Wednesday, August 11, 2010

GOD - use of the term in the Bible and pre-Christian literature


In our modern times, the use of the term "God" among Christians, Jews, and Moslems has taken on a restricted meaning, and is properly used only of "the one true God". However, this restricted usage did not exist in the Hebrew OT, nor in much of the other Jewish literature produced before the advent of Christianity.

In the Hebrew OT, the most widely used Hebrew term for God, elohim, is not restricted to the one God of Israel, and is also applied to the false Gods of the nations, idols, departed spirits, angels, and men—concerning the latter two, note the following examples:

Exodus 4:16 And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people: and he shall be, even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of God (elohim) . (KJV)

Exodus 7:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god (elohim) to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet. (KJV)

Exodus 21:6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges (elohim); he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever. (KJV)

Exodus 22:8, 9 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges (elohim), to see whether he have put his hand unto his neighbour's goods. For all manner of trespass, whether it be for ox, for ass, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, which another challengeth to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges (elohim); and whom the judges shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbour. (KJV)

Deuteronomy 10:17 For the LORD your God (elohim) is God (elohim) of gods (elohim), and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:1 Samuel 2:25 If one man sin against another, the judge (elohim) shall judge him: but if a man sin against the LORD, who shall intreat for him? Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto the voice of their father, because the LORD would slay them. (KJV)

Psalm 45:6, 7 Thy throne, O God (elohim), is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre. Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God (elohim), thy God (elohim), hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. (KJV)
Psalm 82:1 God (elohim) standeth in the congregation of God (el); He judgeth among the gods (elohim). (KJV)

Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods (elohim); and all of you are children of the most High. (KJV)

Psalm 136:2 O give thanks unto the God (elohim) of gods (elohim): for his mercy endureth for ever. (KJV)
Psalm 138:1 {A Psalm of David.} I will praise thee with my whole heart: before the gods (elohim) will I sing praise unto thee. (KJV)

With the above verses in mind, closely related to the use of the term elohim for those who represent and/or act with YHWH's authority is the fact that the earthly throne of Israel's kings, is actually the throne of YHWH:

1 Chronicles 29:23 Then Solomon sat on the throne of Jehovah as king instead of David his father, and prospered; and all Israel obeyed him. (ASV)

Because the earthly king represents YHWH, and sits on YHWH's throne, he receives "worship" with YHWH:

1 Chronicles 29:20 And David said to all the assembly, Now bless Jehovah your God. And all the assembly blessed Jehovah, the God of their fathers, and bowed down their heads, and worshipped Jehovah, and the king. (ASV)

Before ending this post, I would like to provide a selection from the Dead Sea Scrolls (11Q13) that comments on the Psalms 82:1 passage:

…And concerning that which He said, In [this] year of Jubilee [each of you shall return to his property (Lev. xxv, 13); and likewise, And this is the manner of release:] every creditor shall release that which he has lent [to his neighbour. He shall exact it of his neighbour and his brother], for God’s release [has been proclaimed] (Deut. xv, 2). [And it will be proclaimed at] the end of days concerning the captives as [He said, To proclaim liberty in the captives (Isa. lxi, I). Its interpretation is that He] will assign them to the Sons of Heaven and to the inheritance of Melchizedek f[or He will cast] their [lot] amid the po[rtions of Melchize]dek, who will return them there and will proclaim to them liberty, forgiving them [the wrong-doings] of all their iniquities.

