Deeper Waters

What if I told you that there was a proposition that was neither true or false? You could look at it any way but you could not ask the question really “Is it true?” or “Is it false?” Why? Because all the terms are meaningless. Colorless green florks swinzle routinely. Does anyone have any idea whether that is true or false or is it just meaningless? (And of course, contradictory. Take out green and it’s still nonsense.)

I was listening to an audio debate yesterday between Craig and Atkins. Atkins, being the atheist, is a moral relativist. William Lane Craig I believe soundly defeated the views of Atkins, but at one point, they were speaking on moral relativism. It is amazing that relativists still want to avoid some conclusions of their system.

Relativists want to deny that their system means that there is no moral distinction between Mother Teresa and Adolf Hitler. When it’s told that if people embrace this worldview, they will act in such a way, they want to deny it. Now I’d say a lot of moral relativists in America are still good people. That’s the problem though. They have no reason to be good or any concept of it.

That’s what I was screaming out listening to the debate. I wanted Atkins to tell me what good meant. We can argue that a system produces good. What is good? Is there any way that you can look at moral relativism and say that it produces good people if you believe in it? Not at all. Why? Look at the proposition.

Moral Relativism produces good people.

The problem is that the first part makes the second part nonsense. If moral relativism is true, there can be no such thing as a good person. There can be no such thing as a bad person. There is only a person. How can you say any action is good or bad or any person if all such concepts are relative?

Greg Koukl talks about having a caller on his program once who was a moral relativist and he wanted this person to really show what moral relativism leads to. The caller went beyond the “call of duty.” When asked a moral question like “Is it wrong to torture babies for fun?” the caller said “The question doesn’t even make sense.”

That caller is absolutely right. If moral relativism holds the day, then the propositions that concern terms like good, evil, better, ought, etc. in a moral context are meaningless. However, that leads to a question. If these are so meaningless, why is it that our language abounds with them and even Atkins at one point in the debate said that something was evil?

Why? Because we all do know the truth. Some actions are right and some are wrong. Good is not a vacuous term. It has meaning. The moral relativist should say “Murder is morally wrong,” is a meaningless statement as it is neither true or false. The absolutist can say “Amen.”

Friends. Moral relativism is a philosophy we can’t let hold the day. We all know some actions are good and ought to be done and some are wrong and ought not to be done. Let’s stand up for those.

Let me tell you about Erica Corder. Erica Corder is a young woman who was pointed out to me by an agnostic. While it was intended to shame, I hope my article will be used for glory. Why? Because I never heard of this girl until today, but now that I know about her, I think she’s a hero for us all.

What did she do? She was Valedictorian of her class and after her speech, she chose to speak briefly on Jesus Christ. School officials made her apologize in a group email for these remarks before they would give her her diploma. Now, she’s fighting back. She and her family are suing for the right to free speech and the only money they want is to pay attorney fees.

The principal, Mark Brewer, in the story told her that her comments were immature. I’ll tell you all this. There is someone immature here and it is not the girl. What is immature is whining because you think you were permanently scarred because someone mentioned Jesus Christ in a graduation speech.

Now someone might say, “Well what if it was a Muslim?” If a Muslim wanted to at the end give thanks to Allah and tell people to read the Qu’ran, let them. I have no problem with that. I am not afraid of other ideas being out in the marketplace. Why? As long as they’re open to discussion, I am convinced that Christianity can beat them all.

I say we need to honor this girl. A Christian who is silent is not going to change their society around them. This girl is taking a stand and to quote pop culture, “You go girl!” I wish more Christians would take stands like this. Part of what’s held us back is that we haven’t spoken when we’ve been trampled on.

Erica is speaking. For that, I honor her! If anyone wants to see it, here is the story itself.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_5686493,00.html

Congratulations Erica Corder! You have your own post here because frankly, you deserve it for reminding us all that we should stand for our faith! May many more follow after you!

I’m not much of a music person. That shocks a lot of people, but I’m not. In church services, I tend to prefer the old hymns to much of Contemporary Christian Music. However, if I had my choice, I’d simply prefer to get straight into preaching and teaching. In fact, I think if we were being accurate, we should save the music for last and have the preaching first.

