Differences between Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism
In most cases, our religious beliefs are inherited from our parents.
Timeline from the Protestant Perspective - the Gospel defines the Church. Corruption then followed which resulted in the Eastern Orthodox breaking away. Protestant belief is that the Gospel lost its prominence, preeminence & became ritualistic. This happened around the time that Constantine (430 A.D.) declared Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire. He may have done so for political reasons, because of the strong structure of the Christian community & he built upon it. Now you can be forgiven of original sin upon being baptized: everyone was, in the eyes of the Empire/community, Christian. The definition of Christianity, therefore, begins to get blurry because EVERYONE is a Christian. "I'm a Roman citizen, so of course I'm a Christian." Christianity became more aligned with the Roman Empire rather than Jesus & the Bible. A state religion can breed corruption. And if the blurr happens, how do we know who the true Christians are?
Then the Church began to be identified by the sacraments and not the Gospel. Tradition rather than the Bible. Everyone hoped that in the 1500's that the Church (Catholic, which is what everyone was) would define the Gospel at the Council of Trent. However, Martin Luther (an Augustinian Catholic monk) recognized doctrinal problems & thru studies he realized that salvation was not through the sacraments, but was something that God gives to us freely based upon no works of our own. The Church began to sell indulgences (forgiveness of sins past, present & future) if people contributed to the building of St. Peter's Basilica (now the seat of the Roman Catholic Church). Martin Luther then challenged it. The Church door then became the bulletin board, the place where the debate would take place. Luther asked that if the Pope has the authority to release souls out of purgatory thru indulgences, why does he not release them out of the goodness of his heart? THAT's when the Catholic Church (universal) said we are now ROMAN Catholic & if you are going to follow a German monk then you are not part of the Church. And if you were not part of the "Church," you could not have salvation - period, because the Church is the administer of salvation. The Restoration follows: the Church is defined by the Gospel, the Gospel is not defined by the Church. John Calvin said "justification is the hinge upon which Christianity stands." Is one saved through the sacraments and then becomes justified or is one declared justified or righteous by a sovereign act of God?
What is the view of Church history from the Catholic perspective?
The Church determines truth. The Church is necessary to determine what books belong in the Bible, what is truth, what is not truth, what is the Gospel, etc. How else do you get rid of heresy? The Church is meant to be an institution to guard the Gospel.
Matthew 16:13 starts the passage in which Jesus speaks to Peter & says that is "upon this rock I will build my Church..." Catholics believe that PETER is the rock, not his confession of faith of who Jesus is. Furthermore, Jesus goes on in the Great Commission & does not give the command to all the world, but to the select few that He is speaking to who are led by Peter. They believe that body of Christ needs the institution of the Church. A Bible in each person's hands could lead to heresy & breakaway denominations, so they believe the RC Church is necessary to keep things in line.
Up until the 7th century, there were 5 MAIN Churches (Antioch, Rome, Constantinople, Jerusalem & Alexandria) which were led by 5 different bishops. It gravitated this way because these Churches were in the bigger cities and the smaller Churches rolled up to them. They were all equal. Then came the invasion of islam in 612 A.D., which took out the Antioch, Jerusalem & Alexandria Churches. There was then a fight for supremacy between Rome and Constantinople (which eventually became the Eastern Orthodox) and the emperor ended up being in Constantinople. In 1054 A.D. they split over leaven (Constantinople) vs. unleaven (Rome) bread & both ex-communicated one another, taking away the other's salvation. Also in the west (Rome) they shaved while in Constantinople they did not, so the east said that the Roman Catholics were being polluted by the Greeks who also shaved. Rome also converts everything into Latin. In 1453 islam invades again & takes Constantinople, so Eastern Orthodox flees north & becomes Russion Orthodoxy. So now Rome has no other equals and becomes more powerful.
What does the Eastern Orthodox Church believe?
That the Church defines the Church. They see Protestants & Catholics as being similar & themselves as being totally different. They wouldn't support class studies on Christianity because the Church defines the Church.
Why are there so many Protestant denominations?It's based upon the will of man.
Reformed tradition says that man is so depraved that he does not have the ability to find God. Man is completely lost.
Catholics believe that after baptism & the removal of original sin man has ability through the sacraments to find God. Free will.
