Theologica

a bible, theology, politics, news, networking, and discussion site

Jax brought up the fall in another thread.

Not wanting to derail it, I decided to address at least part of it here.

1. The Genesis creation account shows us God as eternal, full of knowledge and wisdom, benevolent, and worthy of worship. Before you say that is being read into the text, just take the time to deeply consider what it means to exist before the universe and then to be able to create the world ex nihilo. The things about God and more are implicit.

2. God didn't simply prohibit man from eating. The issue was an issue of worshipful obedience, or the absence of it. Man had an environment in which he had all that was pleasant to see, eat, and enjoy. (Pause for a moment and reflect on the fact that food could have been made to sustain us without it looking good or tasting worth anything. Those things are unnecessary to mere survival.) God is the benevolent source of all gifts, and all the world was given to man. He could even eat of the tree of life and live forever! The one exception was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Why was that an exception? Because knowledge is bad? Because God was holding out? No, because it was commanded by God that they enjoy the many gifts He had given them, thus enjoying God and His wisdom. That would have been a matter of worship. It would be a reflection of God's worth and an acknowledgement of His worth that they enjoy His gifts. It would reflect a low view of God's worth if His gifts were rejected or misused and they sought to find pleasure outside of His wise commands. They were by no means without pleasure and joy. Infinite joy was available to them. Disobedience was treasonous. Not only so, but disobedience demonstrated that they were not content with God and His gifts. It was a matter of misdirected worship.

Was the word of the serpent/Satan better than God's Word? Was the will of the serpent better than God's will? Was the fruit of that one tree better than all of the others? No.

Just as a woman rightly is angered when her husband sleeps around on her, because it is an expression of what he thinks of her, so it was in the fall. God's infinite worth was not recognized and enjoyed. They did not trust His Word. They did not trust His wisdom. They believed a lie about Him, and actually turned His words into a lie by not believing Him.

We may question the issue of the certainty of this based upon God's omniscience. We may question and wonder how that can be just that God, knowing what man would do, created man and allowed Him to sin. We can discuss that, too. What we need to see, however, is there was no cruelty here. They only needed to trust and enjoy the infinite God and all of His blessings.

Tags: Adam, creation, fall, fruit, joy, pleasure, worship

Views: 521

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

One of the fascinating parts of the Genesis account is that was a sovereign God who created the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  God knew Adam would rebel, and created the tree for just that purpose.  (But God did not make Adam rebel.)  I think that God wanted evil to come into existence in the human race.  Why?  The actual existence of evil manifests the glory of God by showing that God is greater then evil.  If evil existed only in the Angelic realm, and God judges evil, he only receives the glory for judging evil.  In the human realm, God shows that he is glorious enough to save from evil.  For God to save from evil, evil had to exist.  For evil to exist, Adam had to sin.  For Adam to sin, there had to be a tree.  God cannot create evil, but he can create Adam innocent, and create a tree and a command, knowing and intending that the result would be sin.  God could have chosen to restrain Adam from that sin, but God chose not to for his own glory.

Hi Joanne, methinks that you too are getting some things mixed up.

joanne guarnieri said:

Francis, I think you're getting some things mixed up.

 

1) Adam was without sin.  God gave Adam many things to do in the Garden which not only allowed for, but required Adam to make decisions (such as identifying and naming the animals).  Every decision Adam made was de fact "inside of God," because Adam was without sin.

 SO FAR SO GOOD

2) It's kind of silly to say that Adam's choice was neutral, neither good nor bad -- there's no such thing as neutral.  Every choice Adam made was good until he made the bad choice.  Every choice Adam made before the Fall was automatically good because it came out of a good man, a man who not only did not sin, but did not have the sin nature.  Adam was profoundly different than you or me, or any other human besides Eve.

 I NEVER MENTIONED NEUTRAL NOR DID I INTEND TO IMPLY IT. I MAINTAINED THAT ALL DECISIONS ADAM MAKES WHICH EXCLUDE GOD ARE SIN, EVEN WHEN OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT THE DECISIONS ARE "GOOD". THIS IS STILL BIBLICALLY TRUE FOR YOU AND ME.

Every choice Adam made, until the Fall, de facto included God, and was within the perview of God.  Until that fateful day.

AGAIN, I AGREE

 

Only now, post the Fall, could one try to make a case for a making a good decision that is still death because it stems from a sinful nature that is choosing something, a choice that is not empowered by the Spirit of Christ, that is to say.

