Information about the bible

stacky1 · Mar 13, 2012

I was wondering if someone could help me out. I am trying to get more into religion, or at least trying to figure out what I believe(i am having difficulties with that), and I am reading some books and have decided to look more toward the bible. My boyfriend suggested I start reading some proverbs, so I have been reading some the past couple nights before I go to bed. At this point I don't really believe in god, but I am trying to figure stuff out. Just a little background, I was raised catholic and went to church all the way through college. I was in ccd as a kid but didn't pay attention or something, cause I don't remember like any of it. In college I was in intervarsity, a christian group, and went to church and bible studies, but I never really got much out of them. So, as a result, I don't know much about the bible. I started reading some and then I got to thinking, and started having questions, and decided to come here to see if i could find some answers. So here are some of my questions, and sorry if I ramble, and sorry if these are answered in the bible or somewhere and I haven't found them yet(i was having trouble reading with all these unanswered questions)...

Who decided to write the bible? Who wrote the books that arnt about a person? How did they know all that happened like in the beginning? Or with proverbs that I'm reading, how did they know all that? And did the ones about people write their own? Who decided who all got to be in the bible? Who put the bible together? How did they know when to stop? Like, why are we not writing more?

Sorry about all the random questions, but those were all roaming around in my head and I had to get them out to ask someone. Sorry if they don't make since or anything. I probably have more, but that is enough for now. Also, if anyone has a recommendation on the order that the bible should be read, that would be helpful, like should I read it cover to cover or in a different order? And also I currently am having trouble believing in god, so if anyone has any books they recommend, that would be greatly appreciated. I currently have the books, the god questions, made for more, christianity: the faith that makes sense, and the christian athiest(the book my boyfriends bible study is using) Thank you for anyone's help! I really appreciate it!

Unix · Mar 16, 2012

Most books on the T are lousy.

A handy volume I've had good use of, is: Amazon.com: drane Early Christian new testament epistles: Books

stacky1 said:
And also I currently am having trouble believing in god, so if anyone has any books they recommend, that would be greatly appreciated.

sdmsanjose · Mar 20, 2012

Quote of Stacky1
Who decided to write the bible? Who wrote the books that arnt about a person? How did they know all that happened like in the beginning? Or with proverbs that I'm reading, how did they know all that? And did the ones about people write their own? Who decided who all got to be in the bible? Who put the bible together? How did they know when to stop? Like, why are we not writing more?

Stacky
You will drive yourself nuts trying to get proof of many things concerning the Bible. The Bible has at its foundation FAITH so do not ever expect to get absolute proof of many things about the Bible.

God does not want to have to constantly prove Himself to anybody, He much prefers you to trust Him. If you come to believe in God you will probably finally realize that God will do just about anything to bring you into fellowship with Him. He also will not let mankind pervert His truths.

Christians often fuss about a lot of things that are sometimes not all that important. I try not getting too involved in those fuss debates but I try to concentrate on the main messages and the spirit of the Bible. I am reprinting below a post that I made on another forum. Maybe you will find it interesting.

Anessa14 Original thread on CFMarried Couples---March 12, 2012
I'm interested to know whther you believe your own translation of the Bible is to be taken literally, word for word
-or-
is it a teaching, God's words to us
My own translation of the Bible is the NIV and the KJ-Hebrew-Greek Study Bible. The Hebrew-Greek Study Bible gives me the original Hebrew-Greek definition of the English words used in the KJ Bible.

Is it possible that through translation that some words are not exactly the same as in the original writings? My answer is YES. Therefore, I would not argue that every word is to be taken literally.

However, I am convinced that the main messages and spirit of the Bible are absolute truth and from God.

