Following is the first part of a paper I recently wrote on the christology of the prologue to John’s Gospel, which happens to be my favorite passage out of my favorite book out of my favorite corpus in the entire Canon.

I’ve transliterated the Hebrew and Greek so that it will—I hope—be fairly accessible. I’ll post the rest later, since it’s too long for a single entry.

Translation

1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God. 2This one was in the beginning with God. 3All things were created through him, and apart from him not even one thing was created. What has come about 4in him was life, and that life was the light of humanity. 5And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not receive/overtake it.

6(A man appeared, sent from God, his name was John. 7This one came as a witness in order that he might testify about the light, in order that all might believe through him. 8That one was not the light, but [he came] in order that he might testify about the light.)

9The true light, which gives light to every human being, was coming into the world. 10He was in the world, and the world was created through him, and the world did not know him. 11He came unto his own, and his own did not receive him. 12But as many as received him, he gave to them power to become children of God—that is, to those who believe in his name, 13who were born not from blood nor from the will of flesh nor from the will of man, but from God.

14And the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us, and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only posterity from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15(John bore witness about him and has cried out, saying, “This one was the one about whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks ahead of me, because he existed before me.’”) 16For from his fullness we all received, namely grace in place of grace. 17For the Law was given through Moses; grace and peace came about through Jesus Christ. 18No one has ever seen God. The only posterity, himself God, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.

I. Introduction

The Problem of the Prologue

Before pursuing the Christology of the Johannine prologue, it is first necessary to attend briefly to the problem of the prologue to John’s gospel, namely the question of its origin, redaction, and hymnic structure. The prologue (usually regarded as John 1:1-18) appears to stand by itself as an introductory hymn or poem, prefixed to the gospel either as an original composition by the evangelist  or as an originally separate composition—perhaps a hymn of the Johannine community—adapted more or less successfully to its present situation.

As E. Käsemann has aptly put it, “the state of this discussion is not a happy one.”   Indeed, the structure and origin of the prologue to John’s gospel has been a matter of vigorous debate among a wide range of scholars and has resulted in an equally wide range of theories. R. Butlmann has argued that it originates from an Aramaic hymn of the Baptist community, translated, edited, and deployed by the evangelist as the introduction to his gospel.  C. K. Barrett, on the other hand, rejects Bultmann’s hypothesis of an Aramaic origin, and furthermore denies the poetic/hymnic structure of the prologue altogether.  R. Schnackenburg, convinced that the prologue was not originally the work of the evangelist, rejects any lines containing Johannine characteristics as the evangelist’s own additions.

Most recently the prevalent conviction, and indeed the preferable one, is that the prologue is based on an originally independent poem or hymn which was adopted and adapted by the evangelist for the beginning of his gospel. Käsemann agrees, offering in addition, rightly I think, that the evangelist interpolated the parenthetical prose notations about John the Baptist at 1:6-8 and 1:15. This is the view that will be taken up in this essay.

The opinions regarding the hymnic structure of the prologue are myriad. Since it is not the purpose of this essay to deal with the complexities of its arrangement, we will assume the following four-strophe construction. The first strophe consists of 1:1-3b and proclaims the pre-existence and divinity of the Logos and his role in creation. The second (1:3c-8) describes the Logos in terms of the life and indistinguishable light of humanity. The third strophe (1:9-13) laments the rejection of the Logos in humanity. The fourth (1:14-18) finally praises the saving work of the Logos through the Incarnation and his revelation of the Father.  These Christological motifs in the prologue create a tension in which the reader has been informed of the “who” and “what” of the Incarnate Logos, preparing the reader to learn the “how” of God’s saving work through Jesus in the body of the Gospel.  Bultmann eloquently explains the importance of these motifs for understanding the rest of the Gospel: “Because they are half comprehensible, half mysterious, they arouse the tension, and awaken the question which is essential if [the reader] is going to understand what is going to be said.”

