Friday, July 29, 2011

C.S. Lewis and the Meaning of Life

I've been thinking about atheism a lot lately. (don't I always..)  I came upon something interesting in my incredibly selfish introverted thought sessions while I tune everyone else out -- I'm getting a lot better about not doing it, but I still do it..  

I've always thought that if it were found that atheism were true (and I'm of the conviction that atheism can't be known to be true unless one can prove the concept of God as logically contradictory, or if one could say "If God of any kind, then B, not B, therefore no God"), then it would be utterly horrible and that one ought rightly despair if it were found that atheism were true. But now that I think about it more, I'm realizing that Atheism can't even account for our having despair over theism being false (or anything, for that matter!). C.S. Lewis said something similar to it: "Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should have never found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be a word without meaning."
This is incredibly interesting. Lewis, under the assumption that life does have meaning, says that atheism is just too simple in accounting for it. If the ultimate meaning of life is that there is no ultimate meaning, then there is a contradiction there, and atheism is simply false. I agree with this wholeheartedly! But only under the assumption that life has meaning. Yet, if atheism is indeed true, then it's not true that the meaning of life is that life is meaningless. Rather, it's simply that the proposition "atheism is true" corresponds with the ultimate state of affairs. Humans, however, simply cannot live like this-- believing in atheism. We just can't; it's impossible. Human souls devour meaning; we are desperate for some sort of purpose because we simply cannot live without purpose. Yet if atheism were true and we could know it, then we could absolutely not consistently act with despair. That would be irrational. It wouldn't be like crying because you lost your mother; it wouldn't even be like crying because you lost your imaginary friend! It would be like crying because not only did you lose hope and joy, but also because you lost your foundation to identify something as good or bad, or, in other words, crying because there's no reason to cry. It's irrational. Because if atheism were true, it couldn't possibly be bad that atheism were true.  It seems evident that whether atheism is true or not, humans are not designed (whether by the evolutionary process or special creation by God) to be atheistic creatures.   

Thursday, July 28, 2011

Avoiding/healing the wounds of Sexual sin by Confession

I don't remember where I found it, but I recently downloaded a podcast called "Quitting Porn Guy" because it looked like a good group of audio files which would help keep my heart pure from sexual sin while at college. One of the really neat things I found on there was a podcast in which Nate Larkin, one of the guests for an I am Second video, was interviewed about his story of healing from a lifelong addiction to pornography. 

I thought it was an incredible story of healing and God's power through accountability. One of the things that stuck out to me, though, was the fact that guys simply aren't open about their struggles with each other. We're too prideful, or we don't want our sins brought into the light. In James 5 there is an awesome verse that I think needs to be heeded almost religiously: "Therefore, confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another so that you may be healed. The effective prayer of a righteous man can accomplish much."

It's inevitable, if you're a guy, that you're going to struggle with intense sexual temptations. But how much more would it help if we formed accountability and prayer groups with each other (especially in college)? I'm definitely planning on doing this at college with my close friends. Our future wives deserve it, God demands it, and our hearts are worth it. Because of this, I want to make a list of reasons why engaging in sexual sin (i.e: pornography, lustful thoughts, sexual activity with someone other than our spouse, etc.) is to be avoided  no matter what the cost. Since I'm a belief driven person, emotions don't seem to have much of a pull on me-- if I'm going to avoid a certain action, there need to be good, solid reasons to avoid it. So here goes: 

1. You're cheating on your future wife every time you look at another girl lustfully.
2. You're taking the enjoyment out of the sexual intimacy you'll enjoy with your wife if you engage in sexual activity before marriage.
3. You can't leave sexual images and memories behind once you get married. They're stuck with you. 
4. Sexual sin prevents you from seeing the truth. It spiritually blinds you. 
5. There is infinite more enjoyment in not being enslaved to sexual sin than the fleeting misery of looking for a new high in an addiction. 
6. If you look at pornography, you're not engaging in sexual intimacy even with the woman on the screen--- you're engaging in intimacy with yourself and your imagination.
7. Sexual sin fills you with shame and self-inhibiting beliefs which prevent you from growing into a whole person.
8. Most miserably, sexual sin prevents you from seeing girls the way they really are: daughters of God who need to be loved for who they really are. 
9. You have a responsibility to build up the hearts of your sisters in Christ (and other girls), and objectifying their bodies will seriously hinder this. So when you think about a girl lustfully in the name of "love" think also about what love really is, and if you're really loving a girl by thinking about her like that. 
10. Sexual sin prevents you from being who you were made to be: free in God's love. 
11. Face it: girls want a guy who is pure, not a pervert. 
12. Sexual sin reveals unmet needs that need to be met by something whole, true, and satisfying. Not porn. Porn will only make you more miserable. 
13. Be a Braveheart. Fight for the hearts of the girls around you. Don't let them get attracted to you, let them get attracted to Jesus who is in you. You need to fight for their hearts-- against mutual lust, against mutual idolatry, against sexual sin. 