That is for another day though. My concern is with music in the secular world. In many ways, I like a lot of secular music more than other types. I like music that gets me inspired and excites me to be all that I can be. I like music that pulls up great memories and that makes me want to adventure.

When I was eight years old, I had to go to have eye surgery for I was cross-eyed. I remember only one song played on the radio that whole trip at around 4:30 in the morning to the hospital. It was “Theme From Mahogany.” I think about being eight and having that trip every time I hear that song. I still think it’s powerful when I consider the lyrics. Do I know where I’m going to?

I’m also a gamer as many of you know. Play me some good music from Final Fantasy and I am ready for action. Video game music has long been a big seller for me. I have also shown an intense love for Smallville. “Save Me”, the theme song to the show, is my phone’s ring tone in fact. That music will inspire.

Yet I am concerned about the music of today. I see music as something sacred. I think the Greeks were right in having muses. In fact, this is a thoroughly Christian idea. The Bible says that when God created, the angels sang for joy. In the creation stories of Tolkien and C.S. Lewis, music was the instrument by which God created.

Yet I thin in our society today, the muses are being disgraced. It has been said that all revolutions in history began with a musical revelation and Andrew Fletcher is quoted as saying “Let me write the songs of a nation. I don’t care who writes its laws.” Music has powerful effects on society.

This isn’t a modern idea. This is one Plato had. In the second chapter of his Republic, he goes on and on about the kind of music that will be listened to in the city. (In comparison, only one paragraph in the whole work focuses on economics.) Plato knew the effect music would have on the young.

I see kids singing songs and I don’t think they really know the lyrics and if they do, they don’t understand them. These songs are often unintelligible. A “singer” is going so fast that what he or she says cannot be understood. Instead, it seems to be taken in and mindlessly repeated. Music can get past the gateposts of reason very easily after all.

This is most evident to me in Gangsta Rap, as it is called. I’ll be blunt. I can’t stand rap. The huge majority I hear of it is junk. Some of you won’t like that, but I have no intentions of lying. The gangster type though is the worst of the worst. We all know the types. The types that speak of violence towards women, constant sexual imagery, and profanity.

I believe the muses are disgraced. Not all that is called music has the right to be called music and we seem to have an attitude that anything goes. I think music, while I’m not a big fan, is much more important than that. In fact, that could be a reason I’m not a big fan. I haven’t heard much that qualifies.

It’s something sacred. So sacred that we must guard it vehemently and not let impostors into its camp. It is a powerful force and it will either be used righteously or it will be used to destroy us and unfortunately, it looks like the latter now. If the music of the youth today is any indication, the future is grim.

I think we need a musical revolution today. We need good and pure music that reflects the muses. I’m not saying it all has to be explicitly religious music. It doesn’t. It needs to be music though that spurs us onto qualities of godliness. If this is going to change though, it must begin with us.

I had this thought pondering in my mind the other day. The Phoenix is a favorite Christian symbol of mine. It was used by Clement, one of the first church fathers. If you know your mythology, the Phoenix is said to die and then from the fiery explosion of its death, a new Phoenix would arise. In other words, the Phoenix always rose from its own ashes.

Let me ask you this question. What if you were a Phoenix? Alright. Just think about it. See how you would reply to this question.

Would you be afraid of death?

I think the answer is no. You wouldn’t be. Why? Because you know you’ll just come right back from it! What is there to be afraid of?

So what does that have to do with Christianity?

Well, let’s ask some questions.

If you knew that the one you serve is all-powerful and knows the beginning from the end, would you fear anything past, present, or future?

If you knew that your sins were truly forgiven, would you live in misery of the past?

If you knew that God was true in all he said, would you ever sin?

If you knew that you are loved by the perfect one, would you think more properly of yourself?

If you knew that Jesus rose from the dead and promised the same for you, would you fear death?

If you knew that you are an image-bearer of God, would you live like one?

These are all questions we can ask. For that reason, I’m going to keep my blog short tonight. If you were a Phoenix, you wouldn’t fear death. You and I are all these other things. Should we not seek to live accordingly?

