Why I’m Still Here

Tags 

Mark Ward's 4 “fundamentals"

Few people willingly call themselves “fundamentalists” today. I try to do so only when I get to explain what I mean.

So let me explain: I’m a (Christian, Protestant, Baptist) “fundamentalist” because I value four things—four things which make me believe, in turn, that the particular brand of fundamentalism I inherited is worth saving. In no particular order, I value …

  1. honoring my father(s) and mother(s).
  2. biblicism.
  3. personal holiness.
  4. traditional worship.

There are many more things I value as a biblical Christian, but these four have kept me aligned with the churches and institutions that make up (my sliver of) American fundamentalism.

I'm surprised he got away with saying this:

Excerpt:

"I’m not a fundamentalist because I think we’re the only ones who really believe the fundamentals. As for defending and promoting those fundamentals, I’d say we’re actually quite far behind some other Christian groups—the groups whose books and articles I read every day in the absence of much serious written output from my own tribe. This absence is one of the negatives I’ve experienced in fundamentalism. Empirically speaking, we are not the dynamic source of Christian books, articles, podcasts, magazines, journals, and websites that our brothers and sisters in Christ at, say, Crossway Books are. I’m sorry, but FrontLine  is a misnomer for us right now: we’re not fighting any wars except the civil kind. We have a weak Internet voice that almost never reaches escape velocity from our own echo chamber."

 

Kudos though to Frontline  for publishing something unflattering like this.

Kudos Mark

Thanks, Mark, for that article.  I feel like I'm basically where you are and why, although I'd probably add guarding the gospel or separation as a fifth value.  I guess I'm not all that young anymore and outside the demographic of concern but I am certainly thankful for the sliver of fundamentalism that I view as my heritage.

Good Article

This is a good article. Many thanks!
 

TylerR is a former Pastor. He lives with his family in Olympia, WA. He blogs here.

Uneasy on #1 and #4

....for the same reason, really.  That is, there are times where I cannot honor "fathers and mothers" in the church--forefathers in the fundamental movement--simultaneously while honoring Scripture.  To use a picture the author used, I cannot exclude modern music forms from church services to "honor fathers and mothers" without simultaneously ignoring the clear implications of Psalms 149 and 150.  I'm no CCM fan, but if there were percussive instruments and dancing in Temple festivities, maybe that's God's hint that we need to loosen up a bit, get a crowbar, and pull the nails that are holding our feet to the floor.

And in another way, he stumbles around a huge issue in our circles, and to another way in broader evangelicalism; when we talk of "standards" without clearly invoking Scripture, noting the "consequences" of not doing so, we really fall into the same errors as the church based on the Tiber.  For my part, I am glad that the principles of Sola Scriptura (the real first fundamental in my book, it's the same as inerrancy of Scripture) give us the tools to honor our forefathers in the faith by refusing to repeat their mistakes. 

My "Wow" Moment

I've read this repeatedly and it makes me hopeful. The section cited by Larry Nelson above made me spit my coffee.

Excerpt:

"I’m not a fundamentalist because I think we’re the only ones who really believe the fundamentals. As for defending and promoting those fundamentals, I’d say we’re actually quite far behind some other Christian groups—the groups whose books and articles I read every day in the absence of much serious written output from my own tribe. This absence is one of the negatives I’ve experienced in fundamentalism. Empirically speaking, we are not the dynamic source of Christian books, articles, podcasts, magazines, journals, and websites that our brothers and sisters in Christ at, say, Crossway Books are. I’m sorry, but FrontLine  is a misnomer for us right now: we’re not fighting any wars except the civil kind. We have a weak Internet voice that almost never reaches escape velocity from our own echo chamber."

It was truthful and bold. I really pray that it won't be ignored. (BTW, if Mark disappears in the near future we need to start an investigation. : )

"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan

Wow and Why

Ron, I agree with your assessment. There are several reasons that, "Empirically speaking, [fundamentalists] are not the dynamic source of Christian books, articles, podcasts, magazines, journals, and websites that our brothers and sisters in Christ at, say, Crossway Books are."