For example listed below are a few absolute truths from God:

1 God made mankind in His own Image

2 God gave mankind freewill

3 God has the authority to punish disobedience

4 God made provisions for mankind to be reconciled back to Him

5 Jesus Christ is the way the truth and the life and mankind can only come to God through Jesus Christ.

6 Salvation is through confession that Jesus Christ is Lord and that God raised Jesus from the dead

7 The kind of love that is described throughout the Bible is the greatest desire that God has for mankind

8 God will do just about anything to reconcile mankind back to Him.

The reason that I no longer struggle with if every word is to be taken literally or not is that I am absolutely convinced that God is not going to let mankind pervert his main message and spirit for mankind. I believe that if you read the whole bible you will find great consistency and great clarity of Gods main messages and spirit.

jbarcher · Apr 16, 2012

It's been a month since the OP was posted, but

You can pick up any textbook used at a university / college level and start there. I think your questions are legitimate, sensible and worth pursuing; I've done that myself for the last decade. It's a really interesting journey that'll take you places.

If you ever come back to this forum, drop me a message.

Radagast · Apr 29, 2012

stacky1 said:
I was wondering if someone could help me out. I am trying to get more into religion, or at least trying to figure out what I believe(i am having difficulties with that), and I am reading some books and have decided to look more toward the bible. My boyfriend suggested I start reading some proverbs, so I have been reading some the past couple nights before I go to bed...

I'd start with the gospels, myself. They were written by Christians (in my opinion by the Apostles) in the first few decades after Jesus.

The New Testament was basically closed off to include only books by the Apostles and their companions (Luke with Paul, Mark with Peter) -- people who had personal experience of Jesus. It was done by the year 100, although debates as to what exactly should be included lasted for another 200 years or so.

After one of the gospels, I'd read Ephesians or one of the other Pauline letters.

Two good introductory books about Christianity are The Journey and Mere Christianity (click on the links).

Unix · Apr 29, 2012

Those are good advice, Radagast, although I would not recommend reading other Pauline epistles than Ephesians. The book I mentioned on March 16. contains some of the New Testament and bits from poems. The REB in it, is a somewhat good version for Ep 1:1-6:9.

I would also add: don't use a too difficult Bible. Go with for example the Good News Translation (besides the regular protestant American edition, it comes in British editions called the Good News English Bible, and in Catholic Edition). It can be accessed from John 1 KJV | YouVersion It's not about easy language. Versions such as the 2011 NIV and the ESV make study and devotional reading more difficult!

Don't read footnotes in Bibles! If You want to study, go with commentaries instead. I've mentioned commentaries in many posts in this thread: http://www.christianforums.com/t7541241/
... and in: http://www.christianforums.com/t7653202/
The Mt 1-20 commentaries are too comprehensive, You don't need to get/read them, but just have a look at:
http://www.christianforums.com/t7635962-post59953637/#post59953637
... and the issue about Mt 11:27, and read from p. 164 that it was added by the post-Easter Church.

You don't have to pray long prayers, but remember to pray short prayers more often instead, like a few times a week.

Preferably, take notes in Church.

childofdust · May 1, 2012

Shalom, stacky1, hope you return to read this

You asked a lot of good questions. I'll answer a few and let others handle the rest.

Who decided to write the bible?

A very modern question! We moderns are concerned with authorship. All our books always have the name of the author(s) printed on the front page (or easily found in that vicinity!). Because it's important to us exactly who wrote something. That's important to us because part of what it means to be an author (for us) is the concept of creative originality. We don't like it when someone copies something from someone else and uses it as if it were their own text. That's a no-no for us. So in the realm of authorship, existing side-by-side with the idea of creative originality is the idea of copyright: that a particular person somehow owns something that they, themselves, have individually created and that shouldn't be passed off as someone else's.

Okay, you probably knew all that because that's what it means to be an author! But in the ancient Jewish world THERE WERE NO AUTHORS. I do not mean that someone at some point didn't write something. What I mean is that all that stuff above that we find so highly valuable and important (what author means to us)no one in ancient Israel (or anywhere else) before the advent of Hellenism cared about that. Original writers didn't sign their name on their document. The only people who put their name on things were the scribes who copied a text for a client or king. And oftentimes they would put the name of their client or king on the text as well. And scribes did not place a lot of value on originality or individual creation. Rather, scribes considered themselves part of an elite social class. They found their identity in that class. And they strived not for personal, individual glorification, but for the honor and dignity of their profession. So it was far more important that a text came out of a certain scribal school than who wrote the particular text.

