Post Series
0: Intro
1: Narrative Question
2: Authority Question
3: God Question
4: Jesus Question
5: Gospel Question
Theological Foundation Recap
6: Church Question
7: Sex Question
8: Future Question
9: Pluralism Question
10: What-Do-We-Do-Now Question
11: Final Thoughts

Brian’s shift in perspective on the gospel happened during a lunch conversation with a “well-known evangelical theologian” who challenged Brian’s assumptions regarding the gospel by asking the question “What we the gospel according to Jesus?” The theologian replied, “For Jesus, the gospel was very clear: The Kingdom of God is at hand.” He later urged Brian to read Paul in light of Jesus, instead of the other way around. (138)

Before this moment, Brian approached the gospel in a typical evangelical manner, one with which I am all to familiar. As he puts it, “I had always assumed the ‘kingdom of God’ meant ‘kingdom of heaven,’ which meant ‘going to heaven after you die,’ which required believing the message of Paul’s Letter of the Romans, which I understood to teach a theory of atonement called ‘penal substitution,’ which was the basis for a formula for forgiveness of original sin called ‘justification by grace through faith.’” (138)

Instead, “[an] increasing number of us, when freed from the constraints of the six-line Greco Roman narrative and the associated constitutional reading of the Bible, gain courage to speak what has become joyfully clear to us in this fresh reading of the gospels: Jesus didn’t come to start a new religion to replace first Judaism and then all other religions, whether by pen, the pulpit, the sword, or the apocalypse…Instead, he came to announce a new Kingdom, a new way of life, a new way of peace that carried good news to all people of every religion.” (139)

On the point about Jesus coming to inaugurate God’s Kingdom presence, Brian is correct: Repent for “the Kingdom of Heaven has drawn near,” is the opening salvo that launched the teaching ministry of Jesus of Nazareth. “The term ‘Kingdom of God/Heaven’ signified God’s sovereign, dynamic and eschatological rule,”¹ both now and in a future epoch. Throughout three years of preaching, the message Jesus bore was eschatological in orientation; Jesus both established and anticipated the Kingdom of God. Through debates, discourses, and parables, this Nazarene teacher testified to the dawning eschatological reign of God and anticipated the eschatological “age to come” where that reign would be exhaustive and permanent.

I. Howard Marshall affirms that the Gospel writers regarded the Kingdom of Heaven as being central to the teachings of Jesus.² Through these teachings, Jesus declared that the Kingdom would come in the future, yet was also present in someway. Jesus never relegated God’s Kingdom reign simply to the future but instead explicitly announced its presence, while expecting its future; the Kingdom is present and future.³ This “already and not yet” descriptor is now a common place of scholarship, being described as “realized” and “future” eschatology.⁴

For Jesus—as well as the other disciples. including Paul—the euangelian, “good news,” gospel was intimately linked to the concept of the Kingdom of God/Heaven⁵. In fact, I much more prefer the term Reign of God, because the Greek basillea can be rendered Kingdom or Reign. What Jesus makes clear, and what Paul further develops, is that through Jesus Christ God’s sovereign, dynamic and eschatological rule was breaking into earth’s reality. It was happening “at hand,” in that moment, in our moments. The term Kingdom or Reign of God referred primarily to the sovereign activity of God as ruler and king, and only secondarily to the ream over which God ruled.⁶

David Flusser, in his book The Sage from Galilee, presents a convincing case that Jesus absolutely believed the Kingdom had come and was amongst the world. In fact, this idea would have been a fixture of rabbinical Judaism. “There should be no doubt that both for rabbinical Judaism and for Jesus the Kingdom of Heaven is a present reality.”⁷ Jesus’ main task was to be the center of a movement which realized God’s Kingdom reign among mankind, right now in this present age.⁸ “Consequently, when we talk about the [Kingdom of Heaven] we are talking about something that is actually happening here and now.”⁹ God’s Kingdom, the exercise of His kingship, and the manifestation of His sovereignty has dawn near.¹⁰ While its entire consummation awaits His return, Christ inaugurated the Kingdom of Heaven during his lifetime.¹¹ The parables themselves make this clear, beginning with an emphasis on the presence of the Kingdom and its explosive growth.