I hope these are helpful to any of my guy friends, or even some of my girl friends. These things really should be kept in mind. Sexual sin is blinding, conducive to misery, shame, objectification of HUMAN BEINGS, and many more horrible things. I bid myself and others: wait until marriage. It won't be that much longer (seeing as we're all 20 year old farts). I don't want to get married for a long time though! I am far too immature for marriage. 

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Featured Blog Posts

I recently looked at the site and was overwhelmed by how much anti-theistic literature there is on the internet. I don't think they're right, but I do think they need to be responded to. In my experience of dealing with infidel arguments, I have not found many rigorous arguments which deserve too much attention, but at the same time there are many highly emotionally compelling arguments which are strongholds that simply must be torn down by good philosophy. In light of this, I want to start posting more Christian argumentation and featuring some of my apologist friend's blog posts on a weekly (or so) basis. So here goes!

This is it for this week-- I'll be looking for some more!

Friday, July 22, 2011

Bart Ehrman

Today I want to add a link to a blog called the "Ehrman Project". This blog consists of the work of several Biblical scholars who have responded to the popular former Christian, now agnostic, Bart Ehrman's arguments against the reliability of the New Testament.

Here is the site's self-description:

Dr. Bart Ehrman is raising significant questions about the reliability of the Bible. In an engaging way, he is questioning the credibility of Christianity. His arguments are not new, which he readily admits. Numerous Biblical scholars profoundly disagree with his findings. This site provides responses to Dr. Ehrman's provocative conclusions.

Thursday, July 21, 2011


"love of my life, deep in my eyes; there you will find what you need.."

"for better or worse, forever we'll be. the love that unites us- its a mystery" 

I have no problem with God being my metaphorical husband, or myself being the bride of Christ. It seems so right. I know it sounds weird. If I, however, were the one wearing the pants in this relationship, there would probably be significant problems ;)

Sunday, July 17, 2011

Current Task

What I'm doing right now:

1. Looking for a successful Cosmological argument which relies solely on the B theory of time.
2. Figuring out which theory of time is true.
3. Deciding whether I agree that it's impossible that infinite amounts can exist in reality. Right now I completely disagree that they can be added up to or formed in a temporal becoming sense, but I honestly don't understand set-theory enough to say whether I think an Infinite can exist in reality (the other sub-argument within the Kalam, which can also be applied in Cosmological Arguments. It seems absurd, but first-impression intuition can be deceiving.)

Friday, July 15, 2011


I want to post an update since all that confusion I went through a week or two ago and wrote about in the post called, "Where am I". For some reason I feel slightly arrogant putting up updates, as if people were really dying to hear my rambling thoughts, but for anyone who is interested (including the future me, trying to track my spiritual growth!), here goes.

As you'd expect me to say, things have gotten better. I have learned so much in the past couple days. And what's funny is that it didn't really come from book learning-- although I've certainly been studying a lot. It came from sitting and thinking alone; letting my soul deal with itself on its own terms. For too long, I've had hyper skeptical atheist personalities living inside my brain. Since I believe strongly in a good sense of self-criticism when it comes to intellectual beliefs, I always thought it would be good to carry the atheist's opinion with me when I form my beliefs. Unfortunately, since I'm such an emotional person, I never learned how to respectfully disagree! (Seriously, I'm not kidding. This was a real issue haha.)