  1. (Most?) fundamentalists are dispensationalists. Dispensationalists don't get air time.
  2. (Most?) fundamentalists don't attend evangelical seminaries and pursue advanced theological degrees from non-fundamentalist seminaries (we'll leave the reason this occurs alone for now). Even Naselli had to get another Ph.D. from TEDS to get any respect from evangelicals.
  3. (Many?) fundamentalists are still fighting about Steve Green, beverage alcohol, and the KJV. The broader conservative evangelical community doesn't want to touch these people with a 10-foot pole let alone publish their books.
  4. When fundamentalists are published in conservative evangelical sources, they are often accused of compromise or violating various levels of separation.

Advanced Theological Degrees

I graduated from the seminary at BJU. I was blessed to have sat under men who had advanced degrees from places like Union Theological Seminary and other non-fundamental but academically rigorous institutions. Many of them shared the challenges they faced in such atmospheres as they emerged equipped and unscathed. I know there are people  who attended liberal schools and walked away from their professions but my theology inclines me to think that their faith was not genuine to begin with.

"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan

Mark Ward

Ron Bean wrote:

It was truthful and bold. I really pray that it won't be ignored. (BTW, if Mark disappears in the near future we need to start an investigation. : )

If Mark Ward disappears under mysterious circumstances, I volunteer to investigate his disappearance. I'm just down the road, in Olympia.

TylerR is a former Pastor. He lives with his family in Olympia, WA. He blogs here.

Blogs and Publishing

Publishing is probably not a possibility. Getting a book really published, especially in the major publishing houses, is a practical impossibility for a fundamentalist. We all know that. At least I hope we do.

As for blogs, that is a good question. Where are the 30-40 year old BJU/Central/Etc PhD grads? What are they writing? The thing is, the evangelicals, backed by a decent amount of money from MacArthur, Piper, Dever, etc. have academically trained theologians who only write. They don't pastor. So, my question is, where are the BJU trained scholars?

Mark Smith

Mard Ward is has a PhD from BJU, and works at Logos. Andy Naselli has a PhD from BJU (and TEDS) and works at Bethlehem Seminary in Minneapolis. Kevin Bauder has a DMin and PhD and he writes, and is at Central. By and large:

  1. I don't think fundamentalists write as much, and
  2. What they do write often flies under the radar because Baptist fundamentalism is basically a non-entity in the broader conservative Christian world.

I think more fundamentalists need to write, but I'm not sure what publishing opportunities are available. Fundamentalists are usually restricted to blogs. The books some do publish are usually dealing with issues central to Baptist fundamentalism (e.g. One Bible Only), but irrelevant to the larger conservative Christian conversation. I've seen:

  • No attempt to engage the current culture wars (e.g. transgenderism, homosexuality) on a Biblical basis (beyond blogs)
  • Few attempts to write biblical commentaries, beyond the prophetic books
  • Few attempts to engage current theological issues (e.g. NPP). Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary does have an active theological journal, but they are an exception. I don't believe Central has one. Maranatha has one, but they're very busy right now.

I don't believe there are enough trained Baptist fundamentalists to do this work, and those who are trained are already very, very, very, very, very busy.  

TylerR is a former Pastor. He lives with his family in Olympia, WA. He blogs here.

Andy Naselli

has tied himself to D. A. Carson, and now Piper. To me, his experience at BJU is now irrelevant to him. I could be wrong. That is my impression.

You need to see things in "shades of gray"

Mark_Smith wrote:

has tied himself to D. A. Carson, and now Piper. To me, his experience at BJU is now irrelevant to him. I could be wrong. That is my impression.

You need to see things in "shades of gray". Fundamentalists are a very small subset of Evangelicals. 

Reason for lack of scholarship

The current American fundamentalist movement was born out of the modernism and post modernism of the first half of the 20th century.  As society rejected absolute truth in favor of relative, or no truth at all, American Christians responded by affirming the principal and essentiality of the former.  I believe that this movement is the reason why Evangelical Christianity is currently so much stronger in the United States than in Europe.  

However, my impression is that during the last half of the 20th century, many in fundamentalism confused the idea of absolute truth with the idea of absolute human certainty.  This ideal has led to very rigid constructs of biblical interpretation and application.  Much of the fervor within fundamentalism over microanalyzing world events in a prophetic context, the emphasis of biblical cultural norms, and the bible version/translation debates emanates from this idea.