So in as much as he seeks to shift the gospel to center around God’s inbreaking rule through the Kingdom of Heaven, Brian is OK. The problem is when he divorces that kingdom and rule from Jesus Christ and Him alone. He audaciously asserts that Jesus came to announce a kingdom to all people of every religion, a kingdom that has “room for many religious traditions within it.” (139) While seemingly out of the ordinary, Brian is being incredibly consistent with his re-imagined Christian faith, on that is no longer about Jesus Christ as exclusive Lord and Messiah, but simply about God, a generic pan-deity that is in no way wholly rooted in Jesus Christ. As Brian recentered the gospel around the Kingdom—a task I actually applaud at that level—he fails to root that Kingdom in Jesus Christ and exalt him as the catalyst for the Kingdom in the first place.

For Brian, the Kingdom is “about God’s will being done on earth as in heave for all people…God’s faithful solidarity with all humanity in our suffering, oppression, and evil…God’s compassion and call to be reconciled with God and with one another—before death…a summons to rethink everything and enter a life of retraining as disciples or learners of a new way of life, citizens of a new kingdom.” (139) Elsewhere he writes that Paul himself “preaches the Kingdom of God,” that Paul still carried “the same gospel message he received from Jesus Christ in a vision, the gospel of the Kingdom of God. Whether in person or by letter, he calls people everywhere to be reconciled in the Kingdom of God—reconciled to God by grace through faith, reconciled within themselves, reconciled with others whatever their class, ethnic, cultural, or religious background…This is the gospel of Jesus Christ and of his servant/apostle Paul: the Kingdom of God is at hand. Repent and believe the good news. Be reconciled.” (157)

While I agree with all of this on the surface, here is my problem: Brian has successfully divorced the Kingdom of God from Jesus Christ! The reconciliation of which Paul proclaims happens ONLY though Jesus Christ. No one else. We are not simply called to “be reconciled.” Every person is called to be reconciled to God through Jesus Christ. Paul explicitly teaches this in 2 Cor. 5. Romans 8 makes clear that there is no more condemnation for those who are “in Christ.” The righteousness that we all require, the righteousness of God displayed in his reign and kingdom, is given through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe in Him. (Rom. 3)

No Brian, the Kingdom does NOT make room for all faiths, because all other faiths outside of faith in Jesus Christ are false. The Holy Scriptures make clear that God’s Kingdom was inaugurated through Jesus Christ and is available to all because of His life, death, resurrection, and ascension. Peter himself makes this plain in Acts 2 when he roots the eschatological expectations of the Hebrew people in Jesus Christ, declaring that all who call on His name will be saved. Peter does not say, “Repent and believe in the Kingdom of God.” Not at all! He implores his fellow Jews to “Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.” (Acts 2) In fact, he proclaims that, “God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah.” (Acts 2) He is the one in whom salvation is found, “for there is no other name given under heaven by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4)

As I have maintained in my assessment all along, for Brian it’s not really all about Jesus Christ, it’s about God, a pluralized God that accommodates to all faiths and religious systems. Not only is this incredibly clear in this section as he never roots the Kingdom in Christ alone, it is also clear in his horrible exegesis of the book of Romans. On the one hand, Brian’s methodology throughout this book is pitiful and nonsensical, because he rarely quotes primary sources to establish his claims, leading to absurd conclusions, like claiming the primary audience were fellow Jews (Most modern scholarship is unified in agreement that most of the audience are Gentiles, in addition to some Jewish converts)¹² On the other hand, his conclusions are reckless, dangerous to the Christian faith, and devastating to the gospel itself.

His conclusions are crystalized in his continued pluralization of God and Christianity itself in his analysis of Romans 3 and 5. First, Brian argues that Paul is announcing a new way forward for all: the way of faith. (148) This is mystifying because Paul actually maintains the exact opposite: faith has ALWAYS been the means through which one is made right with God! This is the entire point of chapter 4 and the example of Abraham. Ethnicity, food laws, and nationalism in no way bring salvation. Faith does and always has from the beginning. Brian seems to think otherwise because he writes, “Paul now points both Jews and Gentiles toward the way out: not a new doctrine, not a new religion, and not trying harder at the old religion either, but faith. Religious laws and practices are inherently exclusive; you’re either circumcised or not, and either you keep kosher or you don’t. But faith—having reverent confidence or dependence on God—is an option available to everyone.” (emphasis mine. 148)

