A Different Kind of Man?

October 26, 2011 at 11:36 AM 4 comments

I saw a brief clip on the Internet for Dancing with the Stars, in which Chaz Bono – who not long ago went through transgender surgery to become a man – stated that he came on the show to portray a “different” kind of man. The audience responded with a very large ovation and a few hoops and hollers.

He then went onto say that had he had that type of role model as a kid, his entire life would have been different.  Applause and affirmation again from the audience.

Obviously, Chaz’ reference to a different kind of man points to the fact that though he was born a female, he chose to have surgery done so that he would become a man.  It’s an interesting play on words, I guess, but ultimately, what Chaz means is that he is the different kind of man; a man who was created that way surgically.

I don’t believe God makes mistakes…at all.  Chaz would say that he should have been born a man because he felt like one most of his life.  He would also indicate that due to an accident of nature, he was born female, though internally, he was really a man.  Science simply completed what nature failed to do.

The reality is that I truly feel sorry for these individuals.  It must be very difficult indeed to go through life believing (for whatever reason) that the body you are living in should have been the opposite sex.  Yet, here you are stuck in a body that is not in sync with the way you feel, think, or want to be.

Again, I’ll say it.  God does not mistakes.  Then how do we rationally understand what people like this are going through?  If God does not make mistakes, then something happened along the way to “foul things up.”

Well my answer is simple.  It has to do with the sin nature.  Paul tells us we were born in sin, meaning, that as our first parents rebelled against God, they were introduced to death; spiritual death immediately, and physical death eventually.

In order for things that are alive to physically die, cells have to change…for the worst.  Every day, multitudes of cells fall off our bodies.  These are replaced with new ones, yet, they are not exactly the same as the previous cells.  This creates the aging process and of course, scientifically, entropy helps quite a bit.

This is really the aging process.  Our bodies will not last forever, no matter how much exercise you do, or how healthy you eat.  Eventually, things give out.  When the things that give out are major organs, such as the heart, death is very near.

Science can replace certain components in our bodies that do not work well, or have stopped working.  However, even those replacements will eventually stop working.

We are all in dying bodies, whether we care to think so or not.  People who are young, healthy, agile, and beautiful rarely consider the fact that they will one day be old, not-so-healthy, and possibly even ugly or at the least, not as attractive as they might be now.  This is the curse of fallen humanity and it is passed on from one generation to the next.

My point is simple – because of the sin nature or the propensity to die, if you will, genetically, nothing is perfect; absolutely nothing.  This is why some people are born with physical deformities.  Some are born deaf.  Some are born without arms, without legs, or both.

Some are born with a propensity to be obese while others have that gene that causes them to become alcoholics.  In other words, those people who look the best, act the best, and are considered to be the best are still not the best simply because they are not perfect.

I consider someone like Chaz a bit of a birth defect.  That will likely sound harsh to you, but please note that I also know and understand that I myself have birth defects, at least to my way of thinking.  I am not tall enough.  I love sugar and find it extremely difficult to ignore.

I do not have good balance at all and my muscles and joints are growing stiffer.  Years ago, I didn’t feel as though my muscles and joints were stiffer.  I could ride my bike and play all day with friends; soccer, tackle football, or whatever.  Now, I wake up with pains and aches.  This is the result of the fact that I was not born in perfection.

For Chaz Bono, his birth defect is having been born in a woman’s body while believing that he was and is actually a man.  I don’t necessarily believe that this type of defect should be idolized as it was on Dancing with the Stars, but then again, no one wants to be politically incorrect either, so they join in the applause as if he accomplished something.  He really didn’t.  He simply allowed surgeons to rework his body so that he now appears to be a man.  Genetically, what is he?  I don’t know.  Does that change due to surgery?  As far as I know, it does not.

If someone was born without an arm and they had one attached, would we idolize them?  Again, a surgeon or team of surgeons attached an arm to the armless and the person is now learning how to use it.  Did that person actually do anything to qualify for deification?  I’m not trying to sound harsh.  I’m simply asking questions and trying to reason through this.

Imagine if we did not have any propensity to sin and of course, I’m not talking to those people who do not believe in sin or the sin nature.  There’s no point in discussing things with them because we are on two different roads that will likely never meet.

I imagine a world without guilt because there will be no trespass.  There will be no ego because there will be no self-glorification.  There would be a looking out for others, above ourselves because that is simply the right thing to do.