And this thing will [occur] in the first week of the Jubilee that follows the nine Jubilees. And the Day of Atonement is the e[nd of the] tenth [Ju]bilee, when all the Sons of [Light] and the men of the lot of Mel[chi]zedek will be atoned for, [And] a statue concerns them [to prov]ide them with their rewards. For this is the moment of the Year of Grace for Melchizedek. [And h]e will, by his strength, judge the holy ones of God, executing judgement as it is written concerning him in the Songs of David, who said, ELOHIM has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgement (Psalms lxxxii, I). And it was concerning him that he said, (Let the assembly of the peoples) return to the height above them; EL (god) will judge the peoples (Psalms vii, 7-8). As for that which he s[aid, How long will you] judge unjustly and show partiality to the wicked? Selah (Psalms lxxxii, 2), its interpretation concerns Belial and the spirits of his lot [who] rebelled by turning away from the precepts of God to … And Melchizedek will avenge the vengeance of the judgements of God … and he will drag [them from the hand of] Belial and from the hand of all the s[pirits of] his [lot]. And all the ‘gods [of Justice’] will come to his aid [to] attend to the de[struction] of Belial. And the height is … all the sons of God … this … This is the day of [Peace/Salvation] concerning which [God] spoke [through Isa]iah the prophet, who said, [How] beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the messenger who proclaims peace, who brings good news, who proclaims salvation, who says to Zion: Your ELOHIM [reigns] (Isa. lii, 7). Its interpretation; the mountains are prophets … and the messenger is the Anointed one of the spirit, concerning whom Dan[iel] said, [Until an anointed, a prince (Dan. ix, 25)] … [And he who brings] good [news], who proclaims [salvation]; it is concerning him that it is written … [To comfort all who mourn, to grant to those who mourn in Zion] (Isa. lxi, 2-3). To comfort [those who mourn: its interpretation], to make them understand all the ages of t[ime] … In truth … will turn away from Belial … by the judgement[s] of God, as it is written concerning him, [who says to Zion]; your ELOHIM reigns. Zion is… , those who uphold the Covenant, who turn from walking [in] the way of the people. And your ELOHIM is [Melchizedek, who will save them from] the hand of Belial. As for which He said, Then you shall send abroad the trump[et in] all the land (Lev. xxv, 9) … (The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, translated by Geza Vermes, New York: Allen Lane The Penguin Press, 1997, pp. 500-501.)

Vermes, in his introduction to the above text, states:

The heavenly deliver is Melchizedek. Identical with the archangel Michael, he is the head of the 'sons of Heaven' or 'gods of Justice' and is referred to as elohim and el. (Ibid., p. 500.)

Much more to come, the Lord willing…


Grace and peace,

David

14 comments:

Ken said...

כִּי כָּל־אֱלֹהֵי הָעַמִּים 2אֱלִילִים וַיהוָה שָׁמַיִם עָשָׂה

Psalm 96:5
"For all the gods of the nations are idols, but the Lord made the heavens."

You need to include lots of verses that show how the Hebrews understood the passages you cite under the overall teaching that there is really one One Almighty Creator God.

Wish I had time for more at the moment.

David Waltz said...

Hello Ken,

Forgive my somewhat tardy response, but the weather has been just awesome here the last couple of days, and I have been really enjoying being outdoors. In your post you wrote:

>>Psalm 96:5
"For all the gods of the nations are idols, but the Lord made the heavens."

You need to include lots of verses that show how the Hebrews understood the passages you cite under the overall teaching that there is really one One Almighty Creator God.>>

Me: As you know, I agree that there is only "One Almighty Creator God", who alone self-existent, and that everything else that exists owes their existence to Him.

I did not include the numerous verses that pertain to the one true God, nor to verses that speak about false Gods, for the intent of the post was to draw attention to the verses and use of elohim that are NOT used in either of the above instances.

>>Wish I had time for more at the moment.>>

Me: No problem; we are supposed to have the second warmest day of the year here, so I will not be spending very much time indoors today (nor probably tomorrow either). Hope you can free up some time next week to continue the discussion.


Grace and peace,

David

Ken said...

David wrote:
“I did not include the numerous verses that pertain to the one true God, nor to verses that speak about false Gods, for the intent of the post was to draw attention to the verses and use of elohim that are NOT used in either of the above instances.”

David,
I hope you enjoy the weather up there in Washington; must be cold most of the rest of the year, for the beach.

Do you think any of these passages are speaking about false gods?

Psalm 97:7 b
Worship him, all you gods!

Psalm 97:9

For you, O LORD, are most high over all the earth;
you are exalted far above all gods. (Elohim)

כִּי־אַתָּה יְהוָה עֶלְיֹון עַל־כָּל־הָאָרֶץ מְאֹד נַעֲלֵיתָ עַל־כָּל־אֱלֹהִים׃


Psalm 96:4
For great is the LORD, and greatly to be praised;
he is to be feared above all gods.

