since it appeared to me that their god had no impact on their daily lives. I also considered that people who claimed to believe in god were weak willed and unable to accept responsibility for their own actions. Some these theories may be true for some people, it is not my place to know.
When I studied the universe in college, it became apparent to me that there was more evidence supporting the existence of a god than not, and that it was more of a stretch to believe there was no god than to believe. I was not happy about this. I liked a world governed by logic and chance, I was willing to take responsibility for my choices, but with a god in the mix, I my conscience dictated that I respond differently. Other factors led me to decide that the god of the Judeo-Christian faith was the best candidate, and I began to examine life with God, Jesus and the holy spirit.
It wasn't an instant transformation. That was many years ago, and God has led me thru many varied experiences. This blog is not about that.
This blog is about looking at the bible from my perspective, I enjoy examining different theories. Some of my theories may be controversial. So be it. Some of my theories I will play with for a while and decide I don't actually believe them. They are theories. I am not claiming to have the answers, I will get the answers when I stand before God at the end of days.
God gave me a unique perspective for a reason, and I intend to do my best to glorify him with it to the best of my ability.
I once believed there was no god. I thought the people going to church were just playing an elaborate game with each other, since it appeared to me that their god had no impact on their daily lives. I also considered that people who claimed to believe in god were weak willed and unable to accept responsibility for their own actions. Some these theories may be true for some people, it is not my place to know.
When I studied the universe in college, it became apparent to me that there was more evidence supporting the existence of a god than not, and that it was more of a stretch to believe there was no god than to believe. I was not happy about this. I liked a world governed by logic and chance, I was willing to take responsibility for my choices, but with a god in the mix, I my conscience dictated that I respond differently. Other factors led me to decide that the god of the Judeo-Christian faith was the best candidate, and I began to examine life with God, Jesus and the holy spirit.
It wasn't an instant transformation. That was many years ago, and God has led me thru many varied experiences. This blog is not about that.
This blog is about looking at the bible from my perspective, I enjoy examining different theories. Some of my theories may be controversial. So be it. Some of my theories I will play with for a while and decide I don't actually believe them. They are theories. I am not claiming to have the answers, I will get the answers when I stand before God at the end of days.
God gave me a unique perspective for a reason, and I intend to do my best to glorify him with it to the best of my ability.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)