In essence, without sin and without the sin nature, the world would be a different place.  People would be born with bodies that had not been corrupted by sin.  Because of that, people would not be born without limbs, or without hearing, or believing that they were born with the wrong body.

There is no such thing as a “different” man as Chaz would have us to believe.  There are men and there are women, genetically speaking.  From the genes, a person is designed.  A person can change their appearance, but have they changed what they are within?

Does a woman who has her breasts enlarged become a “different” woman?  She might feel better about herself than she did before, but genetically, is she a different woman?  Nope.  Her self-esteem might improve but that does not change her genetic make-up.  Chaz Bono can have surgery done on his body to create from his female body a male body, but genetically, Chaz is still Chastity Bono, a female.

God does not make mistakes.  Humanity made the mistake and now we continue to reap what we have sewn.  It’s that simple and really that clear, though people who prefer to cast off God and the Bible as some archaic leftover from ages past have to explain things another way.  They try to use science to do it, but in this case (as in others), science will betray them because if men and women are defined by their genes, then that cannot be changed.

Chaz, I wish you well.  I cannot say that I can understand what you have gone through in your life.  You say you are happier.  You say you are “yourself” and who you were meant to be, but genetics do not lie.

I hope one day Chaz, you come to terms with your Maker, understanding that He did not make a mistake.  I hope one day you will turn to Him and receive the tremendous love He has for you, as evidenced by the fact that He – as God the Son – came and lived a life of perfection and then died a painfully brutal death in order to satisfy the righteous demands of the law because it is impossible for us to do that.  The vicarious atonement is a problem for many people (and I’ve heard Christopher Hitchens say that in a debate), but the reality is that it shouldn’t be.

The vicarious atonement would be a very difficult doctrine if the individual who offered Himself as substitute was human only.  If God had simply looked around the earth and chose a human being to be the substitute for a fallen humanity, that would be extremely difficult to accept and appreciate.

The reality though is that while God made the rules (and humanity broke them), He also provided the substitute in Himself.  He chose to be born of a virgin, live a life of sinless perfection among human beings and while He was fully human, He also remained completely God.  In essence then, He asked no other human being to do anything.  He became a human being while maintaining His deity in order to fulfill all the requirements of the law so that all who would trust in Him would receive eternal life.  It is that simple.  No regular human being was hurt in the process.  It was all God.

Not one person is born into this life without problems and difficulties.  People constantly ask why there is evil if God exists.  The same answer applies here.  Evil exists because humanity chose their own way instead of God’s.  That’s so simple that even a child could grasp it.

Ultimately, we have ourselves to blame for all the ills in this world.  We brought it upon ourselves, but fortunately, one day, all of it will be a permanent thing of the past. Only those who know Christ – who are in relationship with Him – will enjoy the fruit of that perfect life, yet future.  I hope you are one of them.

Entry filed under: 9/11, alienology, Atheism and religion, Barack Hussein Obama, Barry Sotero, Communism, Demonic, dispensationalism, Eastern Mysticism, emergent church, Gun Control, Islam, Islamofascism, israel, Judaism, Life in America, Maitreya, new age movement, Posttribulational Rapture, Pretribulational Rapture, Radical Islam, rapture, Religious - Christian - End Times, Religious - Christian - Prophecy, Religious - Christian - Theology, salvation, Satanism, second coming, Sharia Law, Socialism, temple mount, Transhumanism, ufology. Tags: , , .

Is Mr. Obama Following a Scripted Plan for Re-election? A Culture, Not a Costume

4 Comments

  • 1. abandonculture  |  November 2, 2011 at 12:37 PM

    “…. but came to your own conclusions based on what you thought I might have meant…..”

    Yes. I admit I was having problems figuring out what your stance is. I apologise if I got it wrong in places. I am as fascinated by your views as I am confused/ at odds. (I didn’t mean that to sound condescending but that probably does, sorry).

    I actually do not ‘believe in’ evolution 100%. Rather, I consider it only part of a much larger process and as such I consider Darwinism a *belief system* to some extent (as is much of science!). And I believe ‘natural selection’ and ‘survival of the fittest’ (while being valid processes in a bigger picture) are promoted relentlessly for a reason: to reinforce the idea that the unnatural power hierarchies that plagues society (from governments to corporate fascism) are somehow a mirror to the natural ‘dog eat dog’ order of the universe. Pure propaganda.