If they are not about false gods, how do you know they are not?

If they are are about false gods, how do you know they are?

Do they included the other "gods" that you seem to be seeking to establish?


you wrote: “ . . . nor to verses that speak about false Gods, . . . “

You don’t think Deuteronomy 10:17; 82, 136, 138 are speaking of or at least including false gods?

How do you know what they are referring to, if not false gods?

Exodus 4:16 and 7:1 mean that Moses is acting on God’s behalf, in doing miracles and confronting Pharaoh and because of the miraculous power of God that He gives to Moses, it will seem like Moses is “God” (a mighty powerful one) in the presence of Pharaoh, who is pagan and animistic and believes in many “gods” (powerful spiritual forces behind nature that pagans worshiped in order to manipulate nature for their advantage and prosperity, etc.)

Exodus 21:6; 22:8-9; and I Sam. 2:25 are speaking of the judges of Israel acting on God’s behalf in making judgments in the context of legal decisions and punishments.

Hebrews 1:6-8 interprets Psalm 45 for us as talking about the Son of God, Jesus Christ, another proof text for the Deity of Christ.

The Chronicles passages “throne of Yahweh” can mean, “the throne that Yahweh gave to David and Solomon”; kingly reign, representing the God of the world, to administer justice as just Kings.

Do you think there really are other "gods" ?

Do you think that the Dead Sea Scrolls interpretation of Psalm 82 is infallible?

How did they come up with Melchizedek and Michael the archangel for Psalm 82?

Is this how the Jehovah's Witnesses think Jesus is Michael the archangel? (connection to Melchizedek, who Jesus clearly inherits/ fulfills his priesthood, but is not exactly Melchizedek, but a type of him. He seems to be a real human being in the OT.


What is your real, bottom line purpose for this post - I mean are you seeking to establish that there are "lesser gods" under the one true creator God, who are men who are not false gods and act on God's behalf?

How would that fit into the Baha'i religion, since you are open to the possibility that it is a further revelation from God?

David Waltz said...

Hi Ken,

Thanks much for taking the time to respond; you have asked some cogent questions that I would like to address in depth; however, one of my daughters and two grandchildren have dropped in here for a few days, so my internet time is very limited. Everyone, except me, is finally in bed but after checking emails and a couple of blogs, I just do not have the energy right now to do justice to your questions—please be a bit patient with me—I will respond when I can devote time that your questions demand.


Take care and God bless,

David

Ken said...

David,
No problem; I await your response.
Ken

Lisamck said...

I am mainly interested in this question of Elohim and meaning of gods in relation to how our Lord uses it in John 10:34. In that passage, He has a wonderful opportunity to affirm categorically that He is "true God from true God." Of course, He doesn't deny that He is God, but He insists to the Jews that they have no basis on which to infer that He claims to be God from His words. He points out that being a son of God does not necessarily imply natural sonhood. That is why He poibnts to Ps. 82 where the Jews who accuse Him already acknowledge that certain men are "gods". In this passage from John 10:34, we should learn that Jesus understand being a "Son of God" to be compatible with being a "god" only. Of course, we learn in other ways that He is God from God, light from light, begotten not made" and so on.

Since this very Gospel claims in ch. 1, that to them who received Him, He gave power to become the "sons of God", we know that the Jews were incorrect if they were inferring from His words, that Jesus claimed to be God. Sons of God are not necessarily God. In fact, with one exception all the gods and sons of God, are created, contingent beings. Jesus wanted to draw attention to the fact that it was His miracles and His works that were getting the Jews all bent out of shape. Nothing in His words warranted their accusation of blasphemy. It was His works which spoke so loudly, and of course, miracles are not blasphemous!

It is very very alluring to those of us who believe in the deity of Christ to be drawn to the apparent Jewish conclusion that Jesus claimed to be God by virtue of being God's Son (which I capitalize out of respect for Christ), but when one speaks, there isn't higher case and lower case. The word sounds the same and means the same to the auditor. But we shouldn't be too hasty to accept the Jewish conclusion when our Lord Himself denies that the conclusion follows from His own words.