Scribes also did not care about copyright or originality. Their craft thrived on reproducing common elements that everyone memorized and it was considered high art to use the same phrases, expressions, and even paragraphs in many different texts without stating who was the author where those things came from. So, for example, here are a few lines in completely different texts that are almost exactly the same (the lines that come after them are also almost exactly the same):

From The Descent of Ishtar
To the dark house, the abode of Irkalla,
To the house which none leave who have entered it,

From Nergal and Ereshkigal
To the dark house, dwelling of Erkallas god,
To the house which those who enter cannot leave,

From the Epic of Gilgamesh
Seizing me, he led me down to the House of Darkness, the dwelling of Irkalla, to the house where those who enter do not come out,

We also see this throughout the Old Testament, where a passage or bits of passages are reused and re-written:

Obadiah 1:1c-2
[1] We have heard a message
from YHWH, and a messenger
has been sent among the nations;
Arise, and let us rise up
against her for battle.
[2] Behold, I will make you
small among the nations;
you shall be greatly despised.

Jeremiah 49:14-15
[14] I have heard a message
from YHWH, and a messenger
has been sent to the nations;
Gather together and come against her,
and rise up to battle.
[15] For indeed, I will make you
small among the nations,
Despised among men.

From our modern perspective, we have a problem with this because it flies against our concept of authorship. If something appears in Jeremiah, we think it shouldn't also appear in Obadiah because based on the concept of authorship, something that appears in Jeremiah belongs to Jeremiah, not to anyone else. But that is imposing our concept of author onto texts that did not share that concept.

So who wrote the biblical texts in the ancient world is really a question not of authorship, but of Authority. Authority came from tradition. And textual tradition belonged to scribes. The biblical texts are products of the scribal workshop which, very likely, was composed of priests and wealthy, upper-class leaders of the ancient Israelite community such as Ezra. Where they came from before that is anyone's guess. Some believe that before they took shape as written documents, they existed as oral traditions. In any case, your question is who wrote them and the answer is ancient Israelite scribes.

When you approach New Testament/Christian times, things look very different and you actually have Paul signing off in his own name on his letters or Luke writing to Theophilus.

"Who decided who all got to be in the bible?"

Another very modern question! Today, we have a concept of something called the bible. It doesn't really work though because even today there is no such thing as the bible. Depending on where you are in the world, a bible will look very, very different. It may be in different languages. It may include different texts. Some of the same texts in those bibles, even if they are the same language, may have very different content (there are, for instance, three completely different versions of Esther).

But we need some kind of word to work with, so we'll pretend like the bible means any canon of authoritative Jewish texts. Okay. Yes, there were authoritative canons! Many of them! Because there were many different Jewish groups or sects and they all had different ideas of what was considered authoritative canon. You had Saducees who only believed in Torah. You had the Dead Sea community who believed in most of what we might believe in today, but they also believed in the Community Rule, the War Scroll, and they had Psalms that don't exist in our bibles. And if you went down to Egypt, the Jews there had the Septuagint, which has extra texts and is in Greek. By about AD 200, you finally have most of the Jewish canon fixed according to Rabbinic Judaism. And also about that time, you have Christian communities fixing their canon, which was the Greek Septuagint. The Jews didn't want the Christian stuff in their canon and the Christians didn't want the Hebrew texts in theirs. So a lot of what counted as bible depended upon which group you belonged to. And, eventually, through the power of the State/Empire, certain religious texts were officially sanctioned and others were not.