    In many ways western science is just another religion – ‘the church of Progress’ – with man/ technology as god. Perhaps it is the most dangerous religion of them all!

    But I find the Biblical account equally problematic. LOL

    In fact I suspect the Adam and Eve account it is actually a mistranslated/ misunderstood/ generally degraded account of genetic manipulation carried out on the human species by some other race …. ‘those who fell from the sky’ most probably! This is in line with the Sumerian accounts (and others) which describe genetic manipulation in great detail. Even the translations of the Sumerian texts predate our own recent (re?)discovery of genetic science. Yet the ancient accounts describe methods used to genetically manipulate humans accurately and in stunning detail.

    Perhaps Eve being born of Adam’s rib is a literal (and quite mundane) description of extracting genetic material. Books can and have been written on the subject, I’m just skimming the surface here and therefore may sound like a loony.

    “…..The point is simply that ORIGINALLY, our sexuality was absolutely a “black and white matter.” ….”

    This is where you start to lose me….

    I find this idea no different from its opposite extreme: the idea that ‘anything goes’, that sex/ sexuality/ gender are frivolous/ shallow labels that can be changed like outfits and that there are no rules (no natural restrictions), and no right or wrong and we can ‘be’ whatever we want.

    (To put it very simplistically) I believe that in more primitive ages we were controlled through ideas about natural limitations and personal, social, familial responsibility (which had some validity but were taken to extremes) ….. but in this new era of technological possibilities and social / economic freedoms we are being controlled through ideas of LACK of limitations and a LACK of social, personal, familial responsibilities. (which also have some validity but are being taken to extremes)

    If it’s not one extreme it’s another!

    While I think there is much truth to be found in the Bible as well as in science, I am weary of the extreme and absolute world views that seem to originate from both (or more accurately from those in power who have always controlled them).

    Like

    • 2. modres  |  November 2, 2011 at 2:38 PM

      The reason you are confused by some of my comments is simply due to the fact that we do not have the same world view. I understand the Adam and Eve account to be literal, but then again, I understand the Bible literally. By that, I do not mean literalistically, but I look for the literal meaning. I have no problem understanding the events of Genesis to be literal. “The morning and the evening was the first day…” equals a 24-hour period. I realize that within Christendom, others take that to mean a variety of things. This is the problem though when people choose to allegorize Scripture.

      While I can appreciate your opinion regarding Adam and Eve you have nothing to base it on except your opinion. You cannot even prove that “the Adam and Eve account it is actually a mistranslated/ misunderstood/ generally degraded account of genetic manipulation carried out on the human species by some other race…” It is simply conjecture on your part.

      Look at it this way for a moment. In every ancient culture there are remnants of a story similar to that of Noah and the Ark. However, if you consider that the Flood occurred in Genesis 9 and by the time we reach Genesis 11 the earth had already been repopulated to some extent so obviously hundreds if not thousands of years had passed between the two chapters. Moreover, according to Genesis 11 everyone spoke one language and enjoyed one culture. It was only AFTER God separated people by language and culture groups that they went off and formed their own individual civilizations. Prior to this, no one wanted to leave that Mesopotamian area to spread out.

      Those people in Genesis 11 would have known of Noah’s Ark (and we’re assuming for argument’s sake that it occurred). If they understood it to have happened, then once God confused the languages by introducing a plethora of languages, they would still have taken that “fable” of Noah with them when they split up. It is because of this that the story of Noah, albeit with different names, is contained in all major ancient civilizations.

      Moreover, not long ago, thanks to archaeology, a small round stone that has finally been decoded and which had baffled scientists for over a century turns out to be an eye-witness account of the destruction of Sodom/Gomorrah:
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-551010/Decoded-The-clay-tablet-tells-asteroid-destroyed-Sodom-5-000-years-ago.html

      When I say that “ORIGINALLY, our sexuality was absolutely a “black and white matter,” please understand that I am saying that due to my biblical worldview. God specifically made man; male and female made He them. Since the Bible tells us that all of His Creation was “good” (perfect), there was no sense of blending or crossovers from one gender to the next.

      Your confusion regarding my comments is solely due to the world view you have. You believe that the further back we go, the more caveman-like people were. I do not believe that. In fact, I believe that both Adam and Eve were by far, infinitely more intelligent than anyone since then, but our physical, spiritual, genetic, and mental degradation is due solely to the results of rebelling against God.