The result of that set of false beliefs was, unfortunately, that every time the real Evan wanted to rejoice in Christ and put my heart's confidence and hope in him all the more deeply, the devil's advocate atheist Evan would rise up and say, "Whoa now! Think about all these other problems you haven't quite worked out yet! Ooooh, and think of how many Christian-antagonist books you haven't dealt with yet! Think of all the skeptical arguments you haven't refuted-- much more, haven't even read!!"

People wonder why I want to read every book on the face of the earth. That's why. (Well, also because I think some of the best heart knowledge one can find is from books) But now that I've sat down and thought -by myself- without a book in front of my face for a while, I'm starting to think that all this really isn't necessary to know Christianity is true. In fact, I've gotten so obsessed with showing that Christianity is true that I've forgotten I already know it's true! It's important, however, to make a qualification. That doesn't mean there won't be confusion, doubts, despair, REALLY BAD doubts, in fact,  horrifying doubts, misery, etc. It doesn't even mean you'll know which details about Christianity are true. But it's this vague, unshakable conviction that no matter how much intellectual criticism you go through, Jesus will always be the one that saved you. I can't stand doubting, I really can't. I can't wait until the soon approaching period of my life where I spend most of my time helping other people out with their problems in stead of studying and studying to solve my own.

In addition, I've been studying Genesis 1 and 2 every waking minute the past four or five days. I love the Bible and I love those chapters of Genesis. (perhaps the most glorious chapters in the Old Testament!) But I'm also becoming fairly convinced that without a study of historical context, we are WAY out of our bounds in assuming Genesis means what our culture thinks it means. I'll leave it at that-- you can read the rest of the posts on my blog to see what else I've been finding out.

Anyways, I must go. Peace to you all!

Thursday, July 14, 2011

Your Grace is Enough

I love this song. God's grace is so beautiful and praiseworthy. And best of all, it is enough.

Great is Your faithfulness oh God
You wrestle with the sinner's heart
You lead us by still waters in to mercy
And nothing can keep us apart

So remember Your people
Remember Your children
Remember Your promise
Oh God

Your grace is enough
Your grace is enough
Your grace is enough for me

Great is Your love and justice God of Jacob
You use the weak to lead the strong
You lead us in the song of Your salvation
And all Your people sing along

So remember Your people
Remember Your children
Remember Your promise
Oh God

Your grace is enough
Your grace is enough
Your grace is enough for me

So remember Your people
Remember Your children
Remember Your promise
Oh God

Your grace is enough
Your grace is enough
Your grace is enough for me

Your grace is enough
Heaven reaching down to us
Your grace is enough for me
God I see your grace is enough
I'm covered in your love
Your grace is enough for me
For me

Genesis as Temple Cosmology

This is going to be a slightly messy post, but I hope it loads well. There are six videos on Youtube which record a lecture by Dr. John Walton, who is a Professor of Old Testament and Wheaton College. He argues in this lecture that our cultural understanding of Genesis needs to be informed by their own culture, not ours. I'm very much persuaded by his arguments (at least that the Jews understood Genesis completely differently than we would have), and I'm still trying to decide whether Genesis can be interpreted in light of assigning functional purpose and not material origins.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

A Call to the Truth

Back when I was, for the first time, filled with the Spirit in my freshman year of college, it seemed so unmistakably obvious that Christianity were absolutely true. I wondered how anyone could doubt it! I wondered why anyone would ever put their hope in anything but the strong and faithful arms of Christ. Even though I still think it's obvious that Christianity is true, I can understand why so many people are questioning it in America. Why? Because Christians in America have misrepresented Christianity in so many unfathomable ways! Not only in 1) Morale performance, but also 2) Failure to believe the truth.

We have relied on entirely bad arguments for our faith, we have failed to study historical context and find out what the Bible is actually saying, and have refused to believe the truth because it made us uncomfortable. And even within this set of beliefs we've created for ourselves, we don't follow them as if they were true!!  What percent of American Christians today act as if Christianity is actually true? A very small minority.  We have gorged ourselves on false ideologies for the sake of comfort and then become shocked to discover that the majority of our youth are leaving the church. I'm not shocked myself-- at least not anymore! I'm not saying I'm immune to this at all, but I am saying let's all embrace the words of the Prophet Samuel when he said to Israel, "Only fear the LORD and serve Him in truth with all your heart; for consider what great things He has done for you."