Now, I don't want you to have the opinion that what gets to be bible and what doesn't get to be bible is entirely arbitrary. All these decision were based on authority and tradition, some older than others, some trusted more than others. Very few people, for instance, thought that the books of Enoch were considered bible. The Dead Sea community probably did...and whoever wrote Jude probably did...and the Ethiopian Church does...but generally speaking, the books of Enoch were not considered authoritative by most Jews or Christians so they don't appear in very many bibles.

christianmomof3 · Jul 6, 2012

sdmsanjose said:
The Bible has at its foundation FAITH so do not ever expect to get absolute proof of many things about the Bible.

That just sounds like a cop-out to me.

sdmsanjose said:
God does not want to have to constantly prove Himself to anybody, He much prefers you to trust Him. If you come to believe in God you will probably finally realize that God will do just about anything to bring you into fellowship with Him.

Again, sounds like a cop-out.

sdmsanjose said:
Is it possible that through translation that some words are not exactly the same as in the original writings? My answer is YES. Therefore, I would not argue that every word is to be taken literally.

That I agree with.

sdmsanjose said:
However, I am convinced that the main messages and spirit of the Bible are absolute truth and from God.

The reason that I no longer struggle with if every word is to be taken literally or not is that I am absolutely convinced that God is not going to let mankind pervert his main message and spirit for mankind. I believe that if you read the whole bible you will find great consistency and great clarity of Gods main messages and spirit.

Many people do pervert God's main message and spirit for mankind. All the time. Look at the Westboro group, and the prosperity gospel just to name two examples. And there are many more.

Timothew · Jul 6, 2012

If I were just reading the Bible for the first time, I would start with one of the gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke or John. Probably Mark or John. Mark was written by a disciple of Jesus Christ named John Mark and John was written by a disciple of Jesus Christ and early pastor of the church named (Surprise!) John. From there, I might read Genesis if I were interested in what the earliest believers thought about God, or I would dive right into Romans because Paul gives such a good description of early Christian faith. Just don't expect to learn everything all at once.

KJV1611Warrior · Oct 13, 2012

Google Chuck Missler how we got our bible. Stay away from modern versions, i.e., ASV, NIV, ESV, NLT, NASB, ect.

sculleywr · Oct 14, 2012

KJV1611Warrior said:
Google Chuck Missler how we got our bible. Stay away from modern versions, i.e., ASV, NIV, ESV, NLT, NASB, ect.

Yes, stay away from anything printed before 500 AD.

Timothew · Oct 14, 2012

KJV1611Warrior said:
Stay away from modern versions...

Stay away from the King James Version Only (KJVO) crowd.
Read a modern translation (NASB, NIV, ESV, NLT, etc.) because they are translated into the language we use. The King James translation advises people to quit. What kind of advice is that?
"quit you like men", 1 Cor 16:15 KJV
Apparently in 1611 "quit you like men" meant "act like men". The NASB translates this "act like men". So why use a bible translation that you have to translate into the language you use, when there are a lot of translations that are already in the language you use?

KJV1611Warrior · Oct 14, 2012

The NIV perverts Jesus Christ into Lucifer!

Isaiah 14:14 reveals Satan's grandest desire, "I will be like the most High." And with a little subtil perversion - the NIV in Isaiah 14:12 grants Satan's wish!

ISAIAH 14:12: The KJB reads, "How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER, son of the morning!. . ." The NIV PERversion reads, "How you have fallen from heaven, O MORNING STAR, son of the dawn. . ." The NIV change "Lucifer" to "MORNING STAR".

BUT WAIT. . . I thought the Lord Jesus Christ was the MORNING STAR?

Doesn't Revelation 22:16 say, "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and MORNING STAR".

The NIV CLEARY AND BLATANTLY makes LUCIFER -- The Lord Jesus Christ! WHAT BLASPHEMY! WHAT PERVERSION! And Christians claim the NIV is a "better translation"!

ISAIAH 14:15: The King James Bible condemns Lucifer to hell: "Yet thou shalt be brought down to HELL . . ." The NIV does NOT condemn Lucifer to HELL! The NIV reads, "But you are brought down to the GRAVE. . ." We all go to the GRAVE! Why doesn't the NIV want Satan in hell?