Rory

David Waltz said...

Hello Ken,

I finally have some ‘free’ time to devote to the internet. Back on August 15th you posted:

>>Do you think any of these passages are speaking about false gods?

Psalm 97:7 b
Worship him, all you gods!

Psalm 97:9

For you, O LORD, are most high over all the earth;
you are exalted far above all gods. (Elohim)

Psalm 96:4
For great is the LORD, and greatly to be praised;
he is to be feared above all gods.>>

Me: Let’s start with the Psalm 97:7 passage. The NAS translates the Hebrew as follows:

Let all those be ashamed who serve graven images, Who boast themselves of idols; Worship Him, all you gods.

My Holman NASB Study Edition cross-references Heb. 1:6 with Psa 97:7. The LXX (96:7) changes the Hebrew elohim (Gods) to ag[n]geloi (angels). Brenton (who cross references Psa 96/97:7 with Heb. 1:6), translates the Greek as follows:

Let all that worship graven images be ashamed, who boast of their idols; worship him, all ye his angels. (Greek: αισχυνθητωσαν παντες οι προσκυνουντες τοις γλυπτοις οι εγκαυχωμενοι εν τοις ειδωλοις αυτων προσκυνησατε αυτω παντες οι αγγελοι αυτου.)

So, with the above in mind, I would have to say the elohim mentioned in Psa. 97:7b are probably angels in Yahweh’s heavenly court, and not false gods.

Off to a dentist appointment; will try to add more later today if the appointment goes well.

Grace and peace,

David

David Waltz said...

Hello again Ken,

Have returned from the dentist; not great news, but it sure could have been worse—anyway, back to your post. The Psalm 96:4 passage is most likely a reference to the false gods of the nations. The LXX terms these elohim, daimonia, which may be a reference to the fallen angels.

>>If they are not about false gods, how do you know they are not?

If they are are about false gods, how do you know they are?>>

Me: Via GHM (i.e. the grammatical, historical method).

>>You don’t think Deuteronomy 10:17; 82, 136, 138 are speaking of or at least including false gods?>>

Me: I do not think the context concerns the false gods of the nations, but rather, has reference to those who act for God/Yahweh as His representative/s.

>>Exodus 4:16 and 7:1 mean that Moses is acting on God’s behalf, in doing miracles and confronting Pharaoh and because of the miraculous power of God that He gives to Moses, it will seem like Moses is “God” (a mighty powerful one) in the presence of Pharaoh, who is pagan and animistic and believes in many “gods” (powerful spiritual forces behind nature that pagans worshiped in order to manipulate nature for their advantage and prosperity, etc.)

Exodus 21:6; 22:8-9; and I Sam. 2:25 are speaking of the judges of Israel acting on God’s behalf in making judgments in the context of legal decisions and punishments.>>

Me: Ageed; it seems that you are acknowledging a broader use of the term elohim.

>>Hebrews 1:6-8 interprets Psalm 45 for us as talking about the Son of God, Jesus Christ, another proof text for the Deity of Christ.>>

Me: I agree with the first half of your assessment; however, given that the original context had the king of Israel in mind, I cannot concur that this “another proof text for the Deity of Christ.”

>>The Chronicles passages “throne of Yahweh” can mean, “the throne that Yahweh gave to David and Solomon”; kingly reign, representing the God of the world, to administer justice as just Kings.>>

Me: Agreed.

>>Do you think there really are other "gods" ?>>

Me: Yes, if by “other ‘gods’” you mean other elohim who represent the Most High elohim.

>>Do you think that the Dead Sea Scrolls interpretation of Psalm 82 is infallible?>>

Me: No, but it does give us some important information on how certain terms were understood and used during the Second Temple era.

>>How did they come up with Melchizedek and Michael the archangel for Psalm 82?>>

Me: Vermes, and other DSS scholars, seem to have made the determination from the context of 11Q13 in the light of the other references of Melchizedek and Michael in the DSS.