Let's all link arms and make our hearts strong by the Holy Spirit, being fearless and willing to believe the truth. After all, it is not the culture which is true, but the truth itself.

Mental Health and Apologetics

My friend Jordan and I were recently talking about making lists of things to remember when studying Christianity so we wouldn't be carried away by emotional (plausible, yet unsound) arguments. One has to be careful to maintain mental health, rationality, and stay encouraged while studying worldviews, or face the consequences of burn out or depression. Here's my list:

1. Arguments and comments need to be looked at solely for their logical substance. I have learned the hard way that just because many atheists are terribly confident that they're right does not at all entail that they are-- although this is the way our emotions run. Remember that all people are desire-driven human beings who have desires to be happy-- no one is exempt. A person could easily believe the wrong world-view because it brings them happiness, not because it is true. That is why airs of confidence and emotional certainty of one's worldview simply cannot be considered when it comes to looking at arguments. Realize that objections to your faith are ideas, not people. "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places." Ephesians 6:12. Our struggle isn't against people, it's against ideas.

2. Arguments from "personal preference" (coined by Jordan) don't get you anywhere. "God would have done it like this" needs to be an assertion which is supported by evidence, not baseless intuitions. You could sit around all day, saying "Why did God do it this way?" "Why won't God act according to the way I think he should act?" But in the end, God doesn't act in the ways you think He should act, or do things the way you think He should have done them. This is the difference between an Omniscient being and staggeringly non-omniscient beings (humans). We just don't have enough knowledge to be making these kinds of claims. As Stephen Curtis Chapman says in one of his songs, "God is God and I am man. And I'll never understand it all, for only You are God."

3. Just because an idea has arguments against it doesn't mean it is false. In the realm of philosophy, there is absolutely no topic which is left un-critiqued. People even debate whether anything "exists" or not, or whether "truth" exists. There are arguments for and against everything. If it is true that every idea which has arguments against it is false, then nothing is true! So clearly even if an idea is harshly critiqued and considered false by everyone does not necessitate that it is false. It must be judged by the arguments against it and for it.

4. Keep in mind the fact that scholarly circles, consensus agreements, and available evidences shift. I'm not saying that truth shifts, but the evidence available shifts. Does that mean we should all give up and quit trying to pursue truth since we can never be sure about our conclusions? Of course not! Evidence doesn't shift that much! But we need not get discouraged when we think something is true and yet everyone disagrees with us. We also ought to be careful not to simply trust scholarly majorities out of hand, but rather to look at strong evidence and argumentation for ourselves.

5. Flee temptation. If there's anything which prevents us from seeing the truth, it is sin. It's not worth it. Just stay away from behaviors which can cause you to be spiritually blind.

6. Since humans have this odd tendency to assume philosophical naturalism (non-existence of the supernatural) out of hand, be careful that you're not doing the same thing. I'm convinced that, psychologically speaking, it's a pride issue. Since belief in naturalism is absurdly contradictory, think twice before you assume naturalism on grounds of "being rational".

7. Remember the Witness of the Spirit. Like William Lane Craig said, "It is unmistakable, yet not indubitable." This is so, so true. I always thought he was playing around and making stuff up, but experience has confirmed exactly what he said.

8. Beware of making the illogical assumption that the failure of one argument for God implies the failure of all of them. Richard Dawkins and his lot seem to be of the opinion that since Darwin has come up with a possible explanation of all biological life, Christianity is therefore false. But that is illogical and unwarranted. Seek truth, not emotional comfort.

9. Avoid procrastination and get to the point. Failing to do so leads to emotional doubt. For example, if there's one issue that is causing you to doubt Christianity factually, then go straight to that issue and work on it. Don't mosey around the internet looking for arguments for Christianity which will make you feel better. This causes the factual doubts to fester, eventually forcing them to become emotional doubts, which can later become volitional doubts.

10. You need fellowship. Humans do not have the ability to believe the truth by themselves. You need encouragement from friends to be able to stand to arguments from critics. Don't think you're not susceptible to burnout from lack of fellowship.

11. You need to pray. Often it's the most foolish seeming things, in our eyes, that are the most necessary to do. When you're spiritually blind, prayer seems strikingly unnecessary. But that's when you most need it.

I'll add more as they come to me.