The Prologue and the Wisdom Tradition

That the Johannine prologue, and indeed the entire Gospel, has as its background the Jewish Wisdom tradition has long been recognized. C. H. Dodd has given an impressive list of parallels between the Johannine prologue and the Wisdom literature, from which it is apparent that the prologue—and the first fourteen verses in particular—appear to be a patchwork of phrases in praise of Wisdom (Sophia).  According to the Wisdom literature, “The LORD created me [Wisdom] at the beginning of his work … before the beginning of the earth” (Prov 8:22-23); in the prologue of John, “In the beginning was the Logos” (1:1). In Prov 8:29-30, Wisdom says of herself, “when he [God] marked out the foundations of the earth, then I was beside him;” likewise, the Logos of John’s Gospel “was in the beginning with God” (1:2). Wisdom of Solomon praises Wisdom as “the fashioner of all things” (7:22); of the Johannine Logos it is said that “all things were created through him” (1:3). Wisdom is said to be “a reflection of eternal light” (Wis 7:26); the Logos is “the light of humanity” (John 1:4). Perhaps most striking of all, Wisdom “appeared on earth and lived with humankind” (Bar 3:37), being commanded by God to “Make your [Wisdom’s] dwelling [kataskēnōson] in Jacob” (Sir 24:8); the Johannine Logos “became flesh and dwelled [eskēnōsen] among us” (1:14). Naturally, more parallels could be drawn; however these suffice to show that there can be little doubt about the dependence of the content of the Johannine prologue upon the Jewish writers in the Wisdom tradition.

Brown, Barrett, and others have offered additional parallels with Jewish tradition, most notably “the word of the LORD” (dbr YHWH) in the Hebrew OT and Jewish speculation on the Torah.  Many of the functions ascribed to the Logos in the prologue to John’s Gospel are in fact functions ascribed to the dbr YHWH in the OT. For instance, it is “by the word of the LORD [dbr YHWH] the heavens were made” in Ps 33:6; and in Wis 9:1, Solomon begins: “O God … who have made all things by your word [logōi].” There appears to be an overlap, then, between Wisdom and Word in Jewish tradition, though Brown notes that Wisdom is never called the word of God.  However, in Sir 24:3 Wisdom claims, “I came forth from the mouth of the Most High.”

From the wisdom tradition of Sir 24:23-25, it appears that Wisdom was also identified with the Torah: “All this is the book of the covenant of the Most High God, the law that Moses commanded us. … It overflows, like the Pishon, with wisdom.”  Moreover, Bar 4:1 says of Wisdom: “She is the book of the commandments of God, the law that endures forever.” It would appear, then, that J. Painter is correct to say that Word, Law, and Wisdom had come to be used interchangeably in the Wisdom literature. Thus, the themes of Wisdom, Word, and Law in the Jewish Wisdom tradition have much in common with, and are clearly background for, the Johannine prologue’s use of “the Logos.”

II. The Logos and Prehistory (John 1:1-3b)

The Pre-existence of the Logos

Like Gen 1:1 (LXX), the prologue to John’s Gospel begins with “in the beginning” (en archē). Here, however, the language relates not to the act of creation, but to what was already in existence with God before creation happened, namely “the Word.” Quite unlike the created being Word/Wisdom/Torah of the Wisdom literature (cf. Prov 8:22-23; Sir 24:9, e.g.), the Logos of John’s Gospel was, in the words of Martin Hengel, “the eternal being of the Word right from eternity.” 

Here we must pause to ask the question, Why does John designate Jesus as Word? It has already been shown that Word, Wisdom, and Torah had come to be used interchangeably in the Wisdom tradition; John chose Word. It is probably true, as many have noted, that Torah was excluded because John wished to contrast the incarnate Word with the Law. Indeed, he does so already in verses 16-17 of the prologue. Wisdom was also unsuitable, both because it is a feminine noun and, more importantly, because the Wisdom christology was defective. J. Painter proposes that John chose Word, furthermore, because

[t]he use of λόγος expressed the theme of revelation dynamically, drawing together a number of themes, thus uniting the creative Word (Gen 1.1; Ps 33.6), the prophetic Word and the incarnate Word who himself is the Word of God, speaks the Word of God and is proclaimed in the preaching of the Church.

This Word is not only said to be present with God before creation came into being, however. This Word was God. Despite some arguments to the contrary,  the phrase kai theos ēn ho logos does not mean “and the Word was a god” here, nor does it simply mean “and the word was of the category of divinity,” as Haenchen prefers to translate it. Many years ago, E. C. Colwell observed the rule that definite predicate nouns usually lack the article when they precede the copulative verb. Colwell’s treatment of our particular phrase is worth quoting:

The absence of the article does not make the predicate indefinite or qualitative when it precedes the verb; it is indefinite in this position only when the context demands it. The context makes no such demand in the Gospel of John, for this statement cannot be regarded as strange in the prologue of the gospel which reaches its climax in the confession of Thomas.