My friend Rodney called me tonight. I’d like my blog readers to pray for him. He did get married in June and his wife’s grandfather was becoming a part of his life quickly. He didn’t really know his grandparents. His grandfather didn’t go in for dialysis. It’s only a matter of time at that point.

Romans 12:14 says to mourn with those who mourn. I thought about that as I got his voicemail and called him. What do you say in those situations? Of course, this will be much harder on his wife, so what is he to do? This is the second death that his wife’s family has had to deal with this year.

Rodney is quite humorous and was joking some on the phone even, but I told him to be cautious with such. We seem to get to the point with people where we think that if they’re sad sometimes, we need to cheer them up. Sometimes, that does help. Others, it only makes the problem worse.

Emotions are natural things. They need to be worked through. It’s natural when you lose someone close to you to have grief. It’s not abnormal. The abnormality would be if you didn’t have grief. That kind of depression and sorrow is not a disease. It is simply a process that must run its course.

Some of us want to find the right words to say. The right words to say could be no words. Silence is golden at times. One thing I was sure to tell him was to just be there. That’s all you can do sometimes. You can’t wipe away the tears forever. Just let them flow and be there for the person you care about.

Death is a part of this world. There will come a world for Christians where there is no death, and then we will eternally rejoice. For now though, we do mourn. When people are mourning, you should not throw them a pep party. Instead, you should mourn as well. You should let them know you’re walking through that valley with them.

Into every life, a little rain must fall. You can expect a barrage of emotions at this point. There will be grief and anger at times. Perchance there will be times when Rodney’s new wife doesn’t want to be with him and merely wants to be left alone. I would say at that point honor that choice. Sometimes, we do need times when it’s just us and God.

And God. What about God? My view is to be honest in your prayers. If you are angry with God, tell him. If you want to know what’s going on, tell him. If you want to just cry before the throne, then feel free to cry. God is a big God. He can take all of your emotions and I think he’d rather get the real you than an actor.

I know these aren’t magic words either. There are many facets of grief. I’m not a certified counselor. I’m just giving out my own two cents for what it’s worth for my thoughts on the subject of sorrow over the years. Rodney. I’m praying for you. Readers. Please pray for Rodney as well and if you think about him some, take time to mourn also.

One of the topics that I went to at church last night for a teaching session we were having was on preparing to teach. I like the guy who did it. It was my favorite session of the night, but there was one part I really disagreed with. He spoke of how prayer was important, which I agree with, and he said we should pray for transformed lives, which I again have no problem with, but then said “And if you do that, God will do it. After all, he says if you ask anything in my name, I will do it.”

Okay. Now we’ve got problems.

My thoughts immediately went to people who would be praying for transformation. What about that young man who is struggling with internet pornography and prays again and again for God to change him and it never seems to happen. What is he to assume about the power of prayer?

What about the girl who wants to lose weight and prays for God to help her because she wants to feel attractive, and yet she doesn’t seem to be able to do it successfully? What is she to assume?

What about the wife who is praying that her husband won’t come home drunk that night? What is she to assume about prayer when that doesn’t happen?

Now, I realize all of these have a factor of human free-will, but I think the problem is that transformation does not always come immediately. The young man will probably spend much time trying to get over internet pornography before he does so successfully for instance. It could help him to get a good counselor and good friends.

God can transform us, but prayer I do not believe is meant to be used as an immediate cure-all. We can even think of other cases where this doesn’t happen. Not everyone who is physically sick and prayed for is healed. There are Christians who have died of hideous diseases though people prayed they wouldn’t.

If we turn prayer into a blank check, we set up a misnomer idea of what the Christian experience is to be. If we don’t get what we pray for, then it is just assumed that we must not be good at prayer or God doesn’t love us, or we’re not good Christians, or any combination or more.

We can even think of things God cannot do for they violate his nature. Could we pray for God to turn evil into good in Jesus’s name or vice-versa? Could we pray for God to make a square circle in the name of Jesus? Could we pray that God will cease to exist in the name of Jesus?

Too often, that phrase “in the name of Jesus” turns into a mantra of sorts where we think we are twisting God’s arm when we say those words. That is not a Christian view of language though. We cannot force God to do anything by our words. We can only ask him to do things.