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

"Genesis Unbound" Part 2

In these next posts, I'll be unpacking the Arguments Sailhamer uses for his views on Genesis.

Before the arguments begin, a roadblock to believing this view must be removed. Is this view new? Is it possible that all of church history has just totally missed the point of Genesis and now we're finding out what's going on? 

Sailhamer argues that this is not the case. The reason that he calls his view "Historic Creationism" is because he desires to call attention to the fact that many in the past have held to the central elements of his view. 
He shows that before navigation, transportation, and world travel became prevalent, many held to the view that the creation days in Genesis were limited to a local and specific area and not of the whole earth. Also, many Jewish theologians during the Middle Ages believed that Genesis 1:2ff (and following verses) referred to the promised land, not the entire planet. 

Perman quotes Sailhamer:
"these medieval Jewish commentators were followed by some noted Christian scholars. According to John Lightfoote-a widely read biblical exegete, theologian, and a Christian scholar of considerable standing-the Genesis account of creation describes God's preparation of a specific area of land which he identified as the garden of Eden. Lightfoote held that 1:1 states that God created the universe, but from 1:2 through the end of the chapter, the passage focuses on God's preparation of the land that was to be the garden of Eden. Lightfoote's view was developed further by later Christian scholars (216)." [1]
It seems to me [Evan] that the most controversial part of this view will not be that there is an unspecified amount of time between Genesis 1:1-- that seems obvious--, but the question of how the creation days could refer specifically to the Garden of Eden.

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

"Genesis Unbound" Part 1

I'm going to start a series of posts, taking notes on a synopsis of the book, "Genesis Unbound" by John Sailhamer. It is by a gentleman named Matt Perman from the Desiring God blog. "Desiring God" is a ministry of John Piper. What's really funny is that I had always thought John Piper was a young earth creationist, but recently I watched a video in the "Ask Pastor John" Section of the site which shows that he believes an Old Earth is very likely. John Piper very much favors Sailhamer's position on Genesis, and that's what we're going to be talking about on these posts!

In his book, Sailhamer argues that there is a theme intended by the original author, in the creation accounts of Genesis, that modern interpretations of Genesis completely ignore in their assumption that Genesis is speaking about the Creation of the Universe within the "six days". He says that when one reads Genesis as Moses intended his original audience to understand it, all of the tensions between modern science and Genesis instantly vanish. Just as a side note, I've been discovering this as well. There are plenty of "apparent" tensions between the Bible and evidence from science/history/philosophy, etc. But if you read the books of the Bible in a rational way without assuming that the author wrote the Bible specifically to your own culture and without assuming the book is tailored to your own assumptions about the world, suddenly all of these tensions begin to disappear.

From now on, I'll be unpacking the concepts of the article. So this isn't me talking any more:

Today there are generally three camps when it comes to Genesis:

Creationists: Believe that the Universe and the Earth were created in six literal 24-hour days, and thus the Universe and Earth are very young, since humans, who were created on the sixth day, have only been around for 10-20 thousands years. Creationists believe that Modern Science is essentially mislead, and they attempt to provide "Christian evidence" that the earth is young.

Progressive Creationists: Essentially agree with Modern Science that the Earth and the Universe are very old. They argue that the days presented in Genesis are not literal days, but longer ages in which God created the World.

Theistic Evolutionists: Believe the world is old and that God created the world over a long period of Time, then using evolution from a common ancestor to create all biological life.

Historic Creationism: Sailhamer calls his view "Historic Creationism". His view fully acknowledges the inerrancy of the Bible, the literal historicity of the events in Genesis, and rejects evolution.

The Historic Creationist view denies three assumptions that these other views share:
1) That the primary purpose of the first chapters of Genesis is only to describe how God created the world.
2) That the world was a formless mass which God shaped into what it is today.
3) That the "land" being made in the six days is meant to refer to the whole earth.

English Bibles have long distorted the meaning of Genesis because of these assumptions, so Sailhamer goes to the Hebrew to "Unbound" Genesis, and to let the book speak for itself.