Arminian tradition - man does have ability to choose God/free will.
B.C., the Hasidim were a group that said "we are not going to let this happen to us again," meaning abandoning God & worshiping other gods. The intention was noble, but the idea spread and other groups came about.
The Saduccees were Jews who let the Roman culture infiltrate their lives (they accepted it & rolled with it).
The Pharisees rose up against it & made all kinds of rules to keep them separate from the Roman culture. And that's how other branches bloom & while they start with the fundamentals, they then build a wall around themselves to keep them separate, they push out culture so as not be infiltrated by the outside world & end up focusing on the non-essentials (e.g., since the world smokes, we're not gonna smoke, etc.) .
Charismatics moved away from the written text because it was always being challenged by the liberals & focus on the gifts of the Spirit.
Evangelicals are preserving the fundamentals without building the walls of separation.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Article-"Representing Christ in a Postmodern World"
Speaks about how our postmodern society wants everyone to be tolerant of each other's beliefs. And by being tolerant, we are to let people say & believe that allah is God? That there are a number of ways to get into Heaven? That by being a good person you can get into Heaven? No way! The postmodern society isn't about tolerance, but wants us to compromise our beliefs!
At the heart of postmodernism is relativism, the belief that truth is in the eye of the beholder. So all truth depends on the situation, culture or language of the person. Two conflicting statements can, therefore, be true: abortion is wrong vs. abortion is ok if.....
Christians tend to fight/argue relativism with absolute objectivism, the belief that all truths are objective. This is the opposite of relativism; all truth is not dependent on the situation, culture or language of the person.
The problem is that there are certain beliefs that can be relative (e.g., eating ham is ok for me, but a sin for the person who believes it is not ok to eat it but does anyway; listening to a certain music may be ok for some but wrong for others). So there are instances when the non-trivial truths can sometimes be relative. We just need to discern between what are the absolute objective truths and what are not. What truths exactly according to the Bible are essential to salvation; what exactly is the content that we must believe in order to be saved; is it enough to just believe or do we need to believe AND turn from sin; do we need to believe in the virgin birth to be saved; is it essential that each believer be baptized...
We need to filter the issues into relative (in the eye of the beholder/depends on situation) vs. objective (definite right or wrong). A chart is included (pg 153 out of the 157 pgs in Adobe) with
True Relativity
Situational (dependent on time, culture, situation)
Autonomous (truly relative. There is no right or wrong. Based on opinion)
vs. True Objectivity (there is a definite right or wrong & not dependent on time, culture or circumstances).
Essential: necessary for salvation. Truths that a person must accept in order to be a true Christian.
Non-essential: not necessary for salvation (e.g., the cessation of tongues either ceased or did not cease to exist today. The truth of tongues is objective, but it is not a prerequisite for salvation.
CREATE YOUR OWN CHART W/RELATIVISM ON THE LEFT & OBJECTIVISM ON THE RIGHT. AS EVERY DAY ISSUES ARISE, PRACTICE CATEGORIZING THEM.
Problem with the Church is that we tend to major in the minors; that is we "witness" to people about the non-essential objective truths that are not important to salvation (rock & roll is OK, having a glass of wine is OK - these tend to be more relative anyway). And if we emphasize the non-essentials too much, they end up becoming on-par with the essentials and it's then hard to really differentiate between the two (this is called "overstatement"). The non-essentials become more important and the essentials become less important.
So some truth is relative, but there are also objective truths - especially the path to salvation, which must not be watered down by non-essential truths.
At the heart of postmodernism is relativism, the belief that truth is in the eye of the beholder. So all truth depends on the situation, culture or language of the person. Two conflicting statements can, therefore, be true: abortion is wrong vs. abortion is ok if.....
Christians tend to fight/argue relativism with absolute objectivism, the belief that all truths are objective. This is the opposite of relativism; all truth is not dependent on the situation, culture or language of the person.
The problem is that there are certain beliefs that can be relative (e.g., eating ham is ok for me, but a sin for the person who believes it is not ok to eat it but does anyway; listening to a certain music may be ok for some but wrong for others). So there are instances when the non-trivial truths can sometimes be relative. We just need to discern between what are the absolute objective truths and what are not. What truths exactly according to the Bible are essential to salvation; what exactly is the content that we must believe in order to be saved; is it enough to just believe or do we need to believe AND turn from sin; do we need to believe in the virgin birth to be saved; is it essential that each believer be baptized...