So what did it mean? It meant that back then, you would want to speak to a patron (The Father in this case) and to do that, you needed a mediator, a benefactor. (The Son) If your will was in accordance with what the patron wanted, he would grant your request. The Benefactor was the one through whom the request was made.

That’s it. It is not a cure-all. Instead, it is a piece of advice to stay in the moral will of God and pray from that position. We cannot make prayer what it was never meant to be lest we distract it from the awesomeness that it is.

I was at church tonight listening to a talk on leadership. I don’t remember how that point was reached, but somehow, there was talk about Christ and the Holy Spirit and the speaker said that you could even speak of “Christ, the Holy Spirit.” Naturally, my mind was locked on that the rest of the talk and afterwards, I did go and talk to him and it was agreed that my point was correct.

I said that we can’t speak of Christ in that way because when we say “God, the Holy Spirit”, we are speaking in a way to clarify which person of the Godhead we mean. There are not multiple persons in Christ though. Christ is Christ. We can say “Jesus is God” or God the Son” but we cannot say stuff like “The Holy Spirit, the Father.”

I understood where he was coming from though for I do know he does believe in the Trinity. Every now and then though, we can all slip up in that area and I think it’s important to catch it each time. (An interesting way is in prayer. Consider how many prayers in church can begin by speaking to the Father and then say something like “And we thank you for dying on the cross.” It’s important that we keep in mind who each person in the Godhead is.)

What was being talked about though where passages that speak about Christ sending the Holy Spirit and then saying that he will come to us. The language is quite similar. I think this is an important point to raise in a Trinitarian framework so let’s take a look and see what is going on.

He didn’t give any passage, but I’m quite sure John 14 would be included:

15“If you love me, you will obey what I command. 16And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever— 17the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. 18I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. 19Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. 20On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you. 21Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him.”

Alright. The Holy Spirit will come and be in you and yet, Christ says that he will not leave them as orphans. He will come to them.

Later in that chapter Christ says:

23Jesus replied, “If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.

So all of them will come? What is going on?

Most likely, it’s saying that the one sent is acting on behalf of the one he is sent by. This happens in the NT with the Centurion’s servant. Consider this from Matthew 8:

5When Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to him, asking for help. 6“Lord,” he said, “my servant lies at home paralyzed and in terrible suffering.” 7Jesus said to him, “I will go and heal him.”

8The centurion replied, “Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed. 9For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and that one, ‘Come,’ and he comes. I say to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.”

10When Jesus heard this, he was astonished and said to those following him, “I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. 11I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. 12But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

13Then Jesus said to the centurion, “Go! It will be done just as you believed it would.” And his servant was healed at that very hour.

So in that one, the Centurion shows up. Alright. Let’s see the parallel account in Luke 7.

1When Jesus had finished saying all this in the hearing of the people, he entered Capernaum. 2There a centurion’s servant, whom his master valued highly, was sick and about to die. 3The centurion heard of Jesus and sent some elders of the Jews to him, asking him to come and heal his servant. 4When they came to Jesus, they pleaded earnestly with him, “This man deserves to have you do this, 5because he loves our nation and has built our synagogue.” 6So Jesus went with them.
He was not far from the house when the centurion sent friends to say to him: “Lord, don’t trouble yourself, for I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. 7That is why I did not even consider myself worthy to come to you. But say the word, and my servant will be healed. 8For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and that one, ‘Come,’ and he comes. I say to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.” 9When Jesus heard this, he was amazed at him, and turning to the crowd following him, he said, “I tell you, I have not found such great faith even in Israel.” 10Then the men who had been sent returned to the house and found the servant well.

Well? Did the Centurion come or not? The answer is probably that in the first case, a servant came but was acting on the behalf of the Centurion. This sounds just like verse 26 of John 14:

But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

Now why do I interpret it this way? I’ll grant if these were the only verses, we could argue for modalism maybe. However, we have several other passages that show Trinitarianism instead. (Notice the constant distinctions between persons in the Upper Room Dialogue itself.)