As regards to publication, my belief is that this viewpoint of absolute human certainty is the primary reason why scholastic and theological inquiry within the movement has been stunted.  The politics of publishing houses or time constraints are secondary in impact.

John B. Lee

Jim wrote:

Jim wrote:

Bauder and Straub from Central: both write

Jeff Straub uploads quite a bit to https://www.academia.edu/ (Baptist history)  http://centralseminary.academia.edu/JeffStraub 

Kevin Bauder here: https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-k...

Both often write for the GARBC Baptist Bulletin

They write, but not for conservative evangelical publishing houses. Bauder did contribute to a book published by Zondervan, but that's about it. Straub wrote an article for SBJT, but that's about it for him.

When they do write for these sources, it's usually about fundamentalism or the bible version debate. Apparently, that's the only thing fundamentalists can contribute to the overall conversation.  I will say, my former seminary prof, Rodney Decker, did write and contribute to broader evangelical scholarship. So, there's that.

 

On publishing

Regarding publishing, it's worth noting that Beacham & Bauder's "One Bible Only", as well as MacLachlan's "Recovering Authentic Fundamentalism", are published by evangelical publishing houses.  I believe Kevin's got a few other writing credits in evangelical-land as well.  

I also don't believe it's predominantly due to what fundamentalists are writing about; you will find many books about wine, Bible translation, and music coming out of evangelical publishing houses.   Not that I deny that there is some viewpoint discrimination out there, but I think that if fundamentalists had well-thought-out books about these subjects, they could get published by evangelical publishing houses.  

Rather, I think one of the major problems is how the points are too often argued.  If we lead with guilt by association and personal attacks, fail to define our terms, ignore obvious facts, and the like, we're not going to get published by reputable publishers; they have a reputation to protect.   

TylerR wrote:I think more

TylerR wrote:
I think more fundamentalists need to write, but I'm not sure what publishing opportunities are available. Fundamentalists are usually restricted to blogs. The books some do publish are usually dealing with issues central to Baptist fundamentalism (e.g. One Bible Only), but irrelevant to the larger conservative Christian conversation. I've seen:

  • No attempt to engage the current culture wars (e.g. transgenderism, homosexuality) on a Biblical basis (beyond blogs)
  • Few attempts to write biblical commentaries, beyond the prophetic books
  • Few attempts to engage current theological issues (e.g. NPP). Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary does have an active theological journal, but they are an exception. I don't believe Central has one. Maranatha has one, but they're very busy right now.

I don't believe there are enough trained Baptist fundamentalists to do this work, and those who are trained are already very, very, very, very, very busy.  

From what I've observed...

  1. (many?) Fundamentalist seminaries are more focused on teaching than they are on academic research and writing. (One seminary I know of actually discourages its profs from writing because it takes away from their in-class teaching/instruction time.)
  2. Fundamentalist professors who do write are primarily writing book reviews.
  3. Publishing houses primarily publish what they believe will sell. Publishing a no-name, fundamentalist author will not generate an ROI. (Even Johnny Mac gets pushback from publishers if they believe his books won't sell.) Further, publishing such an author will degrade the publishing house's reputation in the broader evangelical academic community. 
  4. Because (most?) fundamentalists primarily attend fundamentalist seminaries and don't participate in broader evangelical communities (e.g. ETS), they really don't have the connections and networking needed to land a book deal other than with other fundamentalist publishers.

Fundamentalists waste energy on a narrow band of topics

Fundamentalists waste energy on a narrow band of topics (I know a gross generalization).

But see it in the blog posts ... anti-CCM, versions, hyper-degrees of separation, drinking, why go to a Christian school, CDS, et cetera

Wears one out

---- 

Example: Want a good commentary on the Psalms? No fundamentalist author!

 

Jim

Remember, I work at a state university and I attend Liberty University seminary. I am surrounded by gray!

Jim wrote:

Jim wrote:

Few people willingly call themselves “fundamentalists” today. I try to do so only when I get to explain what I mean.

So let me explain: I’m a (Christian, Protestant, Baptist) “fundamentalist” because I value four things—four things which make me believe, in turn, that the particular brand of fundamentalism I inherited is worth saving. In no particular order, I value …

  1. honoring my father(s) and mother(s).
  2. biblicism.
  3. personal holiness.
  4. traditional worship.