But faith in what? Or better whom? This is where Brian’s color’s shine: God. For Brian Faith is the point. And actually faith in God, as a generic pan-deity. Brian completely ignores the clear teachings of Romans 3 which root that faith in Jesus Christ. Brian completely refuses to exclusivity embrace Jesus as Lord and Messiah. Furthermore, Brian implies that all of our at least the religious systems of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are, in the end, actually unified under Jesus Abraham. After butchering Romans 3, he bludgeons Romans 5. (I realize these words are dramatic, but they are appropriate for the manner in which Brian handles the Text)

Without giving any sources, Brian clams that Paul, in his discussion on Adam, implies “Our diverse religious systems…have many points of departure that separate us, but if we follow any path back to its source to the genesis of our common humanity, we come to the creation story of Adam, where we are united. After unifying us in the story of our common ancestor Adam, Paul presents Jesus as a new Adam, a second Adam, the last Adam…Adam brought death and condemnation to all humanity; Jesus now brings life and justification to all humanity. So we’re all part o the story of the original Adam, and now, of the new Adam, Jesus.”

At this point in the reading I almost put the book down and walked away. Brian’s assertion that all of our religious systems are somehow united in Adam is far from any sound, sane, serious biblical exegesis. I wrote elsewhere on Romans 5:12-21 and will summarize those thoughts here:

Interestingly, the phrase from Romans 5 that is of interest “through one man” is the first time it appears in biblical literature. In classical literature, this idea that someone suffers something because of another (for instance, “I have suffered injustices by a single wicked person…”)((Dinarchus In Demosthenem, 49:4; see also Hippocrates Epistulae)) does appear, but Paul now uses it in accordance with Adam.¹³ Like much of these intertestamental examples, Paul believes that death came as a result of Adam’s sin and now our nature is affected in the way Adam was.

Clearly during the time of Paul, there are signs influential Jewish literature and the 1st century Jewish tradition viewed Adam as a “head” of humanity and that humanity participates in the sin of Adam, enduring the same consequences: death. Paul’s notions in Romans 5:18 that Adam’s trespass results in the condemnation for all people and in v. 19 that all are made sinners through his disobedience are not entirely unique and mirror the same Jewish perspective of his day.

Regardless, though, our Christian understanding of human nature and sin flows from Jesus Christ’s and Paul’s teachings. The historical background must only enhance our understanding of the two without dictating it. Romans 5:18, 19 in particular make clear that “in Adam” we are condemned (vs. “in Christ” we receive justification and life); “in Adam” we are made sinners (vs. “in Christ” we are made righteous).

Adam acts as humanity’s representative not in a religious sense, but a rebellious one. And in the broader context which must include 5:1-11, Paul is explaining how BELIEVERS now have peace and hope with God, because of their faith in Christ blood, death, and life. This is not a passage universalism, which Brian attempts to argue. It is clear that those who “reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ” are “those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness.” (Rom. 5) In other words, those who “declare with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead,” (Rom. 10) those who are “saved” and “in Christ” (Rom 10 and And in regards to the seemingly universalistic “all” in v. 18 Jewett reveals:

In the context of Romans the concern is not so much whether salvation is universal in a theoretical sense…but whether all believers stand within its scope. This verse strong suggests that Adamic damnation has been overturned by Christ’s righteous act and that the scope of righteousness in Christ includes all believers without exception, both now and at the parousia.¹⁴

In the end, Brian continues his journey away from Jesus Christ as exclusive Lord and Messiah toward a pluralized, pan-deity God. Like his friend Samir Selmanovic, Brian clearly describes the kingdom of God in terms that are utterly disconnected from Jesus Christ alone. Further, he has also joined with Samir by selecting the feature of the kingdom of God as a revelatory ground of “divine immanence,” instead of Jesus Christ alone. Selmanovic affirms this devastating indictment by claiming the Kingdom is not exclusively limited to Jesus Christ:

Many Christians believe that the Kingdom of God that Jesus spoke about is inseparable from knowing the person of Jesus. If so, the question begs to be asked: Is the Kingdom of God present in all of life, among all people, throughout history, or is the Kingdom of God limited to the historical person of Jesus and thus absent from most of life, most people, and most history? The answer to this question depends greatly on whether Christians are willing to make their religion take a backseat to something larger than itself. (It’s Really All About God. 76-77)

Like Samir, Brian believes that God is reveal to the world outside of Jesus Christ and that the gospel itself is more than Jesus. In closing this question, Brian claims that “Paul is a ‘Jesus and the Kingdom of God’ guy from first to last.” Here Brian is preaching the Kingdom of God along side Jesus, rather than Jesus Christ alone. Brian, you are wrong to do this; there is a massive difference between the Kingdom of God and Jesus vs. the Kingdom of God through Jesus.