However, since I do see evidence of the Trinity, and that’s a blog for another day, I must find another way to interpret these passages. Of course, in a sense, Christ is in us seeing as he is omnipresent, but the Holy Spirit is not Christ. We must be clear on our terminology. We are Trinitarians.

I have recently seen a non-Christian saying that when it comes to miracles, Christians will believe that all other miracle reports past and present in non-Christian religions are false, but when it comes to Christian miracles, these are true. Why? Well just believe that they are and it will suffice.

First off, I don’t think any Christian should say “Just believe” insofar as one is taking a leap of blind faith. I do think that there are reasons to believe that the miracle accounts in the gospels did happen. However, that is a secondary issue. The primary issue is in the question itself.

Am I as a Christian, obligated to an all-or-nothing scenario? Let’s suppose that I believe X miracle account is false, such as the account of Mohammad splitting the moon in two in Islam. Because I believe that, am I obligated to believe that the resurrection is false? Secondly, am I, in reverse, obligated to believe that since Jesus rose from the dead, that Mohammad split the moon in two?

To begin with though, the evidence in favor of the miracle of Jesus rising from the dead is far greater and this must play a part. We have the manuscript evidence of Scripture being early, the textual evidence that it is what was written down, the philosophical evidence of the coherence of the worldview, the prophetic evidence that the OT prophecied Christ, the archaeological evidence that the Bible has been shown to be reliable, etc. There is more than enough evidence for anyone who wants to believe.

However, the point of the skeptic is still flawed once I accept the resurrection. I do not believe the resurrection because it is a miracle. I believe it for the same reason that I believe Hannibal crossed the Alps. It has shown itself to be true, and I would say far more so than Hannibal crossing the Alps even.

I legitimately look at the evidence for the resurrection and conclude that it happened. In fact, this is what we can do with any question. We can look at the evidence and see if the case holds up or not. We do not again believe something because it is miraculous. We believe it because it is true.

Now I can turn to a miracle like Mohammad splitting the moon in two. Do I really have any evidence to believe this? Well, no. The Qu’ran for instance tells me that Mohammad did no miracles save for the delivering of the Qu’ran itself.  I also see the Hadith tradition is quite distant from Mohammad as well. Then, I see no external evidence that such an event occurred. I am justly allowed to disbelieve it.

Some might think that that is a simple one. What about some accounts of miracles in other religions on a less than global scale? Are they all false? Not necessarily. Why should I believe that a miracle cannot happen in a non-Christian religion? Am I to deny that God can do a miracle for an atheist for instance?

There are several explanations for miracles in non-Christian religions. God could be giving light to those in those religions to seek him out. There could be demonic powers at work that are causing events to occur. There could be witnessing going on that is accompanied by true miracles. Any one of these is legitimate.

Point? It’s not all or nothing. It’s like any other claim. I look at it and see if it’s true. If the skeptic asks you about miracles in other religions, go ahead and say “Sure.” Who are you to say God can’t do them? Be open to examining the evidence for the claim though just as you should examine your own faith. As Paul said, test all things. Hold to what is true. (1 Thess. 5:21)

I’ve recently written on the Space Trilogy of C.S. Lewis and I’ve written a few blogs on the Harry Potter craze as well. I have also recently read the Brothers Karamazov. I don’t really read that much fiction, but I do think it’s good to every now and then. I can picture some people wondering why.

Should we not spend our time in educating ourselves and learning all that we can? Well, I can see the point some, but I don’t think it’s valid. I see the people in the Bible doing a lot more than having their nose in books. (I say this as someone who has a book propped open in the bathroom so I can read while shaving and brushing my teeth.)

I see Jesus in the Bible regularly teaching and then at times having meals with the people. I have no outright evidence of this, but I don’t think theology was always the topic of discussion. They probably chatted about any number of things much the way that we would do so today.

I also think if we all took this approach, the human race wouldn’t last much longer. Many fine scholars are married. That would mean that they’re spending some time going out there and finding a spouse and if they have kids, well, we can be sure that other things are being done besides reading.