There are many more things I value as a biblical Christian, but these four have kept me aligned with the churches and institutions that make up (my sliver of) American fundamentalism.

The problem that I have with this, is that 1) I am not sure is a very tenable argument.  I fully understand where he is coming from, but to hold to this dogmatically means that if the movement does die out, you become the very last person in the movement.  I think it is important to honor your father and mother in the things you were taught.  I am less concerned with aligning those to a man made denominational construct.  The other challenge that I have is that for points 2,3,4, I would argue that many conservative evangelical churches hold to those as well in fundamentalism, if not better.  I would argue that there are many elements in a typical fundamentalist worship practice that is not nearly as traditional as some practices in some conservative evangelical services.  I feel that many in fundamentalism (as I once did), are not entirely clear as to what is out there outside of their circle.  Are there "convergent churches" that have rock bands, smoke and lights in their worship service?  Sure.  But there are also many who do not.  Just as there are fundamentalist churches teaching their kids Father Abraham and singing theologically false songs out of their "traditional hymnal".

I am part of a pastors forum in the Northeast Florida and Southeast Georgia area that is filled with pastors that are not fundamentalist and that meet once a month.  I have personally never met people so engaged with their congregates, so driven to live a holy life in all manner of their lives, focused on teaching their congregation on what the Bible teaches and so purposeful in their worship.  They are not focused on engaging the culture, but focused on engaging the people in the culture with the only technique that matters.  Preaching the Gospel.  They struggle just like we all do, but there churches are filled with young families, are healthy, attracting large numbers of college students going to secular colleges, despite having no "programs".

It is easy to grow up in the fundamentalism movement and really look outside of their circle and put people into categories and preach against those categories.  But as someone who has stepped outside of this circle, I can tell you that this is not always the case.  I visited a few fundamentalist churches up here in the Northeast, recently and it was quite discouraging.  They were filled with man-made constructs, and the churches were filled with 75% over the age of 50 and a lot that were very old.  It felt like "death" walking into them.  I know this isn't true of all fundamentalist churches, because I know of many that are vibrant working to live out the Gospel.

I am just happy to be part of a church that is not part of a denomination, a fellowship or any other category, and that is vibrantly seeking to live out the Gospel.

Bert Perry wrote:

Bert Perry wrote:

if fundamentalists had well-thought-out books about these subjects, they could get published by evangelical publishing houses.  

Perhaps I'm wrong, but there's no one standout reason why fundamentalists don't get published. However, I strongly (did I say strongly) agree with you Bert that we need to work hard at more than writing more. We need to work hard at writing well. Good and important thoughts deserve good and articulate expression. Perhaps that requires more work (and humility) than we've been willing to invest.

Thomas Overmiller
Pastor | www.studygodsword.com
Blog & Podcast | www.shepherdthoughts.com

Harder or smarter

TOvermiller wrote:

 

Bert Perry wrote:

 

if fundamentalists had well-thought-out books about these subjects, they could get published by evangelical publishing houses.  

 

 

Perhaps I'm wrong, but there's no one standout reason why fundamentalists don't get published. However, I strongly (did I say strongly) agree with you Bert that we need to work hard at more than writing more. We need to work hard at writing well. Good and important thoughts deserve good and articulate expression. Perhaps that requires more work (and humility) than we've been willing to invest.

in some cases, definitely harder work--more into original languages, etc..--and in some cases, just smarter.  

To the second point, many simply need a good, vicious editor who will not hesitate to say "you did not define your terms", "you're using personal attacks and inflammatory language", "this is a guilt by association argument", and the like.  (not attacking your work personally, by the way--I of course don't know it well).  Clear out the flotsam and jetsam of logical fallacies, get a quorum of people involved who recognize them and will throw the flag instantly ("ad hominem, 15 yards and loss of down", that kind of thing), and the world is going to take notice.  

I believe that, regarding the kerfuffle involving FBFI and "convergentism", one of FBFI's best friends is Dr. Bauder--he was one who threw the flag on "you're not defining your terms" by asking what was meant by the term--and I'd also suggest a wonderful partner might be found in the many in the "conservative evangelical" wing of Christianity, many of whom dearly love their fundamental friends, and dearly wish that (per Mark Ward's comments) that fundamentalists would be able to find their way out of the "fundamental ghetto" and onto the front lines. 