Karl Barth makes it clear such people as Brian are “oblivious of the fact that [divine] immanence both as a whole and in its parts has Christian truth and reality only in so far as it is founded in Jesus Christ and summed up in Him, so that if, as a whole and in its parts, it is affirmed, preached and believed as a centre in itself and alongside Christ, the Church will inevitably be led back into heathendom and its worship of the elements.” (CD II,1:319). More importantly, he goes on to say that God’s Kingdom is not known at all apart from Jesus Christ, and doing otherwise establishes a Christian heresy. As he warns, “Christian heresies spring from the fact that man does not take seriously the known ground of divine immanence in Jesus Christ, so that from its revelation, instead of apprehending Jesus Christ and the totality in Him, he arbitrarily selects this or that feature and sets it up as a subordinate centre: perhaps the idea of creation…or even the kingdom of God.” (CD II,1:319)

Paul was not about Jesus and the Kingdom of God, but Jesus Christ and Him alone who inaugurated God’s reign through His life, death, resurrection, and ascension. This is clear from his words in Philippians 3:10-11:

I want to know Christ—yes to know the power of his resurrection and participation in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and so, somehow, attaining to the resurrection of the dead.

This was the prayer and cry of Paul the apostle: Jesus Christ and the forgiveness, salvation, and resurrection provided through Him. Why is this also not the prayer and cry of Brian, too? At this point, it is clear they are not. How sad, indeed.

Popularity: 1% [?]

1. Caragounis, “Eschatology,” Dictionary on Jesus and the Gospels, 417. [↩]
2. I. Howard Marshall, Jesus the Saviour. Studies in New Testament Theology (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 213. [↩]
3. McKnight, “Gospel of Matthew,” Dictionary on Jesus and the Gospels, 535. [↩]
4. Allison, “Eschatology,” Dictionary on Jesus and the Gospels, 206. [↩]
5. Matthew favors Kingdom of Heaven language, while Luke/Mark favor Kingdom of God [↩]
6. Marshall, Jesus the Saviour, 231. [↩]
7. Flusser, Sage from Galilee, 87. [↩]
8. Flusser, Sage from Galilee, 88. [↩]
9. Marshall, Jesus the Saviour, 231. [↩]
10. James Dunn, Jesus Remembered, 408. [↩]
11. Craig Blomberg, Interpreting the Parables, 297. [↩]
12. Jewett, Romans, 70. [↩]
13. Jewett, Romans, 373 [↩]
14. Jewett, Romans, 385. [↩]

My alma mater will be featuring me and my recently written book, “the (un)offensive gospel of Jesus,” next week for an alumni spotlight. I thought I would publish the information here, too, to give you a glimpse into the thrust of my little writing project.

Enjoy!

-jeremy

ALUMNUS AUTHORS “(UN)OFFENSIVE” BOOK

by Cheryl (Warren) Brugel ’90

May 4, 2009

“I love people, and I love the church. I believe the church through Christ is the hope for the world.”

These words, spoken by Jeremy Bouma ’02, sum up well his passion and life since his days on Cedarville’s campus. A political science major, Bouma’s goal was to prepare himself to engage the culture with the truths of Scripture. He felt that government would be a great place to do this and ultimately hoped to be on the “front lines of cultural engagement” through writing and speaking opportunities.

After graduating, Bouma packed up everything and moved to Washington, D.C. — without a job! “Intuitively, I knew God was taking me to D.C.,” he said, “and to Capitol Hill in particular.” He spent the next year working for Senator Mike DeWine from Ohio. He then worked three years for the Center for Christian Statesmanship, an organization that reaches government workers with the Gospel. While there, God used him to help a Senate staffer “re-find Christ” and lead an agnostic staffer to find hope again in the church.