We need to filter the issues into relative (in the eye of the beholder/depends on situation) vs. objective (definite right or wrong). A chart is included (pg 153 out of the 157 pgs in Adobe) with
True Relativity
Situational (dependent on time, culture, situation)
Autonomous (truly relative. There is no right or wrong. Based on opinion)
vs. True Objectivity (there is a definite right or wrong & not dependent on time, culture or circumstances).
Essential: necessary for salvation. Truths that a person must accept in order to be a true Christian.
Non-essential: not necessary for salvation (e.g., the cessation of tongues either ceased or did not cease to exist today. The truth of tongues is objective, but it is not a prerequisite for salvation.
CREATE YOUR OWN CHART W/RELATIVISM ON THE LEFT & OBJECTIVISM ON THE RIGHT. AS EVERY DAY ISSUES ARISE, PRACTICE CATEGORIZING THEM.
Problem with the Church is that we tend to major in the minors; that is we "witness" to people about the non-essential objective truths that are not important to salvation (rock & roll is OK, having a glass of wine is OK - these tend to be more relative anyway). And if we emphasize the non-essentials too much, they end up becoming on-par with the essentials and it's then hard to really differentiate between the two (this is called "overstatement"). The non-essentials become more important and the essentials become less important.
So some truth is relative, but there are also objective truths - especially the path to salvation, which must not be watered down by non-essential truths.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Session 6 - Defining Essentials & Non-Essentials
Many people's beliefs about Christianity are based on non-essentials (e.g., don't drink, don't cuss, don't do this & don't do that, hypocracy). That's all they know & see.
True Relativity (what is true to you. Example could be following street signs/laws, but if your wife is giving birth....
True Objectivity (true for ALL people at ALL times & at ALL places).
Situational Relativity - depends on the circumstances. Breaking the law in an emergency may be OK with the police (speeding to get pregnant wife to the hospital). Other Christians may look at going to the movies as participating in the worldly culture, but it can depend on what movie you are seeing. Going to an x-rated movie with the intent to be sexually aroused would be wrong, but you needed to review it for some other reason... "The Passion of the Christ" was rated R.
Is it wrong to drink? What about in culture's where people drink, you choose not to, people feel condemned, and you lose your credibility as far as teaching/leading. This has been a problem with missionaries & it depends on the situation/culture. Evidently many Christians at one point sided with Hitler because he condemned smoking, drinking, gambling, etc. The Biblical principle is to not get drunk, but Christians have made it a blanket statement and condemned it altogether. For those that do drink, WE MAY BE THE ONLY REPRESENTATIVE OF CHRIST THAT THEY KNOW (about 8mins in to section 2 Michael gives a testimony of a situation with his friends and how just having a beer with unsaved guys actually opened up their hearts). A good response to those who ask "why don't you get drunk?" is "because I want to think correctly." This is true & you are not condemning them.
Eating meat sacrificed to animals, homeschooling, etc. are situational.
Autonomous Relativity - purely opinion. Best food, best song, is it warm or cold, what type of Church music should we use (praise & worship, hymns, metal)
Non-Essential Objectivity-not essential for salvation (e.g., the date of Christ's return, (the date may be objective/true, but believing in the date will not save someone), views of predestination (God could have looked into the future and seen that who would choose to follow Him), unfortunately most Church disagreements are over the non-essentials. canon of Scripture (some Churches have 15 extra books), is the Bible God's inspired Word? Speaking in tongues.
Michael uses an example of being in Romania and a guy said that he did not believe in God so don't talk to me about His inspired Word. So together they read Isaiah 53, which was written way before Christ & no one disputes that it was before Christ. It clearly defines what would happen to Jesus. The guy said that it doesn't matter because I don't believe that the Bible is God's inspired Word. Michael said, "That's fine, but that's not what I asked you. What are you going to do with this passage that pre-dates Christ?" The guy read it over and over again & ultimately it changed him so much that his friends could not even believe it!
True Essential Objectivity - Christ's deity. The existence of God. Death, burial & resurrection of Christ. The atonement.