>>Is this how the Jehovah's Witnesses think Jesus is Michael the archangel?>>

Me: I don’t think so; at least I did not come across such an identification in my nearly 30 years as a JW (but, I certainly could have missed it).

>>What is your real, bottom line purpose for this post - I mean are you seeking to establish that there are "lesser gods" under the one true creator God, who are men who are not false gods and act on God's behalf?>>

Me: It was a reaction of sorts to your post “Greek Grammar points to Sola Scriptura and the doctrine of the Trinity” and John’s post referenced in my previous thread. It sure seems to me that a good deal of Evangelical dogmatism is quite anachronistic and does not give the development of doctrine its rightful (and accurate) place.

>>How would that fit into the Baha'i religion, since you are open to the possibility that it is a further revelation from God?>>

Me: How would what “fit into the Baha'i religion”.


Grace and peace,

David

David Waltz said...

Hi Rory,

So good to see you back at AF; you have been missed. Forgive my somewhat tardy response, but last week was an extremely busy one; you wrote:

>> I am mainly interested in this question of Elohim and meaning of gods in relation to how our Lord uses it in John 10:34. In that passage, He has a wonderful opportunity to affirm categorically that He is "true God from true God." Of course, He doesn't deny that He is God, but He insists to the Jews that they have no basis on which to infer that He claims to be God from His words. He points out that being a son of God does not necessarily imply natural sonhood. That is why He poibnts to Ps. 82 where the Jews who accuse Him already acknowledge that certain men are "gods". In this passage from John 10:34, we should learn that Jesus understand being a "Son of God" to be compatible with being a "god" only. Of course, we learn in other ways that He is God from God, light from light, begotten not made" and so on.>>

Me: Excellent observations. Later this week (the Lord willing) I plan to post a sister thread to this one concerning the use of the phrase “son of God” in the OT and other pre-Christian Jewish literature; once that thread is up, I then intend to look at the NT in the light of the material/texts that precedes it.

>>Since this very Gospel claims in ch. 1, that to them who received Him, He gave power to become the "sons of God", we know that the Jews were incorrect if they were inferring from His words, that Jesus claimed to be God. Sons of God are not necessarily God. In fact, with one exception all the gods and sons of God, are created, contingent beings. Jesus wanted to draw attention to the fact that it was His miracles and His works that were getting the Jews all bent out of shape. Nothing in His words warranted their accusation of blasphemy. It was His works which spoke so loudly, and of course, miracles are not blasphemous!>>

Me: Agreed. I would just clarify, “Sons of God are not necessarily God”, by changing it to ‘Sons of God are not necessarily the one God’.

>>It is very very alluring to those of us who believe in the deity of Christ to be drawn to the apparent Jewish conclusion that Jesus claimed to be God by virtue of being God's Son (which I capitalize out of respect for Christ), but when one speaks, there isn't higher case and lower case. The word sounds the same and means the same to the auditor. But we shouldn't be too hasty to accept the Jewish conclusion when our Lord Himself denies that the conclusion follows from His own words.>>

Me: Well said—as I mentioned to Ken earlier, there is a tendency towards anachronism on the part of many modern readers when dealing with texts that were originally produced some 2000 years ago. It is not always an easy task, but one should be cognizant of this tendency, and seek to avoid it…


Grace and peace,

David

Ken said...

David,
Thanks for answering my questions. Sorry about your dentist report; I can relate; and it can always be worse; so we should praise God for His mercy to us.

Ken:>>Hebrews 1:6-8 interprets Psalm 45 for us as talking about the Son of God, Jesus Christ, another proof text for the Deity of Christ.>>

David: I agree with the first half of your assessment; however, given that the original context had the king of Israel in mind, I cannot concur that this “another proof text for the Deity of Christ.”

You don't think the book of Hebrews is inspired, God-breathed? and has the authority to say that these verses are about the Messiah, and they are asserting that Jesus is Yahweh? "but of the Son, it says, O God, Your throne is forever and forever"

But of the Son he says,
"Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, . . .