Listen, this isn't a mere academic issue, this is spiritual warfare at its core!
The NIV perverts The Lord's Prayer into The Devil's Prayer!

LUKE 11:2-4: The KJB reads, ". . .Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil." The NIV removes everything that refers to a Holy God in heaven -"WHICH ART IN HEAVEN. . . Thy will be done, AS IN HEAVEN, so in earth. . . but DELIVER US FROM EVIL." Everything that distinguishes God from the Devil is REMOVED! "OUR FATHER" of the NIV is "NOT IN HEAVEN" and "DOES NOT DELIVER FROM EVIL!" I wonder who it could be? (hint: see John 8:44)

sculleywr · Oct 14, 2012

KJV1611Warrior said:
The NIV perverts Jesus Christ into Lucifer!

Isaiah 14:14 reveals Satan's grandest desire, "I will be like the most High." And with a little subtil perversion - the NIV in Isaiah 14:12 grants Satan's wish!

ISAIAH 14:12: The KJB reads, "How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER, son of the morning!. . ." The NIV PERversion reads, "How you have fallen from heaven, O MORNING STAR, son of the dawn. . ." The NIV change "Lucifer" to "MORNING STAR".

BUT WAIT. . . I thought the Lord Jesus Christ was the MORNING STAR?

Doesn't Revelation 22:16 say, "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and MORNING STAR".

The NIV CLEARY AND BLATANTLY makes LUCIFER -- The Lord Jesus Christ! WHAT BLASPHEMY! WHAT PERVERSION! And Christians claim the NIV is a "better translation"!

ISAIAH 14:15: The King James Bible condemns Lucifer to hell: "Yet thou shalt be brought down to HELL . . ." The NIV does NOT condemn Lucifer to HELL! The NIV reads, "But you are brought down to the GRAVE. . ." We all go to the GRAVE! Why doesn't the NIV want Satan in hell?

Listen, this isn't a mere academic issue, this is spiritual warfare at its core!
The NIV perverts The Lord's Prayer into The Devil's Prayer!

LUKE 11:2-4: The KJB reads, ". . .Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil." The NIV removes everything that refers to a Holy God in heaven -"WHICH ART IN HEAVEN. . . Thy will be done, AS IN HEAVEN, so in earth. . . but DELIVER US FROM EVIL." Everything that distinguishes God from the Devil is REMOVED! "OUR FATHER" of the NIV is "NOT IN HEAVEN" and "DOES NOT DELIVER FROM EVIL!" I wonder who it could be? (hint: see John 8:44)

The Hebrew name Lucifer means "star of the morning." So I would not be too quick to judge.

Keachian · Oct 14, 2012

KJV1611Warrior said:
The NIV perverts Jesus Christ into Lucifer!

Isaiah 14:14 reveals Satan's grandest desire, "I will be like the most High." And with a little subtil perversion - the NIV in Isaiah 14:12 grants Satan's wish!

ISAIAH 14:12: The KJB reads, "How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER, son of the morning!. . ." The NIV PERversion reads, "How you have fallen from heaven, O MORNING STAR, son of the dawn. . ." The NIV change "Lucifer" to "MORNING STAR".

BUT WAIT. . . I thought the Lord Jesus Christ was the MORNING STAR?

Doesn't Revelation 22:16 say, "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and MORNING STAR".

The NIV CLEARY AND BLATANTLY makes LUCIFER -- The Lord Jesus Christ! WHAT BLASPHEMY! WHAT PERVERSION! And Christians claim the NIV is a "better translation"!

Yep using a Latin translation of heylel and then applying the passage to the enemy, please, your hermeneutics is sorely lacking. Isaiah 14:12 follows on from the rest of chapter 14, where in v4 we read:
you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon...
The King of Babylon was setting himself up as the Babylonian God Heylel, that is what this passage is talking about when it comes to this, sure an analogy can now be drawn to the enemy being defeated by God through Christ but only after we have properly exegeted.