A Good, Vicious Editor

Bert Perry wrote:

many simply need a good, vicious editor who will not hesitate to say "you did not define your terms", "you're using personal attacks and inflammatory language", "this is a guilt by association argument", and the like. Clear out the flotsam and jetsam of logical fallacies, get a quorum of people involved who recognize them and will throw the flag instantly ("ad hominem, 15 yards and loss of down", that kind of thing), and the world is going to take notice.  

Yes! I wholeheartedly agree!

Thomas Overmiller
Pastor | www.studygodsword.com
Blog & Podcast | www.shepherdthoughts.com

Completely Ignored

I wrote my D.Min. dissertation at BJU on a bioethical issue (end of life decisions), published and promoted by Ambassador, review copies sent out, and completely ignored by the theological journals.

Here's a link: A Time To Die.

Wally Morris

Charity Baptist Church

Huntington, IN

amomentofcharity.blogspot.com

Fundamentalists Writing

Here is some good stuff I'm thankful for (this is a small list - there's more out there):

  • Kent Brandenburg (ed): Thou Shalt Keep Them. Probably the best a TR position has to offer. A very good book.
  • MacLachlan: Reclaiming Authentic Fundamentalism
  • McCune: Systematic; Promise Unfulfilled
  • Bauder: Four Views; One in Hope and Doctrine; Baptist Distinctives
  • Pickering: Biblical Separation
  • Moritz: Be Ye Holy
  • Oats: Church of the Fundamentalists
  • Various: Dispensational Views on New Covenant
  • James Williams (ed): The Bible in Our Hands
  • Peter Steveson: Daniel
  • John Greening: Strong Church
  • David Beale: Historical Theology in-Depth; In Pursuit of Purity
  • Regular Baptist Press: The entire "BuildUp" series

Also, in light of the recent "Bible Answer Man/Orthodox Answer Man" kerfluffle recently, behold this title from Regular Baptist Press - High Church Heresy: Exposing Resurgent Catholicism and Orthodoxy. A sample is here.

TylerR is a former Pastor. He lives with his family in Olympia, WA. He blogs here.

Material produced by BJU

Material produced by BJU faculty over the last 10 years or so: Commentaries by Steveson on Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, etc., Bell's book Theological Messages, Talbert's Not By Chance and Beyond Suffering, and much more. I suspect that, overall, the BJU faculty have produced a lot of quality books compared to other schools.

Wally Morris

Charity Baptist Church

Huntington, IN

amomentofcharity.blogspot.com

Wally

You're right about BJU. I was actually planning to buy Steveson's book on personal evangelism this evening!

TylerR is a former Pastor. He lives with his family in Olympia, WA. He blogs here.

Vicious Editors and The Exchange of Ideas

To the second point, many simply need a good, vicious editor who will not hesitate to say "you did not define your terms", "you're using personal attacks and inflammatory language", "this is a guilt by association argument", and the like.  (not attacking your work personally, by the way--I of course don't know it well).  Clear out the flotsam and jetsam of logical fallacies, get a quorum of people involved who recognize them and will throw the flag instantly ("ad hominem, 15 yards and loss of down", that kind of thing), and the world is going to take notice.  

Absolutely!

I mentioned, on another thread, that I'm not sure the FBFI is willing to receive criticism, and pointed to the fact that Dr. Ward's article (or whatever it was) was received and someone (ones?) in the FBFI responded by calling for Dr. Ward to be banned from participating in the magazine in the future (as per Dr. Vaughn's opening article).  Others have noted similar responses - TylerR and his exchange with Bro. Unruh, for example.

If Fundamentalists want to be taken seriously, they have to be willing to receive advice, encouragement, rebuke, and questions from their friends and their enemies.  If they want to exist as a genteel social club of nice people that don't rock the boat, then I don't want to hear anything from anyone there about losing all their young people to places that are actually worth going to.

We are Christians.  We stand for truth, and truth endures in the face of all attacks, both without and within.  I am not afraid of controversy - or of saying things that I think need to be said regarding the FBFI - because I (and others on SharperIron) want us to do better, and that means facing ugly issues sometimes and dealing with it like the men we claim to want to be.