ANY DECISION THAT EXCLUDES GOD IS SIN. WHATSOEVER IS NOT OF FAITH IS SIN.

 

Until the Fall, there was no such thing as a good decision that could still be death, because Genesis 3 clearly states that death did not come until after the Fall.

EXCEPT THAT GENESIS 3V6 ALSO SAYS THAT EVE, AND THEN ADAM "SAW THAT THE TREE WAS GOOD".....THEREFORE ADAM'S "DECISION" WAS TAKEN BEFORE THE FALL WHILST EVERYTHING WAS ROSY!

THAT FATEFUL DECISION, PRECISELY TO EXCLUDE GOD, CAUSED THE FALL. THEREFORE A "GOOD DECISION", BUT DEATHLY WRONG DECISION WAS MADE BEFORE THE FALL! ADAM CHOSE TO SIN , TO REJECT GOD, WHEN ALL WAS WONDERFULLY GOOD.

 

3) This statement does not make sense to me, "The decision in the Garden was never about whether a choice was good or evil. It was about whether God reigns."

THE DECISION WAS ABOUT CHOOSING THE RIGHT TO MAKE CHOICES BASED ON HIS OWN INTELLECTUAL ABILITY, A CHOICE WHICH WOULD CLEARLY EXCLUDE GOD.

THE ALTERNATIVES IN THE DEBATE WERE NOT GOOD VS EVIL. THEY WERE GOD AS THE SOURCE VS ADAM AS THE SOURCE. THE TEXT SPELLS IT OUT, ".....YOU SHALL BE AS GOD...." 

It was all about whether that choice was good or evil.  Good is for God.  Evil is against God. 

NOT TRUE, THIS IS WHERE YOU MISS THE POINT COMPLETELY.  AGAIN IT IS FLESH VS SPIRIT . THE SAME PROBLEM WE HAVE TODAY. ADAM JUST INITIATED IT. 

THE CHOICE WAS BETWEEN TWO TREES, NOT BETWEEN TWO ASPECTS OF ONE TREE!!!

THIS IS THE WHOLE POINT OF THE GENESIS ACCOUNT, WHICH YOU MISS COMPLETELY. TO INSIST ON YOUR GOOD VS EVIL THESIS, IS TOTALLY DENYING SCRIPTURE.

And there is no "whether" about God reigning.  God reigns.  All the time, everywhere, in all dimensions, for all people.  Period. 

WRONG THEOLOGY. 1SAM8V7. WHEN THE ISRAELITES DEMANDED A KING TO RULE OVER THEM, GOD TOLD SAMUEL, "THEY HAVE REJECTED ME THAT I SHOULD NOT REIGN OVER THEM". ....PERIOD!!! 

THIS IS MERELY A REPEAT OF WHAT ADAM HAD DONE.

Beings can rebel against His reign.  But He still reigns.  It is only by His sovereign allowance that any being has the choice to rebel.  And to choose to rebel is evil. 

YES HE STILL REIGNS, ABOVE ALL THINGS, BUT WE LIMIT THE EXTENT OF HIS REIGN AND HE PERMITS IT. THAT IS WHAT FREEWILL MEANS. ANYONE CAN QUENCH THE SPIRIT. GOD IS STILL ON THE THRONE, BUT WE IGNORE HIM AND JUST DO WHAT WE WANT TO DO. ie. "I REFUSE HIS REIGN, BECAUSE I PREFER MY OWN REIGN, ON MY OWN THRONE."

 

We sometimes like to ask, "Does God reign in your heart?"  Maybe that's a valid question.  But a better question is, "Do you accept God's reign in your heart?"  Because, if Proverbs is to be believed, God already rules hearts

SOLOMON WAS WALKING RIGHTEOUSLY WITH GOD WHEN HE WROTE THE PROVERBS, SO IT WAS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT TO SAY  THAT "THE KINGS HEART IS IN THE HAND OF THE LORD" THIS WAS TRUE BECAUSE SOLOMON CHOSE IT. LATER ON SOLOMON TOOK HIS HEART OUT OF THE HAND OF THE LORD, AND WENT AFTER FOREIGN WOMEN AND THEIR GODS! 

4) And this doesn't make sense to me either, "In his choice, Adam deposed God. He decided Adam could be like God, ie, Adam could be the source of the rulership of the planet."