Moreover, M. Endo has pointed out that John 1:1-2 form a chiastic structure, causing the predicate noun theos to precede the subject ho logos. Thus, the article was taken from theos in order to make clear which noun is the subject.

But the absence of the article before theos in fact has something more to say. C. K. Barrett is quite right to note that if ho theos had been written, it would have been implied that the Logos is the only being who is God, that is, that no divine being exists outside of the second person of the Trinity. Furthermore, Colwell’s rule does not rule out the possibility that the anarthrous predicate noun may have a qualitative nuance while still being definite; hence, “the Word was fully God.” The anarthrous noun certainly makes this reading possible, if not preferable, and moreover emphasizes the fact that the Logos is of the same essence as God the Father. Of course, if any question remains regarding whether the Logos is still distinct in person from God the Father, it is clarified in the following verse: “He was in the beginning with God.”

The Logos and Creation

In light of the reference to Gen 1:1 in the first words of the prologue, the narrator now speaks of the presence of the Logos in creation. The Logos is asserted to be the mediator of all creation, both positively and negatively. “Everything by the Logos, nothing without him,” says Bultmann. Until 1:3, the imperfect ēn was the only verb used, expressing the timelessness of the Logos and his relationship to God. The switch to the aorist egeneto in 1:3ab looks back to the finished creative work of God in the past as an act that has already revealed the Logos. “The fact that the Word creates means that creation is an act of revelation.”

III. The Logos, Life and Light (John 1:3c-8)

The Logos as Light in the Darkness

At the beginning of the second strophe, the verb tense quickly shifts once again to the perfect gegonen. Having moved from timeless prehistory in the imperfect tense (1:1-2) to the completed creative act of God through the Logos in the aorist tense (1:3ab), the narrator now shifts from creation to history (1:3c-4). The perfect tense describes an event that took place in the past which has continuing relevance, namely in this case the coming about of life in the Logos.

According to the best textual witnesses (including

Many think they repent when it is not the offence, but the penalty which troubles them; not the treason, but the bloody axe.   – Thomas Watson

The great treason of our souls is sin.  At which do we tremble more, the knowledge that we have failed to give Him glory, thanks and praise, or the knowledge that we face eternal damnation for our love of our sin?

As I listen to Danny’s post of the sermon from Sunday, a lot of what I have been dealing with is really coming to the forefront.  This has been a very hard year teaching school for me.  First, racial tension is very strong, especially during this election year.   I have been called racist, among other things, just because I’m a white guy teaching mostly minorities–many at risk, even though I really believe that Civil Rights are as imperative in God’s world view as every other issue that I hold dear.  But my heart breaks for these students, and many of my days are as bad as any that you would learn about in an education class or a new story in fact. 

I am writing simply to ask for your prayers.  There are so many children in many towns that essentially are street children, and if it weren’t for our public schools, these kids truely wouldn’t have anything.  The immensity of it is huge!  And I really don’t know what to do with these students except try everyday to reason with them, teach them, pray for them, and ask for others to pray too. 

But with all of this, I have to say, imagine my position, as hard as it is…I will be teaching about the Civil War, Slavery, and Civil Right as Obama is sworn in and begins his presidency!  The kids are really ecstatic, and I am too, simply for them, but I really do need prayer, prayer to have wisdom to break cultural barriers and even language barriers (most of my students are hispanic and migrant at times).

One thing clear about the Christian worship servicet is that the Bible is not clear on how it “ought” to be performed.  There are many different views but only the reformed and charismatic perspectives will be briefly portrayed and examined.  On one hand the reformed ideal for a worship service is guided by order and supported by a ritual of activities rich in the history of the Church.  On the other hand, the charismatic ideal for a worship service is an intense worship experience where there is an encounter with the Holy Spirit accompanied by signs and wonders and new and fresh experiences.  Both ideals have strengths and weaknesses.  However, if each camp merely pursues its’ own ideal then they are left with an immature and unbiblical expectation of how the worship service “ought” to be.  Therefore, further explanation is needed in order to flush out the benefits from these different ideals in order to serve these purposes.