So let’s suppose we’re talking about the person who likes books but thinks all fiction is a waste of time. To them, I again disagree. Fiction goes back much farther than we realize. It was written as a teaching tool as well and not primarily for entertainment, although it was meant to be entertaining.

When we get to the Greeks, we find them writing plays. While this was entertainment, it was not in a vacuum. Worldviews were being expressed and lines were being drawn. The greatest ideas of the time were being shown. I even think of a line from the play Antigone that shows a belief in a moral law outside the king.

What’s the point? It’s something to make an argument for objective morality and it should be done. The value of fiction is that fiction allows us to see the living out of ideas. You want to argue that morality is above the king and that all of us are subject to it. Great! A play like Antigone though shows how that might look if it is lived out.

That is a real gift of fiction. It also enables us to live out adventures so that when the time comes, we’ll be ready. Want a mystery? Go to the library. Want an adventure? Go there as well. This can apply to movies and TV shows as well. We can get to experience things on a unique level as well as get to see ideas lived out.

I do enjoy non-fiction reading the most, but I can’t deny that I do learn much from Fiction. Is it a waste of time? I don’t think so. Of course, some fiction probably is. Some non-fiction probably is. However, God gave us imaginations. Pity us if we don’t take the time to use them and enjoy them.

I just recently finished reading C.S. Lewis’s Space Trilogy. The last book in the series is called “That Hideous Strength” and is about an organization called N.I.C.E. (National Institute of Co-ordinated Experiments) coming in and pretty soon, they have a worldwide following where they plan to use the blessings of science to remake man into God.

I won’t tell what happens in it. I really think that each person should read the trilogy for himself. The last book wasn’t entirely a page-turner, but at the same time, it sucked me in somehow. I wasn’t sitting on the edge of my seat until we got right to the end, but yet I had to know what happened. Lewis is just a masterful writer in that way.

There is one character that when I think about him, he is the most frightening character to me in the book. Is it the evil leader of the N.I.C.E.? No. Is it the Bent One himself? (referring to Satan) No. Is it the Deputy Director of the organization? It is not him either. This character only appears in a few places, but he has a rather significant role.

That is Reverend Straik.

Reverend Straik was once a good man, but then he had suffering in his life that was profound. He joined the N.I.C.E. and applies anything that has to do with power to being the will of God and fully supports the N.I.C.E. as being the will of God. He is willing to twist Scripture to fit this belief. At the end of the story, he shows exactly how depraved he has become. I shall not tell you what happens, but my blood runs cold thinking about it.

Why does he scare me the most? Simple. The other characters I know are evil. I expect them to be evil. However, I think of a reverend and think “Him as an evil figure?” However, it is true. The one who seems to have such zeal that the prophecies are being fulfilled is a man of darkness.

These are the most dangerous threats in many ways. The Apostle Paul knew that he was going to death when he spoke to the Ephesian elders. He didn’t choose to warn them though about persecution from Rome or the Jews so much as persecution coming from within for wolves would enter and devour the flock. This is the same one who said Satan’s servants masquerade as angels of light.

This is what makes Straik so dangerous and it’s harder when I think on how he used to be good. I know of many people who used to be good in ministry but then something happened and they want to the dark side. Today, they usually become agnostics and atheists. I think Straik is more dangerous though. At least with the others, you know where the line is. By Straik maintaining his title, the line is not so clear.

There are several Straiks running around today. Now they’re not out there trying to make humanity deity entirely. (The Mormon church though…..) However, they are bringing in false teaching and the real danger is they look legit. They look like devoted Christians. They may say they’re only studying the Bible, but be cautious.

A lady today told me about a church she started attending. She told me that they only say what the Bible says. They don’t have any opinions. The pastor just says what it says and that’s it. I want to look closer at this place. I would hope it’s legit, but the idea of no opinions bothers me. It is as if this one person is the final authority on what the Bible says.  Such is breeding ground for a cult.

Friends. We can’t afford to be risky today in theology. When someone comes to you wanting you to join a new church or a new mission or movement, be sure to find out what they believe. Make sure that they mean what you mean when they use the words. Mormons will say they believe in the Trinity. Don’t think they mean what you mean by that word though.

Be on your guard. Straik does not exist only in fiction after all.