THIS DOESN'T MAKE SENSE? I AM NOT SURE WHAT IS UNCLEAR HERE. THIS IS THE CORE OF THE WHOLE EPISODE IN THE GARDEN. ADAM CHOSE TO RULE, ALONE, WITHOUT GOD. I CAN BE LIKE GOD! I CAN BE THE SOURCE! 

CAN'T YOU READ THIS FROM THE GENESIS ACCOUNT?

God already gave Adam the rulership of the planet.  Nobody got deposed here....except Adam. Adam gave his throne, unwittingly, to the devil (which comes out when the devil tempted Jesus in the desert).  What really happened is that Adam no longer accepted God as his god.  He thought he was making himself his god, that he could be like God in that he could be worshiped (by himself) and rule without accountablity. Sadly, unbeknownst to himdelf, he ended up enslaving himself to a new god: the devil. 

THIS PARAGRAPH CONTRADICTS ITSELF AND CONTRADICTS SOME OF YOUR PREVIOUS STATEMENTS.

 

5) Finally, I can't make sense of this: "Both good and evil can be static truths inside or outside of God."

This simply cannot be.  God, and God alone, is the measure of good and evil.  He is all that is good, and from Him comes only good.  Anything that does not come from Him, ipso facto, is evil.  Everything either points to, or points away, from the Lord.  There would be no such thing as "good" and "evil" without God.

FOR A LONG TIME, (AS A NEW BELIEVER) I THOUGHT SOLOMON'S COMMAND TO CUT THE BABY IN HALF, AND GIVE HALF TO EACH MOTHER WAS A TERRIBLE EVIL. AT THE VERY POINT THE COMMAND WAS GIVEN, BY AN APPOINTED JUDGE, IT WAS JUDICIALLY WRONG, AND WOULD ALWAYS BE WRONG EVEN TODAY.

IF VIEWED IN ISOLATION IT WOULD ALWAYS BE MURDEROUS, UNLAWFUL AND UNGODLY.

YET SOLOMON, BECAUSE OF THE SPIRIT OF WISDOM THAT GOD HAD GIVEN, KNEW IT WOULD NEVER EVER HAPPEN! IT WOULD HOWEVER REVEAL THE TRUE MOTHER.

SOLOMON MAY EVEN HAVE ALREADY PERCEIVED BY HIS SPIRIT WHO WAS THE TRUE MOTHER, BUT IT WAS CRITICAL THAT OTHER PEOPLE (INCLUDING THE MOTHERS) SAW THE TRUTH CLEARLY REVEALED RATHER THAN JUST TAKE HIS WORD FOR IT.

SOLOMON'S COMMAND BROKE THE "THOU SHALT NOT KILL" COMMANDMENT. IT LOOKED EVIL, BUT NEVERTHELESS WAS "GOOD".

Francis Drake said:

Nooooo Joanne!

Eating of the Tree of Knowledge is about making a decision from the flesh for both good as well as evil. It applies to any decision making done outside of God. That decision may be very very good rather than evil, but it is still death because it excludes God.

The decision in the Garden was never about whether a choice was good or evil. It was about whether God reigns. In his choice, Adam deposed God. He decided Adam could be like God, ie, Adam could be the source of the rulership of the planet. He decided that he, Adam, in his accumulated knowledge had the necessary stuff  to rule like God did. He decided that he didn't need the Tree of Life any more. 

Both good and evil can be static truths inside or outside of God. In fact, that was what the Law of Moses was all about. God gave them a Statute book of Law for those who didn't even want to know God. Living within the Law would at least make the nation workable, albeit not righteous. That's why it says that the law is for law breakers!






 

Sorry Jason;  I honestly read the OP.

But God already knew the answer to these questions and proceeded anyway.  Therefore, do we say Don Mauer has a point: God allowed the fall to occur so that He would be glorified through the redemption of mankind?


Jason said:

I think that I answered that in the OP, at least indirectly.

The whole issue is about worship. Would man worship Him who was worthy, or would man pursue pleasure by trusting in another object to give him joy?

Would man choose God and the tree of life, or would he choose self and that activity which would lead to death?

John Bailey said:

Do we know why God put the Tree of Knowledge in the garden in the first place? It certainly is His perogative, yet knowing the outcome, He proceeded anyway.