Refocusing a Calling

Although Bouma had many incredible experiences in Washington, God used this time to open his heart to full-time ministry. Sensing God leading him “back home” to Michigan, Bouma left Washington in 2006 to attend Grand Rapids Theological Seminary. He is currently earning his Master of Divinity with an emphasis in church planting and beginning a Master of Theology in historical theology — all while helping to pastor a small church in the area.

While God may have changed Bouma’s location and type of ministry, He has not changed Bouma’s passion. If anything, Bouma’s desire to engage culture with the story of Christ has only strengthened his focus since attending seminary.

“While on Capitol Hill, I discipled people and found myself having spiritual conversations in order to connect their stories to the Jesus story,” he shared. “Now I am preparing to do it for a living through seminary, learning how to pastor a church and dreaming of ways to engage my postmodern, post-Christian world with the teachings of Jesus, in both conventional and alternative ways.”

(Re)Telling the Jesus Story

Most recently, Bouma had the opportunity to write a book titled The (Un)Offensive Gospel of Jesus. Writing a book while pastoring a church and attending seminary may seem a little daunting. But for Bouma, the process has further clarified his mission of helping the church accurately and lovingly tell Jesus’ story of rescue. “After returning to Michigan, I was amazed to see the amount of cultural and ecclesiastical transformation within my generation,” he said. “I began to examine the ways in which the church shows Jesus and tells His story.”

And he struggled with what he saw. The Jesus he saw portrayed mostly ranged from a “white, middle-class Republican who’s only concerned with blessing” people to a Jesus not concerned with daily happenings but only with getting people saved from hell. He saw many young people offended by what they heard and saw, which led them to turn their backs on Christ and the church completely.

Bouma began asking himself, “Where is the Jesus of the Bible?” In his book, he sets out to accurately portray the biblical Jesus and gives insight on how the church can better share the story of Jesus to a postmodern world.

As the title suggests, the book seeks to debunk the notion that Jesus and His story will never offend unbelievers. Bouma writes, “Lest you think that my use of (un)offensive means undemanding, think again. While I do not believe the heart of Jesus and substance of His story is offensive, I do not mean His demands will not irritate our modern sensibilities.” He further explains, “The Gospel of Jesus, then, is both (un)offensive and offensive. Jesus’ good news of rescue and re-creation is not inherently offensive, yet people can still react in offense at its demands.”

What Bouma does see as offensive is the way the church often shares Jesus’ story. “I feel that the way the church tells God’s story of rescue is incredibly problematic,” he said. “We start in the wrong part of the story.” He explains in his book that too often Christians begin sharing the Gospel “in the middle of the story, either with sin or heaven/hell.” He believes it is more accurate to begin God’s story with creation and who we were intended to be at the beginning. He takes the reader through the biblical story of creation, rebellion, rescue, and re-creation — using each to explain how to better share God’s story with a lost and dying world. For Bouma, “this is a better, complete, more biblical way of telling God’s story of rescue than the ones typically told.” He also feels it better addresses a new generation embracing postmodern ideals.

Reaching a Generation

A key element of his book is explaining the postmodern movement, especially in relation to how it affects the church and its mission. He writes, “Before the church considers how to retell God’s […] story, it is essential that we first understand the context in which we are telling that story.” He then devotes a chapter to postmodernism, breaking it down into easy-to-understand themes that can then help the church understand the world.

Bouma ends his book by encouraging believers to follow Christ. He explains that Jesus’ first words to the disciples were “Come, follow me,” not just “obey me” or “believe me.” Bouma writes, “No longer were they [the disciples] to be who they were before that calling. Instead, they would be a different people, called to a different mission.” Bouma calls the church to do the same: “[We need to] leave our former identities and both follow after Jesus and engage in His mission.” In so doing, Bouma believes we will better engage our culture with the love of Christ and reach a dying world with the good news of God’s story.

Since publishing his book, Bouma has been encouraged by the response. “I’ve learned that an atheist friend of a friend is inching toward a relationship with Jesus because of the Person and story she encountered in the book,” he said. “Hearing that made my day, because ultimately that is what it’s all about: people encountering the loving, gentle, caring Jesus and connecting to His hopeful, (un)offensive Gospel story of rescue.”