      I believe that what humanity has been experiencing is DE-evolution, going from order to disorder just as the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics prompts, as opposed to the opposite that science would have us believe.

      My “extreme” view is my own. I’m actually in a minority these days in many respects. I gain nothing from it except ridicule.

      Either God is who He says He is – and please note that nowhere in the Bible is there an attempt to prove God’s existence. It is a foregone conclusion – or He is not and the Bible is completely lacking in veracity and integrity.

      The Bible is made up of roughly 2/3 prophecy, meaning it tells events BEFORE they occurred. Roughly half has been fulfilled and much of it was fulfilled during the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.

      It is easy to arrive at the conclusion you arrive at with respect to God’s Word, but there is a preponderance of evidence (archaeological as just one branch of science) that disagrees with you. I wonder if you have taken the time to avail yourself of all the information that is out there before you arrived at the conclusions regarding Adam and Eve for instance?

      Most higher critics for example, insist that the book of Daniel was written AFTER the facts presented therein simply because it is SO accurate. Chapters 10-12 provide so much historical detail that it is uncanny and to think that it was written BEFORE that history came into being is profound. Hence, higher critics prefer to do whatever they can to denigrate and disprove it, stating that the book of Daniel was written by a man who simply took the name Daniel and since he wrote about the events after they occurred, it was easy for him to present such detail. There are many problems with that believe, not least of which is the fact that the book of Daniel was included in the Septuagint which was a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures and that was done more than 100 years BEFORE the events in chapters 10 – 12 occurred in history.

      I understand where you are coming from and I also understand why it is easy to adopt some of the beliefs you’ve adopted.

      It seems that you are extremely interested in genetic research. Are you aware of just exactly how much science is contained in Scripture, even though it is not a scientific book?

      For instance, at around A.D. 1,000, a Jewish sage by the nickname RAMBAM came to the conclusion that there are ten dimensions around us but that we can only experience four of them: length, height, width, and time. He arrived at this conclusion based on his reading of Genesis 1.

      Now, 1,000 years AFTER him, science has determined that – guess what – there are ten dimensions around us but that we can only experience four of them.

      With respect to extreme and absolute world views, I would obviously say that I have no problem with believing Scripture simply because it makes sense. For the average person, the idea of Adam and Eve is a myth as are most of the other stories of the Bible. Interestingly enough though, archaeology has unearthed some extremely interesting artifacts that, rather than destroying the Bible’s credibility, without intending to do so, actually wind up supporting it.

      One last comment. With respect to your views on Evolution, I would agree with you; however, I would go one step further in stating WHY science is often deified. It is because people do NOT want to have to deal with answering to the God of the universe. Romans 1 explains this perfectly. We do not want to be beholden to anyone other than ourselves. Evolution gives people the ability to believe in a form of “creation” without God. In fact, more than one “scientist” has been quoted as saying that if given the choice, he would rather believe that aliens seeded life here, rather than acknowledge the possibility of an all-knowing, omniscient God did the creating.

      Science cannot tell us how life began on this planet. They cannot even tell us why atoms don’t blow apart. Something holds them together. What is it? They don’t know. But with science, they always have this excuse: “we don’t know…now, but we will know someday” and that is good enough for most people. It’s pitiful, yet these same individuals pick apart Scripture with one thing after another and if someone does not come back with a rationale response, it supposedly proves that science is correct and the Bible is wrong.

      Thanks for writing. Our world views are totally different.

      PS – By the way, the genetic manipulation is more than hinted at in Genesis 6 and elsewhere. This occurred before the Flood and it is interesting to note that Noah was considered “perfect” in all his generations (which may actually mean his DNA), which also means that no one else besides Noah, his immediate family and the animals God brought to Noah had not been genetically manipulated. Why would anyone want to mess with the God-created DNA in humanity?

      To keep redemption from occurring…

      Like

  • 3. abandonculture  |  October 26, 2011 at 3:12 PM

    (disclaimer: I do not watch TV!)

    It is interesting to me that you choose to see it as celebrating a ‘birth defect’ rather than celebrating a man who has presumably struggled overcome a very challenging situation and achieved relative happiness and fulfilment at the other end.