True Non-Essential Objectivity - smoking is wrong. But where do we draw the line? What about coffee? Eating a Big Mac (which is not good for you)?
WE NEED TO BE CONSISTENT IN OUR THEOLOGY!! The postmodernists are watching.
Section 4: What is essential for orthodoxy?
1. Picture a circle with a bullseye being "What is essential for salvation"
2. Next outer circle is side of that is "What is essential for orthodoxy? It's like establishing an umbrella (traditions of the Church; unorthodoxy is denying some of the core Christian truths such as the trinity, man is essentially good).
Section 5: Certainty. How certain are we about our beliefs? Postmodernists are always looking for absolute certainty. We usually do not have absolute certainty.
Chart of certainty - goes from -10 to 0 then to 10.
True Relativity (what is true to you. Example could be following street signs/laws, but if your wife is giving birth....
True Objectivity (true for ALL people at ALL times & at ALL places).
Situational Relativity - depends on the circumstances. Breaking the law in an emergency may be OK with the police (speeding to get pregnant wife to the hospital). Other Christians may look at going to the movies as participating in the worldly culture, but it can depend on what movie you are seeing. Going to an x-rated movie with the intent to be sexually aroused would be wrong, but you needed to review it for some other reason... "The Passion of the Christ" was rated R.
Is it wrong to drink? What about in culture's where people drink, you choose not to, people feel condemned, and you lose your credibility as far as teaching/leading. This has been a problem with missionaries & it depends on the situation/culture. Evidently many Christians at one point sided with Hitler because he condemned smoking, drinking, gambling, etc. The Biblical principle is to not get drunk, but Christians have made it a blanket statement and condemned it altogether. For those that do drink, WE MAY BE THE ONLY REPRESENTATIVE OF CHRIST THAT THEY KNOW (about 8mins in to section 2 Michael gives a testimony of a situation with his friends and how just having a beer with unsaved guys actually opened up their hearts). A good response to those who ask "why don't you get drunk?" is "because I want to think correctly." This is true & you are not condemning them.
Eating meat sacrificed to animals, homeschooling, etc. are situational.
Autonomous Relativity - purely opinion. Best food, best song, is it warm or cold, what type of Church music should we use (praise & worship, hymns, metal)
Non-Essential Objectivity-not essential for salvation (e.g., the date of Christ's return, (the date may be objective/true, but believing in the date will not save someone), views of predestination (God could have looked into the future and seen that who would choose to follow Him), unfortunately most Church disagreements are over the non-essentials. canon of Scripture (some Churches have 15 extra books), is the Bible God's inspired Word? Speaking in tongues.
Michael uses an example of being in Romania and a guy said that he did not believe in God so don't talk to me about His inspired Word. So together they read Isaiah 53, which was written way before Christ & no one disputes that it was before Christ. It clearly defines what would happen to Jesus. The guy said that it doesn't matter because I don't believe that the Bible is God's inspired Word. Michael said, "That's fine, but that's not what I asked you. What are you going to do with this passage that pre-dates Christ?" The guy read it over and over again & ultimately it changed him so much that his friends could not even believe it!
True Essential Objectivity - Christ's deity. The existence of God. Death, burial & resurrection of Christ. The atonement.
True Non-Essential Objectivity - smoking is wrong. But where do we draw the line? What about coffee? Eating a Big Mac (which is not good for you)?
WE NEED TO BE CONSISTENT IN OUR THEOLOGY!! The postmodernists are watching.
Section 4: What is essential for orthodoxy?
1. Picture a circle with a bullseye being "What is essential for salvation"
2. Next outer circle is side of that is "What is essential for orthodoxy? It's like establishing an umbrella (traditions of the Church; unorthodoxy is denying some of the core Christian truths such as the trinity, man is essentially good).
Section 5: Certainty. How certain are we about our beliefs? Postmodernists are always looking for absolute certainty. We usually do not have absolute certainty.
Chart of certainty - goes from -10 to 0 then to 10.
Friday, August 3, 2007
Session 5 - Christian Epistemology
We all have elements of modern & postmodern epistemology.
Modernist objections to Christianity:
Modernists: facts, rationality, and evidence. Postmodernists: fairness, relationships & emotion.
Modernists Correspondence View of Truth: (1) Truth is an objective reality whether someone believes it or not; and (2) that objective reality is grounded in nature. If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to see it, does it make a sound? The modernist's answer would be yes. The modernist would also say that in the same time and same relationship, one can not equal something else (e.g., God can not be good and evil, God can not be Allah & Yaweh).
Key motto of modernist: "Man can & will know all truth."
What is the postmodern view of truth? (1) Truth is a perspective reality that exists in the perspective of the individual or group and (2) that perspective reality is grounded in time. They'd say that the Bible is OUR Bible in time. The postmodernist would also say that in the same time and same relationship, one CAN equal something else (e.g., God can be good and evil, God can be Allah & Yaweh).
Key motto of postmodernist: "The truth can not be known."
Religious spin on postmodernism Epistemology:
Universalism: the belief that all people, good & bad, will make it to Heaven.
Pluralism: belief that there are many ways to God, which are all equally valid.
Syncretism: the assimilation of different beliefs & practices. Mixing.
Inclusivism: belief that salvation is only through Christ, but Christ may be revealed in other religions. The idea that a Buddhist who never heard of Christ will be covered/saved by the blood of Christ.
Exclusivism: Traditional Christian view is can only be a Christian if you have heard of Christ & believe in Christ.
Catholic church's Vatican II says: "But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the creator. In the first place among these are the Moslems, whom professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful god, who on the last day will judge mankind. Those also who can attain salvation through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His church, yet sincerely seek god and, moved by grace, strive by their deeds to do his will as it's known to them through the dictates of conscience." Wha?!
What is the Christian view of truth?
We are above, so to speak, the modernist & postmodernist views and are trying to interpret the Gospel into the culture that we have.
The Christian's Correspondence view of truth: (1) that truth is an objective reality that exists whether someone believes it or not and (2) that objective reality is grounded in an eternal God.
God can not violate the law of non-contradiction. God can not lie, He can not cease to exist, etc.
Key motto of truth: the secret things belong to our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever, that we may observe all the words of this law (Deut. 29:29).
Apophadic Theology: "negative" theology which views God & much of theology as beyond our understanding &, therefore, beyond defining through positive assertations. Finite people can not say what the infinite God is, but only what He is not. God is uncreated, immutable, infinite and immortal. (attractive to the postmodernists). Eastern Orthodox churches.
Cataphatic Theology: affirmative, "positive" theology which seeks to understand God in positive terms, understanding that God communicates to us through language & concepts that are analagous to Who and what He truly is (analogy of language). Western churches, protestants, Roman Catholocism. Emphasizes what we CAN know.
Christian view of truth starts with Cataphatic theology (things known/revealed) and then move towards Apophadic theology (things unknown; mystery). Start with soft skepticism, then to Perspectivism (understanding thru various perspectives) to Objectivism which leads closer to truth.
Modernist objections to Christianity:
- What about all the contradictions?
- God is just a crutch. Religion was created by man.
- Jesus was just a man.
- The Bible of today is not the same one that was written 2 thousand years ago.
- If I can't see it, I don't believe it.
- Evolution has proven Christianity to be wrong.
- The Bible is full of myths & fairy tales.
- How did Noah get all those animals on the ark?
- There is no such thing as miracles.
- Do you really believe in the story of Adam & Eve?
- If God exists, why is there evil?
- The Inquisition and the Crusades show that Christianity is oppressive.
- Christianity is a way to God, but not the only way.
- Christianity is arrogant & exclusive.
- How do you know that your Bible is better than other religious writings?
- Why does God allow bad things to happen to good people?
- What about those that have never heard?
- The Church is full of hypocrites.
- Why would God send anyone to Hell?
- The God of the O.T. is cruel, partial & unjust.
Modernists: facts, rationality, and evidence. Postmodernists: fairness, relationships & emotion.
Modernists Correspondence View of Truth: (1) Truth is an objective reality whether someone believes it or not; and (2) that objective reality is grounded in nature. If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to see it, does it make a sound? The modernist's answer would be yes. The modernist would also say that in the same time and same relationship, one can not equal something else (e.g., God can not be good and evil, God can not be Allah & Yaweh).
Key motto of modernist: "Man can & will know all truth."
What is the postmodern view of truth? (1) Truth is a perspective reality that exists in the perspective of the individual or group and (2) that perspective reality is grounded in time. They'd say that the Bible is OUR Bible in time. The postmodernist would also say that in the same time and same relationship, one CAN equal something else (e.g., God can be good and evil, God can be Allah & Yaweh).
Key motto of postmodernist: "The truth can not be known."
Religious spin on postmodernism Epistemology:
Universalism: the belief that all people, good & bad, will make it to Heaven.
Pluralism: belief that there are many ways to God, which are all equally valid.
Syncretism: the assimilation of different beliefs & practices. Mixing.
Inclusivism: belief that salvation is only through Christ, but Christ may be revealed in other religions. The idea that a Buddhist who never heard of Christ will be covered/saved by the blood of Christ.
Exclusivism: Traditional Christian view is can only be a Christian if you have heard of Christ & believe in Christ.
Catholic church's Vatican II says: "But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the creator. In the first place among these are the Moslems, whom professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful god, who on the last day will judge mankind. Those also who can attain salvation through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His church, yet sincerely seek god and, moved by grace, strive by their deeds to do his will as it's known to them through the dictates of conscience." Wha?!
What is the Christian view of truth?
We are above, so to speak, the modernist & postmodernist views and are trying to interpret the Gospel into the culture that we have.
The Christian's Correspondence view of truth: (1) that truth is an objective reality that exists whether someone believes it or not and (2) that objective reality is grounded in an eternal God.
God can not violate the law of non-contradiction. God can not lie, He can not cease to exist, etc.
Key motto of truth: the secret things belong to our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever, that we may observe all the words of this law (Deut. 29:29).
Apophadic Theology: "negative" theology which views God & much of theology as beyond our understanding &, therefore, beyond defining through positive assertations. Finite people can not say what the infinite God is, but only what He is not. God is uncreated, immutable, infinite and immortal. (attractive to the postmodernists). Eastern Orthodox churches.
Cataphatic Theology: affirmative, "positive" theology which seeks to understand God in positive terms, understanding that God communicates to us through language & concepts that are analagous to Who and what He truly is (analogy of language). Western churches, protestants, Roman Catholocism. Emphasizes what we CAN know.
Christian view of truth starts with Cataphatic theology (things known/revealed) and then move towards Apophadic theology (things unknown; mystery). Start with soft skepticism, then to Perspectivism (understanding thru various perspectives) to Objectivism which leads closer to truth.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Session 4 - Postmodern Epistimology
What is epistimology? Websters dictionary: "The theory or science of the methods or grounds of knowledge. " The justification of knowledge, how do we come to know truth...
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Session 3: Categories of Theology
As we got thru the program, we need to decipher which folk theology beliefs we have are worthy to be held & be willing to let go of those that are not.
Most heretical beliefs over the course of history have come from the different interpretations of the Bible.
Systematic Theology - takes a subject & says what does the OT say, the New T, etc. An analysis of scripture. Truth & understanding God does not come just from the Bible, but thru nature, our experiences, community, reason, history (the same Spirit that inspired St. Augustine is the same Spirit that inspires us today), etc. Why do we tend to think that our generation knows more about Jesus than prior generations? There is probably more legitimacy in those that came before us than in our own walk because our walk is tainted by our culture and we are further removed from the original centuries. Those before us have things to offer that we do not & we have things to offer that they did not.
Most heretical beliefs over the course of history have come from the different interpretations of the Bible.
Systematic Theology - takes a subject & says what does the OT say, the New T, etc. An analysis of scripture. Truth & understanding God does not come just from the Bible, but thru nature, our experiences, community, reason, history (the same Spirit that inspired St. Augustine is the same Spirit that inspires us today), etc. Why do we tend to think that our generation knows more about Jesus than prior generations? There is probably more legitimacy in those that came before us than in our own walk because our walk is tainted by our culture and we are further removed from the original centuries. Those before us have things to offer that we do not & we have things to offer that they did not.
Friday, July 6, 2007
Lesson 1-Chris
I really liked the section about deconstruction and reconstruction of our faith. It's a key part of being ready to study theology but a sometimes difficult one. I feel I'm at a place where this really fits. I'm excited to discover some things for myself instead of others explaining them to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)