Bouma trusts that his book will be just the beginning of his work to bring lost people and the church together by teaching the church how to best share God’s hopeful story of redemption.

Popularity: 5% [?]

So apparently there are more people interested in my book than I thought The GREAT GIVEAWAY is over. I hope those who were able to get free copies are inspired by the Jesus and Story I try to paint in those pages. Enjoy!

I have been pleased with my initial ‘sales’ and reception of my book “the (un)offensive gospel of Jesus” after its release last October (watch some vids and read about the book and an excerpt ). I am excited that people are ‘getting it,’ both young and old, conservative and progressive, and are reconsidering how they show Jesus and tell His amazing, hopeful Story. I’ve recuperated my initial investment and then some, so I thought I’d do something fun to celebrate

I have a few extra cases in my basement and want to get the books out into peoples hands. This is where you come in.

I want to give you and a friend a free copy. I even want to pay for the shipping! All I ask is two things: 1) Read it and write a review on amazon.com and barnesandnoble.com. It can be 3-4 sentences or 3-4 paragraphs, 2 stars or 5, doesn’t matter to me; 2) Give the second copy away to someone you know.

If you want to partake in the goods email your name and address to: jeremy [at] novuslumen.net or leave a comment here. I have 32 slots (64 books total) to fill so act fast!

Enjoy!

-jeremy

Popularity: 3% [?]

I posted another video for my upcoming book, “the (un)offensive gospel of Jesus.”

It is a reading of one of my favorite sections from a chapter entitled, “our creation.” In this chapter I contend that the way we tell God’s Story of Rescue begins in entirely the wrong place: we begin either with sin or with heaven. I (and others) believe God’s Story begins at creation and our collective human story doesn’t being with sin but with the reality that we are beings crafted after the Image and Likeness of God. Yes we do rebel and are broken/cracked because of rebellion, but we are not fundamentally sinful. Instead, we are fundamentally Image Bearers of God.

Enjoy the video and dont forget to join my Facebook Group!

Popularity: 2% [?]

Late last year I began a (unfinished) series of blog posts on “the unoffensive gospel of Jesus.” The idea was to counter the crazy notion that “the gospel is offensive,” something I’ve heard far too often from Christians. So a few months ago I thought I would turn it into a book! I took this (un)offensive gospel motif and combined it with a phrase I began to develop late last year: “we are responsible for the Jesus we show and the Jesus they see; we are responsible for the story we tell and the story they hear.”

Here is the description of the book from the back cover: “Contrary to the popular Christian notion that “the gospel is offensive,” this book contends that Jesus and His message is inherently inspiring, reasurring and good, drawing those who needed restoration and rescue, while disturbing the power brokers both in Jerusalem and Rome. Based on several blog posts, experiences in the Western Church, studies in the Gospels and theology, conversations and friendships, and the joy of personally following Jesus, Jeremy A. Bouma explores the person and message of Jesus and helps us understand why both are more hopeful than many of us think.”

Here are the 11 chapters:

1. introduction

PART 1: Jesus-Show

2. the (un)offensive Jesus

3. the Jesus we show; the Jesus they see

4. showing Jesus well

PART 2: Story-Tell

5. a story among stories

6. the Story we tell; they Story they hear

7. our creation

8. our rebellion

9. our rescue

10. our re-creation

11. the (un)offensive gospel of Jesus

The idea is to help Christians understand how we are showing Jesus and telling his hopeful message poorly, while offering a better way of showing Jesus and telling His hopeful message. It also hope it encourages de-Churched and un-Churched people to rethink Jesus and his Story, a Jesus and Story this is inherently (un)offensive.

So far I’ve written over 45,000 words and 192 pages. I probably have another 30 pages to go. I’m on track to finish it in 3 weeks and send it off to 4 of my friends for edits. At the end of September I’ll finalize the book and send it off to the printer. By mid-October it should be available at amazon.com and the book website, www.unoffensivegospel.com.

I’m not expecting to be the next “Shack” by any means. I’ve always wanted to be published, so this is fulfilling a personal goal. Besides the goal fulfillment I do hope it provokes people to think about how we Christians are showing Jesus and telling His story, and also provide a more hopeful portrait of both for those not connected to Jesus or His story. We’ll see how it goes…

Popularity: 2% [?]