The reformed ideal for a worship service is guided by order because God is a God of order.  Thus, the service is usually done with a type of ritual order that is made up by various parts.  One part of the service is corporate prayers such as the Lord’s Prayer and/or the corporate confession of sin.  It is also typical for creeds to be read such as the Apostle’s creed, which has been in the church for hundreds of years and sums up what a Christian ought to believe.  There is also typically a great veneration and respect for the Lord’s Supper, and this sacrament is taken more often in a reformed tradition than in a charismatic one.  This also includes someone sharing about what the Lord’s Supper symbolizes the benefits of grace it provides, and a warning to those who have unconfessed sin or are unbelievers not to partake of it lest they incur judgment upon themselves.  One of the most important parts of the worship service is the preaching of the word because this is where God’s word is preached for the edification of the body of Christ, and is where God’s sovereign will is manifested to his people.  Another part of the service is the singing of songs, but often there is a greater respect for historical hymns and songs such as the doxology than is given in a charismatic service.  At the end of the service a benediction or prayer of blessing is pronounced upon the congregation.  

It is important to note that the large idea that formulates the reformed perspective of a biblical service is God’s transcendence and thus his lofty and holy nature.  In short God is above his people and the world and in light of this, there is not an expectation for God’s Spirit to show up and change the service.  Indeed, this is why so much painstaking thought and effort is taken in order to plan the service in a manner that best edifies the body of Christ and glorifies God.   The service is very intentional and is planned and ordered because it is thought of as the godly thing to do.

In addition, when faced with the question ,”what a biblical worship service is supposed to look like,” the reformed camp does not merely gather from biblical support but heavily values and looks to history as well.  What did the early church services look like and what did the early church do? The Apostles Creed testifies to this reformed value.  Besides it educating the Christian on what they ought to believe, the Apostles Creed is a rich and historical part of the Church.  Thus, if the Church has spoken it for so many hundreds of years then the question is why not say it anymore? 

On the other hand, the charismatic ideal of a worship service is an intense encounter with the Holy Spirit accompanied by signs and wonders.  Though not typically as many as the reformed service, there are also different parts that make up the charismatic service.  One of these parts is an openness and expectation for the manifestation of spiritual gifts.  The charismatic camp longs to hear prophetic words every Sunday, to see healings, miracles, and even more extreme parts seek after signs such as gold dust.  Another part is the preaching of the word, but the ideal in the charismatic preaching is to have a fresh word from the Lord, and what is preached is supposed to be what the Spirit of God is leading the pastor to preach.  Singing is also an important part of the service and these songs are often newer songs that will be sung for a few years and then eventually become dull and then dismissed in light of newer  and fresher songs.  There is often great excitement, emotion, and affection shown in the singing of songs than in the reformed camp as these are highly valued in order to portray one’s love for God.   The sacraments are also given though usually not as often as the reformed church and usually in a more individual and emotive manner.  Yet, the best expectation for the service is for the Holy Spirit to fall in such power that there is no sermon given, no “ordered” service per se, but an encounter with the Holy Spirit in which He minister’s to his people.

It is important to note that what forms the charismatic perspective of the biblical worship service is the imminence of God, and thus his Spirit filling his people and being close to them.  This is why the people often cry out for God to pour out his Spirit in greater and greater heaviness, with cries to God for “more and more and more” of his Spirit. This type of service is seen as seeking after God for an intimate experience with his presence.

In addition, when faced with the question, “what a biblical service is supposed to look like,” the charismatic camp does not tend to look at history but at the present Church at large and who is being more successful.   For instance, there was a recent outpouring of God’s Spirit in Lakeland, FL and when charismatcis go to this type of service they then return home wanting the same type of experience at their church with an understanding that this “ought” to be a typical service.

One of the strengths of the reformed service is their intentional pursuit to form an ordered service, and thus careful attention is given to every detail for the edification of the church and the exaltation of God.  Thus, the sermon is carefully prepared in order to adequately preach the Scriptures, and because of this the sermon is clear and professional.  Whereas charismatics may try to preach off the cuff, which is often sloppy and more hype than edification.  Another strength in the reformed camp is their value of Church history.  Sadly, many Christians and charismatics in churches today look at the Apostles Creed or older hymns as boring and meaningless ritual.  However, this only reveals such a person’s ignorance and utter disrespect for the richness of Church history to guide the present Church on how to best obtain a biblical service.  If a reformed person knows the Apostles Creed then he can respond with what a Christian ought to believe, but if a charismatic person is asked what he ought to believe as a Christian then one will tend to get a plethora of different answers because they were never taught precisely what they ought to believe. 