ISAIAH 14:15: The King James Bible condemns Lucifer to hell: "Yet thou shalt be brought down to HELL . . ." The NIV does NOT condemn Lucifer to HELL! The NIV reads, "But you are brought down to the GRAVE. . ." We all go to the GRAVE! Why doesn't the NIV want Satan in hell?

The underlying Hebrew is sheol which is not actually the same as the western idea of hell, but this also fails to account for:

When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earthlGog and Magogand to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. They marched across the breadth of the earth and surroundedp the camp of Gods people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.-- Rev 20:7-10

Again you show horrible hermeneutic when it comes to modern translations, to me this would be indicative of bad hermeneutic when it comes to the more difficult KJV.

Listen, this isn't a mere academic issue, this is spiritual warfare at its core!
The NIV perverts The Lord's Prayer into The Devil's Prayer!

LUKE 11:2-4: The KJB reads, ". . .Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil." The NIV removes everything that refers to a Holy God in heaven -"WHICH ART IN HEAVEN. . . Thy will be done, AS IN HEAVEN, so in earth. . . but DELIVER US FROM EVIL." Everything that distinguishes God from the Devil is REMOVED! "OUR FATHER" of the NIV is "NOT IN HEAVEN" and "DOES NOT DELIVER FROM EVIL!" I wonder who it could be? (hint: see John 8:44)

Again you have horrible hermeneutic:
Our Fathern in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us today our daily bread.
And forgive us our debts,
as we also have forgiven our debtors.
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from the evil one." -- Matt 6:9-13
You have absolutely no basis for your accusations.

sculleywr · Oct 14, 2012

progmonk said:
Yep using a Latin translation of heylel and then applying the passage to the enemy, please, your hermeneutics is sorely lacking. Isaiah 14:12 follows on from the rest of chapter 14, where in v4 we read:
you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon...
The King of Babylon was setting himself up as the Babylonian God Heylel, that is what this passage is talking about when it comes to this, sure an analogy can now be drawn to the enemy being defeated by God through Christ but only after we have properly exegeted.

The underlying Hebrew is sheol which is not actually the same as the western idea of hell, but this also fails to account for:

When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earthlGog and Magogand to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. They marched across the breadth of the earth and surroundedp the camp of Gods people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.-- Rev 20:7-10
Again you show horrible hermeneutic when it comes to modern translations, to me this would be indicative of bad hermeneutic when it comes to the more difficult KJV.

Again you have horrible hermeneutic:
Our Fathern in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us today our daily bread.
And forgive us our debts,
as we also have forgiven our debtors.
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from the evil one." -- Matt 6:9-13
You have absolutely no basis for your accusations.

great pownage to read

Keachian · Oct 14, 2012

sculleywr said:
great pownage to read

When it's the same tired examples over and over again it really isn't that difficult to rip apart

OzSpen · Dec 1, 2012

KJV1611Warrior said:
Google Chuck Missler how we got our bible. Stay away from modern versions, i.e., ASV, NIV, ESV, NLT, NASB, ect.

To the contrary, if a person is investigating the Christian faith one of the finest Bible translations to begin with is the New Living Translation. It is an accurate, dynamic equivalence translation that uses simplified words. I am currently working through it for my daily Bible reading and find it to be brilliant in communicating the depth of God in Scripture.

Old-fashioned, Elizabethan language like that of the King James Version and other early English translations, is a hindrance for those wanting to know the Bible's message. How do I know? From personal experience in my early days as a believer.

In Christ, Oz

Information about the bible

Newbie

Hebr incl Sirach&epigraph, Hermeneut,Ptolemy,Samar

Regular Member

ANE Social Science Researcher

comes and goes

Hebr incl Sirach&epigraph, Hermeneut,Ptolemy,Samar

Newbie

pursuing Christ

Conditionalist

Active Member

Orthodox Colitis Survivor

Conditionalist

Active Member

Orthodox Colitis Survivor

On Sabbatical

Orthodox Colitis Survivor

On Sabbatical

Regular Member

Similar threads