Hebrews 1:8 - the author of Hebrews (Tertullian thought it was Barnabas, and I lean toward that view, seeing that Barnabas was called an apostle (Acts 14:4, 14), he was a traveling companion of Paul, a Levite (Acts 4:36 -hence the details of the temple, sacrifices, and priesthood in Hebrews chapters 7-10), and a "son of encouragement/exhortation" (in Hebrews 13:22, he may be giving us a hint as to who he is - "this brief letter of encouragement/exhortation").

Hebrews 1:6 - "let all the angels of God worship Him" -
a clear assertion of the Deity of Christ also.

Do you believe in the Deity of Christ anymore?

Why don't you think these are clear NT texts that teach the Deity of Christ?

Ken said...

As to the purpose of this post,
David wrote:
"It was a reaction of sorts to your post “Greek Grammar points to Sola Scriptura and the doctrine of the Trinity” and John’s post referenced in my previous thread. It sure seems to me that a good deal of Evangelical dogmatism is quite anachronistic and does not give the development of doctrine its rightful (and accurate) place.

If the gospel of John was written in 90 AD at the latest; or, as some scholars believe it was written before 70 AD, which I also agree that it was pre-70 AD; and it is God-breathed, which it is; then how could this be "anachronistic"? My point is that the doctrine of the Trinity is based on Scripture, not a church council. Also, basing the doctrine on the text, the verse, and that the Greek grammar defeats Arianism and Modalism together demonstrates the principle of Sola Scriptura. I don't see how you can say that this is anachronistic.

How exactly are these rare uses of Elohim relevant to the issue of John 1:1 ?


Ken wrote:How would that fit into the Baha'i religion, since you are open to the possibility that it is a further revelation from God?>>

David wrote: How would what “fit into the Baha'i religion” ?

How would your idea that there are other "gods" (lesser gods; and angels and demons called "elohim") fit into the Baha'i religion? Does Bahai'ism believe that there is more than one God?

Ken said...

David,
I cannot remember if you wrote on this before, and maybe I asked you this before here at your site, but what would you say is the official definition of "subordinationism" ?

Aren't there many different kinds of "subordinationism" of the Son of God?

Do you believe Jesus is God, eternal, equal with the Father (homo-ousias) ?

Ken said...

Rory,
David mentioned at Beggars All that you were waiting for a response from me; and I assume that means you would like a response to your above post.

Your post is about John 10:34 and Psalm 82, but lets put John 10:30-39 up to get the entire context. (and look at all of Psalm 82)

30 I and the Father are one."

31 The Jews picked up stones again to stone him. 32 Jesus answered them, "I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?" 33 The Jews answered him, "It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God." 34 Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in(BB) your Law, 'I said, you are gods'? 35 If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken— 36 do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'? 37 If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; 38 but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father." 39 Again they sought to arrest him, but he escaped from their hands."

I don't think Jesus is saying the Jews were wrong to say "Son of God" means a claim to be God. He is actually saying that is right; but that the "gods" of Psalm 82 are not true Gods, but prideful men who are unjust judges and rulers who think they are "gods" and God mockingly "says" "you are gods". But that He really is the Son of God/ God the Son, but they in Psalm 82 are not.

John 1:1-5; 1:14; 1:18; 5:17 and 8:56-58 and 8:24 and 20:28, 20:30-31 and all the other "I am" statements in John also add to our understanding here.

Jesus is careful to quote the verse from Psalm 82, "I said, "you are gods" - Yahweh is mocking them, "I said" is important - "but you will all die like men" (read all of Psalm 82)- and that they were judging wrong and doing injustice and evil and oppression - points to the unjust judges and rulers and dictators, both in Israel and outside of Israel - shows that God is mocking powerful political leaders, judges who think they are "gods", but they really are not.

Jesus is saying in verse 36 - "whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world" - ie, the one who really is the true eternal Son of God - how can you say that is blasphemy from the one who really is the Son of God and not just being mocked as "gods".

Ken said...

David,
I am exhorting you with a new post about your openness to Bahai'ism - I trust you know that I mean it in Christian love and evangelism/apologetics for the glory of God!
Sincerely,
Ken

http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2010/08/exhortation-to-david-waltz.html