One strength of the charismatic service is the manifestation of spiritual gifts for the edification of the body of Christ.  This is an important aspect of the service that must not be neglected, as much of the reformed camp does because of their false understanding that the New Testament gifts have ceased.  Another strength is the hunger and eager expectation for the presence of God, to which God will often respond with the pouring out of his Spirit on his people unto their edification and his exaltation.   However, too often this understanding that one must always be crying out for more of God’s Spirit often leads to a type of discontentment, which may be ungodly and not spiritual but fleshly.  This is revealed by many charismatics who are unhappy with their church and may even leave it because the church they attend doesn’t measure up to the revival they just came from.  Thus, in their pursuit of the presence of God they rightly hunger for God, but loose a godly contentment and understanding that the service is not primarily about their experience with God but about the edification of the body of Christ and exaltation of God.

In conclusion, the transcendence and imminence of God must be valued and kept in perspective.  The history of the church is not boring but rich, and what is new, fresh, and seemingly successful may not actually be what is needed for a biblical service that edifies the body and exalts God.  Intentional order must always be pursued but a healthy and eager pursuit of the Spirit of God and his gifts must be sought after.  In such a reformed charismatic balance is a more biblical service then if left to themselves.

E. M. Bartlett was born December 24, 1885, in Waynesville, Missouri. He demonstrated his gifting in music at an early age and trained at the prestigious Hall-Moody Institute. After graduating he began teaching at singing schools and quickly became a much sought-after teacher. He conducted singing schools in several states. Amazingly he wrote several hundred hymns. Many of these hymns took merely minutes to write, but in early 1939 he suffered a stroke. Broken in health, unable to speak, he wanted to demonstrate that his faith remained strong  Although it took Bartlett nearly a month he composed the lines of this hymn.

This song is the story of his life:

The first verse talks about Bartlet’s salvation.

The second verse speaks of the healing power of Jesus. Remember that Bartlet wrote this song as a stroke victim. He does not ask for physical healing. He asks that the Lord heal his broken spirit. His livelhood had been singing and teaching and the stroke completly took away his voice.

In the third verse Bartlet provides a picturesque scene of Heaven. But he does more than that in this verse.

And some sweet day I’ll sing up there
The song of victory.

Remember the stroke took away his voice, but Bartlet strongly held to his faith. He knew that one day he would sing again.

I heard an old, old story,
How a Savior came from glory,
How He gave His life on Calvary
To save a wretch like me;
I heard about His groaning,
Of His precious blood’s atoning,
Then I repented of my sins;
And won the victory.

Chorus:
O victory in Jesus,
My Savior, forever.
He sought me and bought me
With His redeeming blood;
He loved me ere I knew Him,
And all my love is due Him,
He plunged me to victory,
Beneath the cleansing flood.

I heard about His healing,
Of His cleansing power revealing.
How He made the lame to walk again
And caused the blind to see;
And then I cried, “Dear Jesus,
Come and heal my broken spirit,”
And somehow Jesus came and brought
To me the victory.
Chorus:

I heard about a mansion
He has built for me in glory.
And I heard about the streets of gold
Beyond the crystal sea;
About the angels singing,
And the old redemption story,
And some sweet day I’ll sing up there
The song of victory.
Chorus:

Though we’re probably all sick and tired of talking and hearing about candidates, referendums, races, and plumbers, I want to take a moment to share about the ONLY two issues that I consider when casting my ballot. The issues will hopefully come as no surprise to most of you, as most of you probably have similar views. To our members and readers not living in the USA, I invite you to read as well since this is not really about US politics, but more universal issues that effect us all. 

The media has been reporting that the issue voters are most concerned about for this election is the economy; and this comes as no surprise. We seem to be on the verge of another depression. I’m not worried, but then, I’ve never been one to worry. Though our economy is in shambles, our great nation is being lulled into accepting values that will ultimately destroy us: genocide and homosexuality.

Whoa! Did he just go there?

Yes.

Americans committing genocide? Intolerance of homosexuality? Oh yes. Let me be clear, in this article I am not speaking against people that are homosexuals, I am speaking against homosexuality. I am not speaking against people that have abortions, I am speaking against the act of abortion.

ABORTION

Approximately one million unborn children per year, who, under normal circumstances, would lead normal lives, have their lives taken from them in the United States. Since abortion was legalized in the United States, over 44 million such murders have taken place. To put things in perspective, those unborn children, had they been allowed to live, would make up almost 13% of the current US population. That is staggering! For every 9 people you see, there is one you DON’T because they were aborted! Let’s broaden the perspective a bit further. During Nazi Germany’s attempt to extinguish the Jews from Europe, only 6 million Jews were killed. I am not taking the Holocaust lightly, it is one of the most tragic events of the human existence. However, the genocide of unborn children in the USA is more than seven times greater than that of the Jews during World War II.