Well, Francis, I think it would be helpful to tell you that I operate from a mindset that God is utterly sovereign in every way possible.  I take that as a universal truth. Though I may accept the concept, loosely, that God allows people to choose to refuse His reign, I hasten to add that this happens only at a certain level of experience.  In point of fact, I believe, utterly, that

1) God is in control of His universe, nothing is outside the scope of His rule. God controls and guides all events for His glory and for the good of believers.  

 

2) God determines the outcome of all things according to His wise purposes. God doesn’t wait to see what a person is going to decide before He acts.

 

3) God’s decree governs history. God does not adjust His plan according to the events of human history. God finishes what He begins. (It isn't just Solomon's heart He holds in His hands.  He is the One Who establishes all governing authorities, for His purposes, and He is the one Who also brings them down, when He so decrees)

 

God is not surprised by evil, God does not approve of evil. But God has sovereignly decreed that people exercise their ability to make moral choices – choosing between good and evil. Sin is proof that God doesn’t control people the way you and I would control a puppet.

 

But God is all-knowing and all-powerful. God gives real choices and works out His will within them from the infinite possibilities that are raised. He is able to work in, around and through people to insure the outworking of His purposes. If God were any less sovereign He wouldn’t be able to give people moral freedom because He would not be able to guarantee that His will would be done

 

Therefore, any language that suggest the "deposing " of God, any language that suggests God does not rule hearts, or in any other way is not in sovereign control of His universe, is not going to make sense to me.  It's not the paradigm I work with.

 

Secondly, I believe that God, and God alone, is the ultimate measure of all things.  He is the Uncreated One.  He existed before all things.  He created all things. Any language that suggests good and evil can be measured by any other way does not make sense to me.

 

When God, on the seventh day, said "It is good," He was addressing all that His hands had made.  In fact, God went further and said, "It is very good."  What had His hands made, Francis, in that Garden?  When you read Genesis 2 you read that God, verse 8, planted the Garden Himself.  Verse 9, He made all kinds of trees to grow, wait for it......"Trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food."  And in the very middle of the Garden were

 

Yes

 

Two particular trees that God planted.  Both, like the other trees, were "pleasing to the eye and good for food." God had made them and declared them "very good."  This is really important. It wasn't that the tree was bad, or that its fruit was bad.  It is that God instructed the man and the woman not to eat of it.  That's all, simply that.  God told them not to.  God told them that to eat of it would result in death.  Not because the tree was bad, or that its fruit was bad, but because of what would happen inside of them if they were to choose rebellion against God.

 

Jesus echoes this principle Himself in Mark 7

 

Solomon's pronouncement had many layers.  His wise intention played out as he intended it to.  On a fallen planet, filled with sinful people, the whole situation is completely unlike the Garden of Eden.   I think we're safe in saying Solomon's decree was meant for shock value, and it worked.  I doubt he intended to kill the baby.  In any case, the very use of "good" stems back to God.  God is Who defines good and evil.

 

God is sovereign over this whole universe and in fact sustains it by the power of His word.  He gave rulership of the planet to Adam and Eve.  They, in turn, unwittingly turned their crowns over to the devil.  He is a defeated foe, now, but he still holds all unbelieving human beings in his sway, and darkens their minds to prevent them from understanding the gospel.  Without God's help, no one would understand, let alone receive, the gospel.  That's the paradigm I live in.

 

Now it's possible that you work form a different paradigm than I do.  What mindset do you operate from?

You can't actually believe this, can you? That would be like as if  I threw a little kid into the river in order to get the public praise for rescuing him!

John Bailey said:

 God allowed the fall to occur so that He would be glorified through the redemption of mankind?


I know, Jax, it's a quandary.  I've been wondering about this question myself.  Of all the many traditions I've been exposed to, over the years, the one I find most true says, "Where the Bible is silent, we are silent; where the Bible speaks, we speak."

 

It's a fascinating project, to try and figure out why God would tell Adam and Even not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  Fasinating to try and figure out where exactly these two trees were, too.  Was it like Annapolis, where there's a church circle and a state circle?  Or were they obscured from each other?  Why didn't Adam and Eve eat from the tree of life?  Were they afraid to go near the tree of G and E, and therefore also did not go near the tree of life? 