    I also don’t think you fully understand what male and female means (medically speaking). There are about two dozen (yes two dozen!) medically / physiologically distinct variations on the traditional (and incredibly over simplified) ‘male’ and ‘female’ classification scheme.

    For example, a person can be born with XX chromosomes, yet have male genitals (or vice versa). Or a person can be born XY and have undeveloped male genitalia (to the point where they actually look like female genitalia) due to an insensitivity to testosterone. Thus she will develop as a perfectly normal girl (presenting no visible sex ambiguity until puberty when she fails to menstrate) despite being chromosomally male.

    Ambiguous genitalia / ambiguous sex is actually very common. What we call male and female are really the extreme ends of a natural sliding scale that spans between male and female. To be born someway in from these extremes of sex (towards the more ambiguous middle ground) is as common as being born with red hair. That is a medical fact.

    (another disclaimer: I am not religious either)

    You claim that God does not make mistakes. Yet you fail to consider the possibility that such people are not mistakes. Perhaps their life mission (as it were) is to make sense of and overcome their situation… and perhaps teach us all something valuable along the way? (if nothing else then to be more fluid and more compassionate to others and to celebrate difference rather than condemn it).

    One of the biggest effects of modern consumerism (advertising) is to bombard us with images (now photoshopped) to create the impression of two polarised ‘opposite’ sexes belonging to two vastly different and extreme and ‘competing’ camps. By defining sex according to extremes they know that most people will fall short of their respective sex (too hairy, too puny, not butch enough, not thin enough etc). This enables them to sell more products to each group as we desperately try to conform to the unrealistic and atypical standards for our sex so that we won’t be regarded as a lesser (failed) man or woman.

    In addition, depicting and defining all men as ‘rugged manly hunks’ and all women as ‘flawless and painted waifs’ actually encourages attitudes in society of harsh judgement and intolerance of both physical appearance and social behaviour. If someone differs from the advertiser’s narrow (and increasingly unobtainable) depictions of what is normal or acceptable they are often ridiculed, condemned, and even attacked.

    This polarisation of the sexes and fixation with conformity to an artificial and pernicious set of standards leads to violence expressed both outwardly and inwardly.

    Just look at school playground behaviour or a town centre on a Saturday night. And look at the rise in body issues such as anorexia, bulimia, self harm, depression, suicide etc. It may also lead to an increase in ‘gender identity disorder’ – feeling uncomfortable or ‘wrong’ in one’s gender. Although this is not to say all transgendered people are only suffering a psychological condition due to society’s narrow and restrictive gender stereotypes (but it can certainly play a role).

    I am no expert on these things (it’s a fascinating subject though!), but it seems to me that in a world of wars, poverty, crime and corruption it’s a little ridiculous to be so selectively intolerant as to pick on those who do no harm to others and are just trying to make the best of their bizarre life circumstances (which is what we are all trying to do, is it not!?). Presumably you can imagine that the man must have gone though quite some turmoil before you add to it with your own harsh judgments?

    “… genetics do not lie”

    Medical understanding of genetics tells us that in fact genetics can lie. I would not use the term ‘lie’ myself. The point is it is not a black and white matter. It is a lot more subtle and sophisticated than you imagine it to be. 🙂

    Like

    • 4. modres  |  October 26, 2011 at 5:47 PM

      Thank you for taking the time to read my blog and for commenting. Unfortunately, I get the impression you did not really thoroughly read my comments, but came to your own conclusions based on what you thought I might have meant. From reading your own comments, it seems that you scanned through my article to pick and choose certain phrases that may have tended to jump out at you, but failed to gain the overall meaning from my post.

      For instance, if you got the impression (and you seemed to; “...it’s a little ridiculous to be so selectively intolerant as to pick on those…”), you missed my point entirely. If I was being intolerant of folks like Chaz Bono, then you would also have to charge that I was being intolerant of people born without limbs, which I wasn’t. In fact, I included myself in my post, noting that I also suffer from certain “abnormalities” from birth. Further, I also admitted that I have no idea what Chaz has gone through.

