Undercrank

Hello friends, This is an old, old question, but it's still a relevant one. I'm always interested to hear just exactly why so many feel they need to be able to defend God and His Truth on the same level as those are rooted absolutely in science and 'evolution'. I was into apologetics too for a long time but eventually came to realise that Normal Christianity in all its fullness can never be compatible with Christian Apologetics. But it takes time to explain that inner realisation properly and it's always tempting for others to conclude this is a unique aspect of my walk with God -- it's for me, not a universal approach. But that's not what I believe. My concern is that too many give more attention to this subject than they do to the full-time business of following God, dying to self and living in the power of God's Spirit in wisdom and revelation -- in other words, the normal Christian life as defined in Scripture. We don't have a lot of time here to live for God as He intends and intellectual sideshows are an encumbrance. Sam

Give yourself a solid foundation before God: If you know the right thing to do but don

When it comes to Bible history and reading there are a lot of cliches we regularly get bombarded with. But there's a lot to be said for making the New Testament your absolute foundation. I know there are many who are reading chunks of the Old Testament, or using "through the Bible in one year" routines, but laying hold of the nuts and bolts of Christian living is key. And we get that uniquely in the New Testament. If I may: http://slashedcanvas.info/essays/essays8.htm All Scripture is inspired and the New Testament is the foundation of Christian practice and Church order. It should be our primary concern. On another topic: A few translations are more reliable than others. Some believers don't consider the choice of translation that important. I put a considerable amount of effort into investigating this subject. As a result I'm of the opinion that the modern translations the New King James Version and the New American Standard Bible are significantly more dependable than translations like the New International Version. The same can be said of the most recent translation of the Authorised Version which first appeared in 1611. But there are those who find fault with all these versions. Other versions, such as The Message, lean heavily on paraphrasing (expressing the meaning of the original languages using different words, especially in an effort to achieve greater clarity). Some question the overall value of Bible versions produced in this way. I certainly do. The translator of The Message "...decided to strive for the spirit of the original manuscripts