 

What would have happened if they ate from the tree of life first?  Would God then have invited them to eat of the tree of G and E?  We know that evil already existed in the form of the devil and his gang of rebels.  Would eating of the tree of G and E have been helpful towards understanding the nature of evil?  Or was the tree of G and E simply an ordinary tree, and it wasn't the actual fruit that imparted knowledge, but rather the internal workings of making moral choices that imparted this knowledge?

 

Man, these are questions that would be so interesting to hear the answers to!!!!

 

But "where the Bible is silent, we are silent."  it's pure conjecture, all of it, and must be treated as such, including this question of why God planted these trees in the way He did, because the Bible does not offer an explanation....

Interesting analogy.  More like you watched a child jump into the river after you told him not to and then rescued him.  But No, I don’t believe that. 

 I do believe God created everything and He can do whatever He wants with His creation.  Fortunately for mankind, He is a loving God; thus, He sacrificed Himself to save us from a deserved death so we may live with Him forever.

I also apologize to the forum for wasting everyone's time with my inappropriate questions.  I will be silent now. 


Jax Agnesson said:

You can't actually believe this, can you? That would be like as if  I threw a little kid into the river in order to get the public praise for rescuing him!

John Bailey said:

 God allowed the fall to occur so that He would be glorified through the redemption of mankind?


John, hope I didn't offend. I don't think your quesion is inappropriate.  I'm still thinking about it.  I just don't think there can be a definitive answer, since the Bible doesn't give one.  It's a fascinating question, and prompts many more questions, actually.  Still, have to tread carefully, here, since the Bible doesn't give us an answer (that I know of).

Totally wrong assumption here. It's more like choosing sides. We were all on God's side in the beginning, however, God knew there would be those in his creation that would rebel, like Lucifer. So God set up the circumstances where you can choose which side you want to be on AND you are told, in advance, the consequences for that decision. We are currently lined up picking who's team we want to play for. 

Jax Agnesson said:

You can't actually believe this, can you? That would be like as if  I threw a little kid into the river in order to get the public praise for rescuing him!

John Bailey said:

 God allowed the fall to occur so that He would be glorified through the redemption of mankind?


No you didn't offend me.  Thank you for being so thoughtful.  I was just getting in over my head and thought it best that I bow out.  You all are such power hitters it's hard for someone like me to keep up.  

I do believe what you said was correct and we must be careful when the Bible is silent. 


joanne guarnieri said:

John, hope I didn't offend. I don't think your quesion is inappropriate.  I'm still thinking about it.  I just don't think there can be a definitive answer, since the Bible doesn't give one.  It's a fascinating question, and prompts many more questions, actually.  Still, have to tread carefully, here, since the Bible doesn't give us an answer (that I know of).

Thanks Joanne for responding, but I cannot for the life of me understand why you wrote all this, as most of it is straw man stuff. I would agree with virtually all of it, but you write it as if I deny it?


joanne guarnieri said:

Well, Francis, I think it would be helpful to tell you that I operate from a mindset that God is utterly sovereign in every way possible.  I take that as a universal truth. Though I may accept the concept, loosely, that God allows people to choose to refuse His reign, I hasten to add that this happens only at a certain level of experience.  In point of fact, I believe, utterly, that

1) God is in control of His universe, nothing is outside the scope of His rule. God controls and guides all events for His glory and for the good of believers.  

 

2) God determines the outcome of all things according to His wise purposes. God doesn’t wait to see what a person is going to decide before He acts.

 

3) God’s decree governs history. God does not adjust His plan according to the events of human history. God finishes what He begins. (It isn't just Solomon's heart He holds in His hands.  He is the One Who establishes all governing authorities, for His purposes, and He is the one Who also brings them down, when He so decrees)

 

God is not surprised by evil, God does not approve of evil. But God has sovereignly decreed that people exercise their ability to make moral choices – choosing between good and evil. Sin is proof that God doesn’t control people the way you and I would control a puppet.

 

But God is all-knowing and all-powerful. God gives real choices and works out His will within them from the infinite possibilities that are raised. He is able to work in, around and through people to insure the outworking of His purposes. If God were any less sovereign He wouldn’t be able to give people moral freedom because He would not be able to guarantee that His will would be done

 

Therefore, any language that suggest the "deposing " of God, any language that suggests God does not rule hearts, or in any other way is not in sovereign control of His universe, is not going to make sense to me.  It's not the paradigm I work with.

 

Secondly, I believe that God, and God alone, is the ultimate measure of all things.  He is the Uncreated One.  He existed before all things.  He created all things. Any language that suggests good and evil can be measured by any other way does not make sense to me.

 

When God, on the seventh day, said "It is good," He was addressing all that His hands had made.  In fact, God went further and said, "It is very good."  What had His hands made, Francis, in that Garden?  When you read Genesis 2 you read that God, verse 8, planted the Garden Himself.  Verse 9, He made all kinds of trees to grow, wait for it......"Trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food."  And in the very middle of the Garden were

 

Yes

 

Two particular trees that God planted.  Both, like the other trees, were "pleasing to the eye and good for food." God had made them and declared them "very good."  This is really important. It wasn't that the tree was bad, or that its fruit was bad.  It is that God instructed the man and the woman not to eat of it.  That's all, simply that.  God told them not to.  God told them that to eat of it would result in death.  Not because the tree was bad, or that its fruit was bad, but because of what would happen inside of them if they were to choose rebellion against God.

 

Jesus echoes this principle Himself in Mark 7

 

Solomon's pronouncement had many layers.  His wise intention played out as he intended it to.  On a fallen planet, filled with sinful people, the whole situation is completely unlike the Garden of Eden.   I think we're safe in saying Solomon's decree was meant for shock value, and it worked.  I doubt he intended to kill the baby.  In any case, the very use of "good" stems back to God.  God is Who defines good and evil.

 

God is sovereign over this whole universe and in fact sustains it by the power of His word.  He gave rulership of the planet to Adam and Eve.  They, in turn, unwittingly turned their crowns over to the devil.  He is a defeated foe, now, but he still holds all unbelieving human beings in his sway, and darkens their minds to prevent them from understanding the gospel.  Without God's help, no one would understand, let alone receive, the gospel.  That's the paradigm I live in.

 

Now it's possible that you work form a different paradigm than I do.  What mindset do you operate from?

Ace, Ace reply Jax. I love it.

Sadly, this also applies to some other similar theological arguments I have heard in the past.

Jax Agnesson said:

You can't actually believe this, can you? That would be like as if  I threw a little kid into the river in order to get the public praise for rescuing him!

John Bailey said:

 God allowed the fall to occur so that He would be glorified through the redemption of mankind?


Reply to Discussion

RSS

Sponsors

Birthdays

Birthdays Today

Birthdays Tomorrow

Linkologica

Blog Resources

Arminian Today

Anyabwile

Bock

Called to Communion

Challies

Classical Arminianism

Craig

Christian Answers For The New Age

Christians in Context

Conversation Diary (catholic)

Continuationism.com (marv & scott)

Desiring God blog

DeYoung

First Things

Fr. Stephen (eastern orthodox)

 

Internet Monk

KJV Only Debate (jason s.)

 

Köstenberger

Lisa Robinson - TheoThoughts

Mohler

McKnight

National Catholic Register (catholic)

Parchment & Pen

Pierce

Re-Fundamentals

Resurgence

Roberts

Roger Olson

Taylor

Team Pyro

The Apologist's Pen

Untamed Spirituality

WDTPRS (catholic)

Witherington

 

Theological Resources

BioLogos

Center for Reformed Study and Apologetics

Creeds and Confessions

Christian Classics Ethereal Library

Council of Biblical Manhood and Womenhood (complementarian)

The Center for Bibical Equality (Egalitarian)

Evangelical Theological Society

Monergism.com

Reclaiming the Mind Ministries

Society of Evangelical Arminians

Theopedia

Theological Word of The Day

Tyndale House Bulletin

 

Church History

Early Christian Writings

Glimpes of Church History

 

Christian Traditions

Book of Concord

Catholic.com

Eastern Orthodox

Orthodox Catechism

 

Apologetics

CARM

Lennox

Reasonable Faith

RZIM

Stand to Reason

Tektonics

 

Bible Study

Bible Gateway

Bible Researcher

Blue Letter Bible

Bible.org

IVP New Testament Commentaries Online

 

Online Bible and Theology Education

Biblical Training

The Theology Program

 

Theology and Bible MP3s

Covenant Seminary

263 Theology Questions and Answers

Veritas Forum

 

Theologica Chat Room

MiRC Chat

Badge

Loading…

Get the Widget


Sponsor



Bible Options




© 2014   Created by Michael Patton.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

/*============================================================================================ /*============================================================================================