The FBFI knows it has problems, but nothing can be done about those problems when the continual response to these kinds of issues (and there have been more than a few discussed on SharperIron) is:

  1. The suppression of other views by removing them from FBFI channels or hiding comments on FBFI blogs.
  2. The coverup of all these issues under the rubric of 'individual viewpoints' or 'Christian unity'.

Unity is based on Truth, and Truth is contained in God's Word.  We do not need to fear it, no matter what our attendance numbers may look like.  If you're going to participate in the exchange of ideas, then you're going to need to take arrows - even unjust ones.  But at least then you know where, and who, you're standing with and against.

Edit - the line that was struck out was something that I referred to that was in error.  I am leaving it in but striking it out because it's important to note that this was originally a part of my post.  My apologies for the confusion.

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

Are you for truth, Jay?

Jay wrote:

We are Christians.  We stand for truth, and truth endures in the face of all attacks, both without and within.  I am not afraid of controversy - or of saying things that I think need to be said regarding the FBFI - because I (and others on SharperIron) want us to do better, and that means facing ugly issues sometimes and dealing with it like the men we claim to want to be.

The FBFI knows it has problems, but nothing can be done about those problems when the continual response to these kinds of issues (and there have been more than a few discussed on SharperIron) is:

  1. The suppression of other views by removing them from FBFI channels or hiding comments on FBFI blogs.
  2. The coverup of all these issues under the rubric of 'individual viewpoints' or 'Christian unity'.

If you are for truth, why do you keep peddling falsehood? What other views are "removed from FBFI channels"? What comments are hidden? What are you talking about?

Obviously, we are not going to run every opinion, informed or otherwise, with no discretion. SI doesn't do that, there are guidelines here for commenting and moderators, etc. The simple fact of having editorial guidelines and policies is not suppression of truth.

But I would suggest it is false to accuse the FBFI of covering things up or implying sinister motives to our actions. I will push back when you raise suspicions like this. It isn't true. If you are for truth, you shouldn't use innuendo to discredit by suggesting "something else is going on."

I would like to know what you mean by "suppression" "hiding" "coverup." Those are very charged words and are serious accusations. You provide no substance to back them up.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

My mistake originally

Don, I looked at link 1 but did not see the comments remained on link 2, Jay responded to my comment and PM-d me about the matter.  See other thread for details including my correction.

So while I still think it's troubling that at least one FBFI member proposed giving Mark Ward Jr. the "right boot of fellowship", I've struck that and left an apology.  My mistake, not intentional.

Jay, you don't know me in

Jay, you don't know me in person, and I don't know you. But I will share some cordial thoughts of my own in response to your interaction here. I think I agree in heart with what you are saying, but I probably disagree in your perception of the FBFI in general. I concede that my viewpoint may be skewed, something that is always possible for sure.

  1. My personal experience, from many angles, indicates to me that the FBFI welcomes thoughtful, heartfelt input from men like Mark Ward, Jr. and others who value the FBFI. This recent FrontLine magazine, in part, reveals that. That one or a few members asked for Mark's contribution(s) to be withheld does not describe the entire FBFI. It describes whichever individual(s) voiced personal concern. And whomever voiced such concern has every right to do so. That's the nature of healthy, friendly camaraderie.
  2. I'm not sure what cover-up you are refering to. Again, the recent FBFI magazine is the opposite of any sort of cover-up.

Jay wrote:

Unity is based on Truth, and Truth is contained in God's Word.  We do not need to fear it, no matter what our attendance numbers may look like.  If you're going to participate in the exchange of ideas, then you're going to need to take arrows - even unjust ones.  But at least then you know where, and who, you're standing with and against.

I agree with what you've said in these four sentences. Wholeheartedly. Unreservedly. And so, I think, does John Vaughn, Mark Ward, Jr., etc. Again, the recent FrontLine magazine reveals this shared conviction. And the small article I contributed to this magazine myself focuses on some of what you are saying. We all have need for increased growth in the grace of godly communication as friends and co-laborers for the gospel, both talking and listening to one another better. And knowing our weaknesses, the FBFI is taking significant steps in that direction.

Thomas Overmiller
Pastor | www.studygodsword.com
Blog & Podcast | www.shepherdthoughts.com

Thanks Bert

We all make mistakes. No problem.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3


▴ Top of page