Did you know that? What’s more… it’s completely legal.

What should we expect from a society that does not operate under the law of the survival of the fittest, but rather under a system that protects the rights of all those within her jurisdiction? It is inarguable that an unborn child is THE weakest and most utterly helpless person in society. He is absolutely dependent upon his mother for survival. Though mother and child share one body for a time, they are two people. The mother and father of the child are responsible for the existence of the child and are thus responsible for the survival of the child. Once an unborn child’s life is taken from it for whatever purpose, a sever injustice has occurred. A society that protects its weakest members should absolutely protect the rights of unborn children ABOVE the rights of the mother carrying it.

HOMOSEXUALITY

Examples of commands against homosexuality and jugments against those who practice is are abundantly sufficient in Scripture. The practice is expressly forbidden in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were utterly destroyed for their participation in the sin.

It should also be noted that there are other extra-biblical examples of judgments against nations that had an overtly homosexual culture. The Greek and Roman empires are excellent examples. They both openly celebrated the practice and indulgence of homosexuality, and though they were once great empires, they are now reduced to nothing in the global forum.

Homosexuality is anti-family. While it is unfortunate that most children spend at least a part of their lives in broken homes and in disfunctional families, those children that are given the opportunity to grow up in a stable home with one mother and one father stand the greatest chance of leading healthy and productive lives. Most families don’t start out with the goal of being disfunctional, but when a homosexual couple attempts to begin a family, it does just that.

NOTHING ELSE MATTERS

Therefore, how a candidate views abortion and homosexuality fully determines whether or not I vote for them. A nation that endorses these atrocities has decided to begin its descent from greatness. Unless we reject these practices and begin our reascent, I believe that our collapse as a world power is imminent. Sure, the economy is important, but it is also cyclical. It will ALWAYS bounce back regardless of who is in power.

You may ask, “What if both or many of the candidates agree with you on these issues?” My response would be, “Praise God that that is the case!” Sadly, it is almost never the case; especially when the fields of candidates become more and more narrow. If it is indeed the case, I currently do not have a “third most important issue”. I would be interested to hear what some of yours are.

From the article in the Detriot Free Press:

Most Peruvian faith-healers support Obama

LIMA, Peru — The 11 shamans in a Peruvian faith-healing organization said today that they have foreseen victory in the U.S. presidential race: nine for Democrat Barack Obama and two for his Republican rival John McCain

Blowing incense over a sacred llama fetus perched on a bed of coca leaves next to posters of the leading candidates, the shamans shook rattles, chanted “Up, Obama, up!” and threw flowers at their images.

“Obama is growing stronger, I’ve seen that he has the spiritual support of Martin Luther King and John F. Kennedy to protect him,” said Juan Osco, president of the Apus-Inka healers association. “He’s going to win.”

Mary Gomez, a healer from the city of Chiclayo, said she has seen that Obama “will win and he will change history. … He is going to help all the Latinos living in the United States.”

The shamans whistled, chanted and rubbed both posters with Andean spirit-totems, crucifixes, a statue of a dark-skinned Jesus and other idols to scare away bad spirits and negative energies they said might prevent a fair and democratic election.

“We are cleansing both of them so that on Nov. 4 the person that the U.S. really deserves wins,” Osco said. “We have seen that if the election is not fair, there will be another global economic crisis, war and despair.”

It’s over folks!  Once the sacred llama fetus has spoken, it’s pretty much a done deal.  No need to bother to head to the polls.

I’m up here in New Hampshire spending time with my family. It’s the first time many of them have met my son, Stryder. I am relinquishing my posting duties today to my wife, Amanda. She will be posting later today on the subject of drawing closer to God and having a more intimate relationship with Him.

Stay tuned…

Also, check out Steve’s post on the free audio book download. I’m downloading my free copy right now.

UPDATE: Amanda’s post can be viewed here

Noel Piper recommends a free classic Christian book download over at Christianaudio.com.  This month’s freebie is “All of Grace” by Charles Spurgon.  Are you interested?  You gotta act before the end of the month.

Go to http://christianaudio.com/free_download.php to get it.  Yeah, you need to register too, and remember the coupon code.  But come next week you’ll have listened to Spurgeon and already downloaded another book.

…to quit commenting on everyone else’s blogpost & write my own.

But the other guys know Greek and Hebrew and all that stuff.  All I have are my opinions.

It must be Hebrew envy.