Before making any specific arguments, the view is just laid out in its fullness beforehand:

In Genesis 1, there are two great acts of God. The first is the creation of the cosmos, the earth, the planets, the moons, stars, animals, plants, etc. The second is much more limited in scope and time. It is a period where God prepares the "land" for his chosen people. Perman says,"Beginning with Genesis 1:2, the biblical narrative recounts God's preparation of a land for the man and woman He was to create." [1] According to Perman in his review of this book, this is a stunning truth, because in later parts of Genesis where God plans to lead his people into a promised land so that they can live in God's blessings, it is not the first time God has prepared a place for his people.

Here's a larger portion of the text from Perman's article that I think would help communicate this:
"In sum, Sailhamer argues that Genesis 1:1 refers to the creation of the entire universe and that God did so over the period ofan unspecified length of time that could have been one year or fifteen billion years. The text just does not say. Genesis 1:2and following, which recount God's acts during the six days, therefore do not refer to the creation of the universe. They speak of a time after the creation of the universe when God prepared a land (which is the same land later promised to Israel) for Adam and Eve whom he was to create on the sixth day. And the reason that God had to prepare the Garden for Adam and Eve was, among other things, because "the earth [promised land] was formless and void [a deserted wilderness],and darkness was over the surface of the deep" (v. 2)."
Ok, this is me [Evan] again. I have to admit, as I'm studying this (I'm studying this article for the first time as I take these notes), that this seems incredibly counter-intuitive and implausible, and even ad hoc. But as Perman says at this point in the article, "This view is very uncommon to us today and so it will take much defending. The remainder of this analysis will therefore consist mainly in an unfolding of the main arguments for historical creationism."

So with that I finish this post. The rest of the posts will consist of unpacking Sailhamer's arguments with Perman. I'll try my best to write clearly about it.

[1] Perman, Matt. "Science, The Bible, and the Promised Land." Desiring God Blog. Desiring God Ministries, 1998. Web. 12 Jul 2011.

Monday, July 11, 2011

Where am I?

I want to be honest. I'm really struggling with some stuff in my life, and it's not healthy. I want to come back to the truth. All I want is to believe and follow the truth. So far, in my experience, the truth is Jesus.

Even though I am a Christian and I practice (for the most part) spiritual disciplines which bring me closer to God, I believe that I am, in some sense, sitting on the fence still. I believe Jesus is my savior (and boy, has he saved me from some things in my life). But since I went through all kinds of horrid doubts and have started studying philosophy, something in me has changed. It's almost as if intellect, inquiry, and studying has stopped serving as a means towards believing the truth, but rather for being able to look academically respectable and able to refute other people. I know this is not the call of the Christ follower, and thus this needs to stop. But it's gotten to a point where it's really, really hard to budge out of this deadlock.

God: Evan, you continually claim that there is a ton of evidence for me, but you still don't believe in me to the point that you have 100 percent obedience. It's time for you to be obedient in full measure.

Evan: Yes.. But. (Insert some academic question here).

Here's the thing. The questions will never end. I know they wont. I'm a question factory. I can come up with 100 skeptical questions for every intuitional truth that the average human would accept without question. But that doesn't mean the truths are wrong.

I'll be honest. I don't like this, but I'm stuck here. I don't want out, but I know I need to run for dear life out of this rut, before I start to have a bitter heart; supposing I don't already.

Lusting over women is a painful struggle. The merciless contradictions involved with objectifying the very people I am most burdened for are so painful to me. Shame, guilt, and despair are hovering over me like a unrelenting rain-cloud that just won't go away.

Pride over just.. being right and viewed as a good and.. academically respectable person. It's making me into someone who seeks man's approval and not God's.

If it were just an evidential problem, then that would be fine; and some of this is evidential problems-- (i.e., realizing that there is an atheistic objection to one of my favorite arguments for theism that I haven't heard of). Yes, this all will be solved in good time. I don't even believe Christianity on the basis of solely arguments, but the witness of the Holy Spirit.

This cannot be a chase after being approved, but rather believing the truth.

So with regards to this, I need prayer. I need your help, if you read this. Pray that my struggles with pride and lust will be overcome by the power of Christ. I covet your support.

---UPDATE-- 7/14/2011
I'm doing much better. I realized I needed to actually read my Bible, pray, and make friends with the Holy Spirit again. Thank you, anyone who prayed for me.

Friday, July 8, 2011

everything will make sense in due time...  until then, this crushing feeling will be my friend.