      You admit that you are “not religious,” and please be reminded that I noted the differences in beliefs between atheists for instance and myself and also indicated those two roads would never meet. In truth, we are looking at this from two completely different perspectives, but unfortunately, you are attributing to me something that is simply not true. You are also looking at the genetic question as I am AFTER the fall of humanity, with one big difference. You likely believe (based on your potential belief in evolution) that the “non-normal” (for the lack of a better word and based on percentage) genetic qualities were ALWAYS present in humanity, therefore you do not see a person having both a penis and a vagina as being an out of the norm (again, for the lack of a better phrase), of nature (NOT less than human, simply different from the norm). I turn to the opening chapters of Genesis and read that God made man; male and female He made them. When God made the first two people; one male and the other female, my belief is that neither of them suffered from any abnormality at all, genetically, physically, or spiritually. They were not created with only one arm, instead of two. They were not created with the potential to become alcoholics, or as in my case, completely addicted to sugar. In their original state, neither of the first two humans would have suffered from arthritis, or gout, or obesity or any other health-related problem. They were not in a confused state of mind regarding their sexuality. This was the way it was until they arrived at a certain point when they chose their way as opposed to God’s way.

      My overall point was this: it is because of of the fact that the first two people “sinned” (likely an antiquated and mythological idea to you), death was the result (due to the initiation of entropy at that point). Spiritual death occurred immediately and physical death occurred much later, though it began at the same point spiritual death occurred.. Because all people came from those two individuals, that propensity to die would be passed onto all people who came from them. I fully believe that is why ALL people (and I clearly noted that in my original comments) were/are IMPERFECT. For some, imperfection comes in the form of being born without a limb or two, or being born with Down’s Syndrome, or dwarfism. For others, it is a genetic propensity toward alcoholism. Yet for others, there is the confusion regarding sexuality and the inner turmoil that stems from it.

      None of these “symptoms” make anyone less than anyone else. In fact, it places all of us in the same boat, really. We are all human beings and we are all corrupt; not one of us being perfect. This is exactly why I referred to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Since all humans are in the same boat, we are all in need of the same salvation and no one is exempt, unless they wish to be.

      Your comments regarding advertising are off point. Consumerism has always played the opposites because those who are trying to sell us things know that we need to first buy into their world view. I don’t buy into it and there are plenty of others who don’t. It really does not enter into this conversation, because I was not using advertising or consumerism as the starting point for my comments. I was and am using the Bible as the starting point for my comments and the fact that I believe Chaz – though he may believe he is correct in a secular world view – is nonetheless incorrect with respect to a biblical world view.

      I was also not being harsh (“Presumably you can imagine that the man must have gone though quite some turmoil before you add to it with your own harsh judgments?”). Of COURSE I have no idea what the man actually went through before he changed from being Chastity to Chaz and I noted that. There is absolutely no way I can know and neither can you. I’m sure it was confusing, frustrating and at times she likely thought of suicide. Again though, this is not the point at all.

      The point is simply that ORIGINALLY, our sexuality was absolutely a “black and white matter.” However, sadly, because we have come so far from that original point with each generation “devolving” more than the last, it is clear that this type of phenomenon is becoming a type of “normal” though in my view, it was never that and will never be that. If not for technology (which you refer to in a number of your own blog articles), we would not be half as far as we are now as a race of people. In that sense, “evolution” has failed miserably. Technology has gotten us to our current level and without it, Chaz would have had no opportunity to change sexes physically.

      You also miss my point about the fact that God does not make mistakes. Since there is not ONE person alive today who can claim to be perfect in all ways, then we are ALL born with some type of deficiency. For some, those deficiencies are more pronounced or more obvious than with others, but the truth is that we ALL share in the same problem: imperfection resulting from our fallen natures which has affected the entire earth, the animal kingdom, and we ourselves in all respects.

      The only issue I have with Chaz is the statement he made that he is a different kind of man. He is a scientifically-created man and whether or not his genetic code clearly speaks of him being male or female does not negate the fact that he was born as a female and may very well still be female genetically. I have no idea. His insinuation that there are different types of “males” is incorrect, in my opinion, and again, I base that on Scripture. God does not make mistakes at all, but since humanity has, we reap what we have sown.

      Thanks for giving me the opportunity to clarify and I hope I’ve done that. I was neither condemning or judging Chaz for what he has become. I was taking exception to his statement that he is a “different” kind of man. While he sees validity in his statement, it does not stand against Scripture, like so many other things that human beings believe.

      Like


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 9,448 other followers

Our Books on Amazon

Study-Grow-Know Archives

Blog Stats

  • 1,078,634 hits

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 9,448 other followers

Follow Study – Grow – Know on WordPress.com

%d bloggers like this: