Rules of Engagement…

Welcome readers and lurkers to WYLD C!  ARE YOU READY TO ROCK?!

(I kinda do think of my blog as a theological version of the Wyld Stallyns…though even I am not sure what that means!)

I post thoughts here that I welcome interaction with.  Thoughts on the scriptures, thoughts on various writers and thinkers, thoughts on the MB conference and churches therein, thoughts on whatever.  I welcome all lurkers and readers and even those who think I’m a fool and want to rub my face in it.

I enjoy a fair bit of spirited interaction, and even downright aggressive criticism.  I’ve been online since the early 90’s, and I’ve been arguing and debating online for pretty much since then.  I enjoy rational engagement and theological swashbuckling and like many bloggers, I have some ground rules for those who show up here and want to have a tussle:

1.  Bring actual argument, not ambiguous attack.

Now on the internet, it is basically unarguable that 99% of people don’t know logical argument two ways from Tuesday.  Anyone who doubts that can simply log onto the Answers In Genesis Facebook page and behold the cacophony of yodeling goats that show up there.

A simple logical argument goes like this:

a.  Make a propositional point.

b.  Provide some form of supporting reason.

– Things like “Calvinism is a false Gospel because John Calvin said that Jesus never existed” is an argument that can be interacted with.  It has a clear proposition (Calvinism is a false gospel) and a clear supporting reason (Calvin said Jesus never existed).  That is something we can work with.  I can interact with both those statements and deal critically and concretely with them.

– Things like “You must open your mind to the possibility that I’m right” is simply a statement and “what if you’re wrong?” is simply a question.  Statements and questions cannot be interacted with, beyond saying something like “You must close your mind to the possibility that you’re right” or each person re-asking “what if you’re wrong?” ad infinitum.  Statements masquerading as arguments are fairly clear to see; they get cast aside because they’re not arguments.

If you come on here and drop verbiage without dropping off an argument, you’ll find yourself on the receiving end of humor, not serious interaction…in other words I may sarcastically (or mockingly) point out your lack of argumentation by responding with a non-argument.

2.  Posting a URL is not a response.

On the internet, people who are inexperienced debaters will sometimes respond to a post with some form of the “read this” response, where they toss a link or series of links at you like that’s some sort of actual response to your points.  The idea behind such a response is “if you read this, you’d understand my positions and the truthfulness of it would become patently obvious”.  I find that this response comes from people who are frustrated or unable to articulate their ideas and are feeling trapped or flustered.  I sympathize for such people, but bad arguments are still bad arguments.

If you post a series of URLs as a response on here without summarizing the content and presenting the argument of the articles/links, you’ll be referred to this page and may have your post edited at my discretion.

3.  PM’s and E-mails are fair game.

One thing that is astonishing to me is how the Internet has shown what people do with anonymity; it’s rarely “honor God”.  If you decide to privately contact me for the purpose of a heated rebuke or an actual threat, I may choose to post and interact with your PM or e-mail.  If you have an idea that cannot stand up to public interaction, it’s not that great an idea.  If you’re saying something that is unbiblical, teaching something that is unbiblical, or actually attacking the faith, I’m going to publically engage your ideas/teaching because scripture tells me to expose public error in the public sphere.  I’d say that Acts 18:27-28; 2 Timothy 4:1-5 and Titus 1:10-13 set precedent and give me some straightforward commands in this regard.

If you try to “light me up” in an e-mail or privately command me to shut up, I may post your e-mail for all to see (at my discretion).

4.  Be Cordial.

You don’t have to like me, and you definitely don’t have to agree with me, but you do have to try to post comments with a little civility and decorum.  No swearing, no insulting, no racism, etc.  If you need to be told how to avoid these sorts of things, you’ll be banned after a warning or two (depending on the infringement).

5.  Try to comment in a specific and orderly manner.

Don’t show up at a post about Islam and try luring me into a debate about eternal security, don’t write a single paragraph comment that has 1,000 words and 100 different points, and make specific criticisms and comments.  Verbal diarrhea is both annoying and not conducive to constructive interaction.

6.  Friends and Family are off limits.

Cheap shots will see you instantly removed from the comment board.

7.  Criticisms about “tone” mean you’re desperate.

You’re dealing with a text only document, written by a person you either don’t know or barely know.  This means that, no matter who you think you are or who you think I am, you don’t know me enough to read “tone” accurately into posts or comments.  You bring 80-90% of the “tone” you find in a blog post to that blog post, and people who cannot deal with arguments whine about “tone”.  Nobody likes a whiner.

8.  Grammar and Spelling Nazi’s annoy everyone.

Let’s face it.  This is a blog, not a published book.  Nobody here is a professional writer, and I’m under no delusion that I’m even a half decent writer.  People who comment here often throw down thoughts in a rush, are mediocre writers who confuse “your” and “you’re” or “who” and “whom”, and sometimes are commenting in a language that isn’t their first.  If you pick on someone’s spelling because as a response to something that they write, that suggests that you are a lousy thinker who covers up that fact with being annoying.  Your not fooling any one when you pick apart bad writing as some form of response to logical arguement.  Nobody likes a weiner.


Just so you know, if you want to emphasize something, feel free to use CAPITALS.  If you write EVERYTHING IN CAPITALS, you sound like you’re yelling and people that yell all the time are, as a general rule of thumb, the same kind of people who go to the symphony with the strange delusion that it is supposed to be an interactive evening (and loudly hum along with the orchestra during a piece of music).  You know the type?  Socially speaking, the V-8 is somehow firing on 5 cylinders?  That may not be you, but if you use a ton of CAPITALS, you appear to be a symphony hummer.

10.  Unrelated verbal diarrhea + an invite to your blog = I AM CRAZY.

Now I enjoy an *eccentric* commenter as much as the next guy, but it’s rather annoying when that person posts a comment that is 5 pages of rambling on a topic completely unrelated to the post on which they’re commenting, and then closes the comment off with an invite to their blog.  I’m not pleased with those people at all.  That’s worse than being a symphony hummer.  That’s basically going to the symphony with your laptop and watching YouTube with the volume cranked.  It’s both significantly rude and annoying and suggests that you’re missing a few cards from your deck (at least on a level of what’s socially appropriate).

In other words, #10 is a rather annoying pet peeve of don’t do it!  (If you do, you’ll get a warning and then I’ll take it on myself to edit the content of your posts to make them far more entertaining.  You’ve been warned).

11.  Any invite to your blog = I am obnoxious.

This is another pet peeve of mine.  I’ve done several hundred posts now and have established a reader base over a period of around a decade.  My reader base isn’t huge, but I write on stuff that’s of interest to me and I tend to write stuff that involves a lot of work (which limits my following since I don’t post as often as I’d like or on topics that are terribly popular, but I actually like it that way…far less comments to interact with!).  Still, I try to regularly write stuff that is interesting/edifying or biblically/spiritually helpful, and I don’t have a Twitter/Facebook account where I follow everyone and their dog so that they’ll follow me in return and inflate my “blog following” numbers.  There are enough folks out there who buy a fancy looking blog, write generic or “encouraging” garbage, and post links to their blog everywhere.  If people want to find you, they will find you if you’re worth finding.

So don’t be obnoxious.  Sign in under your WordPress account to post comments, or if you’re anonymous, link your blog in your name.  If you’re smart enough to actually post a comment worth reading, they’ll follow the link back to your blog and check it out.

So in summary, follow these two simple rules:

You man now load your weapons and commence firing!

42 thoughts on “Rules of Engagement…

  1. Some feedback after reading’ Rules of Engagement’

    Your ‘TONE’ gives me, the reader, the impression that there’s no actual invitation for engagement here or to have a conversation that flows in both directions. Your TONE implies that you value rules over the benefit of sharing varying perspectives that leads to learning.


    TONE: The attitude of an author, as opposed to a NARRATOR or PERSONA, toward her subject matter and/or audience. Tone is closely linked to MOOD, but tends to be associated more with *VOICE. The tone of Theodore Roethke’s poem My Papa’s Waltz–about a boy and his drunk father–for example, is sad, sentimental and IRONIC.

    Tone is revealing. Readers can perceive much from your tone. If you insist on simply telling people “Criticisms about “tone” mean you’re desperate.”-
    you reveal that you want ‘closed’ conversations (in which case you may as well just post sermons without giving the option to comment) and perhaps don’t like being challenged-which makes for a crappy and boring conversation.

    This brings me to – “Cheap shots will see you instantly removed from the comment board.”

    Much of your writing in this Blog has a condescending TONE to it, and is riddled with ‘cheap shots’ to readers. You would be better off adhering to the same rules you put forth to the audience as it would give you more credibility.

    *VOICE: Distinct from the terms PERSONA, NARRATOR and TONE, voice is associated with the basic vision of a writer, her general attitude toward the world. The poet Sylvia Plath’s voice, for example, might be called that of a victimized daughter, wife, and mother.

    • 1. Pick any topic and bring up any issue or belief. We can talk about anything. I’ll let you post whatever argument you want, and I’ll interact with your argument. I’ve always done that and will continue to do that. I’ve only edited and then removed one commenter from my blog, and that was for a clear and obvious violation of rules 2, 4, 5, and 6.

      I think I’m using the term “tone” in a different way than you’re meaning it. When I talk about “complaints about tone”, I’m talking about the common occurrence of people who dismiss arguments because though what you said is true, they somehow know that you said it in an unloving (or rude, “unchristian”, etc.) way, and are (by default) now wrong on a moral technicality even though your argument is sound and valid.

      People bring a lot of “tone” baggage to a text only discussion. That’s one of the reasons I don’t like to bring up certain topics (KJV Onlyism, Calvinism, etc.). Many people have had very heated debates about Calvinism and, no matter how you say things, only hear any disagreement with them as yelling because their main encounter with the idea came from someone who was horribly rude and obnoxious.

      I attempt to engage in dialogue, and dialogue that is anchored in the truth; the word of God. That means that some people will be speaking according to God’s word and others will not. Saying so doesn’t automatically mean that one has an “unloving tone”. Also, this means that people who make exegetical arguments can be twisting scripture or performing obvious eisegesis, and saying so does not automatically equate condescension or arrogance. If a person says “the Bible says X” and the Bible does not say x, the question is one of truth, not personal preference.

      2. I basically defined a cheap shot as a personal attack or an attack against one’s family/friends/church.

      If you can point me toward any cheap shot (of that nature) I’ve made, I will gladly edit/remove where needed and repent.

      3. Does your comment have a condescending tone to it? How can I know?

    • I am from Birmingham, Alabama and googled:
      Chris Hodges owns a lot of houses.
      You popped up and I read what you wrote.
      For starters, I do not go to his church. I think I am one of the last several thousand in a hundred mile radius.

      He lives in my gated golf course neighborhood and has a pool. And a house on number 1 hole.
      ( I am not envious. My husband and I have worked our rears off and our church gets plenty of money and that is one of the top priorities for our family. We are more than grateful)

      The story is someone gave it to him

      I went to the Shelby County Probabte website and put in his name. Boy, he owns 2 million in several homes in our county and I hear his team is building mega houses out in the boonies on acreage.

      People are so gullible. But I feel like I am sinning when I point out where he lives. Gated community! So no one sees it??!!

      I met the family that moved from Baton Rouge that runs the ARC. The church plants have to pay 5% forever to them.

  2. You’re my kinda’ guy. Inviting all legitimate dialogue with the confidence that God has provided the answers in His character and in His word.

    It is a constant reminder to me that such service always remain much more than simply “a right way of thinking”. For when it becomes a mechanical process, solely, there is the temptation to assume credit for the results of God’s sacrifice and for my knowledge of His word, myself.

    For me, it’s important that characteristics of love, humility and sincere concern are a prelude to any attempt to respond to a question or criticism. And that’s much harder to convey than the correct reference to scripture or it’s proper interpretation.

    May God continue to bless you in your service right where you’re at.


    • Thanks for the thoughts Garry!

      Well spoken on love, humility and concern. It’s often almost impossible to communicate that to someone when you disagree over an issue, for disagreement itself is often seen as being “unloving” and arrogant.

      Feel free to come back anytime and engage with in while we both engage the scriptures.

    • Garry,
      I agree with you. We need to develop the right tone and the right heart when communicating God’s message. MennoKnight, I like that what you say, it is “easy to be entreated” James. I hope to learn from you and the other fellow posters how to do this.

  3. I am Phil Jackson Jr. That’s not my real name but I’m the kind of guy who doesn’t use his mouth (or keyboard) for much beyond insulting people and repeating myself ad naseum, so it’s best that people don’t know who I am. Also, I don’t know how to positively discuss things that I disagree with, so I get angry and then do irrational things (like spamming a blog with repeated comments that don’t actually say anything). The comment I’ve previously written has been edited to this one by the blog administrator and, if I decide to actually interact or comment on the topic of a post, I’ll be welcome to come back on here and say whatever I want (including aggressive disagreement). I didn’t think the admin was serious when they warned me about my spamming, but now I’ve learned that they were.

  4. I am Phil Jackson Jr…no wait. Steven Plett… no wait. Richard Seiner. I am “Legion the troll” and my IP has now been banned. No more witty banter. No more comments.

  5. Pingback: Adrian Warnock buys the “Strange Fire” broken record… | Watch Your Life and Doctrine Closely...

  6. “I think I’m using the term “tone” in a different way than you’re meaning it. When I talk about “complaints about tone”, I’m talking about the common occurrence of people who dismiss arguments because though what you said is true, they somehow know that you said it in an unloving (or rude, “unchristian”, etc.) way, and are (by default) now wrong on a moral technicality even though your argument is sound and valid.”

    Oh Lord Jesus will you n I get along 😀

  7. I recently discovered your site and enjoy it greatly. You’ll no doubt discern from my name that you & I have a common starting point. I’m not a high level blogger, nor am I a blogger looking for some free clicks & traffic. But…I do post thoughts now & then and add this link in hopes you’d take a look and give a little feed back. God bless.

  8. Got your comments from a good brother & friend, John Chester. Great take on Dr. Brown’s nonsensical thoughts regarding Hinn. Short note: my son, former Navy SEAL (Team 3), was tabbed to work on Hinn’s security team until he was warned by the contact of Hinn’s bizarre & profligate private life. Side note: great resource to check out regarding Creation/Evolution is my bro. in law’s blog:

  9. You made me grin . . . more than once. Even chuckle out loud a couple of times. I completely enjoy your sense of humor! I landed on your blog after friend shared your post on the movie Noah via Facebook. I’m actually not much of a blog reader—at least in the follow-and-read-every-day sense. I have 5 kids and very active husband—I barely have time for the important stuff. Like fb. 😉 But I am a voracious reader, and I’ll read pretty much anything if it snags my interest. And that post did. Thank you for taking the time—and paying the money—to watch Noah and give such a thorough and well-thought-out review of it. Kudos.

    Now for the real reason I’m writing. (You knew this was coming, right?) I’m a freelance proofreader and copy editor. Yes, I read Rule #8. I even agree with it. But hear me out: You have intriguing—and valuable—insights to offer and the wit to make reading them not only less-than-painful, but fun. Why allow people the escape route of focusing on punctuation and spelling errors? Make them give full attention to what you’re actually saying. It’s human nature to “look for an out, any out” when people feel argued into a corner. Don’t give them one. Not an easy one, anyhow. Make them wrestle with the meat of your argument. “Outs” can’t be entirely mitigated; I get that. But they can be minimized, at least in the realm of grammar, punctuation, and spelling.

    Fair or unfair, right or wrong, merit is often judged based on presentation. So make the presentation stellar. It takes relatively little effort and offers a huge return on investment. At least to those, like me, who physically twitch when they see a period outside of a closing quotation mark. 🙂

    A fellow Believer with grammar-nazi tendencies—that I really, really try to contain,

    • Thanks so much Misty! It’s always good to find someone that appreciates my humor. I’m glad that the Noah review was helpful in any way!

      Also, I appreciate the encouragement to not have spelling/grammar errors. I do try to write with decent grammar and spelling but I’m also not the best grammarian in the world either. I simply don’t know certain things (or once did and have since forgot). I wish I could have perfect grammar and spelling, and I often edit posts 3-4 times for those things (though sometimes I toss up a first draft and edit later). Any ideas for how to get better at that all?

      I tossed up rule #8 because in blogging, there are certain types of “police” that are annoying to everyone: Grammar police think that grammar is all that matters. Theology police will disregard someone for what they deem a significant theological error (using the wrong theological term to describe an idea). Logic police will tear apart the minutiae of a logical argument in insignificant ways and claim a victory. Those are all annoying and I run into people who make fun of a spelling error as some sort of actual response to an argument. I try to spell goodly, but sometimes I make an errors. People who focus on tiny errors are annoying to everyone.

      That excuse being offered, I welcome any ideas on how to clean up my writing!

      Feel free to subscribe and pop back from time to time! There might be something else that you enjoy!

  10. I might just do that. 🙂 Meanwhile, if you ever find yourself in need of a good proofreader, give me a holler. I enjoy communication in all its forms and am passionate about communicating well—especially when it’s seeking to honor my Savior.

  11. Oops! Only part of your response showed up in my email. (First & last paragraphs only.) Now that I’m actually on your site, I see the whole thing. Give me a sec to catch up.

  12. Okay, now that I’m spamming your inbox . . . Your grammar is actually very good. No real worries there. Besides, there’s wiggle-room in blogging. People expect blogs to be informal, to use colloquialisms and slang—even made-up words—that would never pass muster with an editor. Punctuation is more important, because it allows people to follow the cadence of your speech. The reader can “hear” the writer through punctuation. Good punctuation isn’t even noticeable. The words are the ride; the commas, periods, etc. are simply the rails that move the reader forward on the line of the author’s thought. The booger is that punctuation rules change regularly. (The only reason I’m up-to-date on them—currently, anyway—is because of my line of work. And I have to look things up routinely!) You might invest in a copy of The Chicago Manual of Style—or, if it’s in the budget, hire someone to proofread for you. There’s really no substitute for getting fresh eyes on your material. I write too, so I hear ya on editing posts 3 to 4 times—and still finding stuff later! Best wishes as you continue to blog.

  13. I’m not going to “load any weapon and commence firing” as you suggest, since, seeing as you have watched ‘Noah’ that would have been what Tubal-Cain did. But before you read this, anyone, remember the Word of God : “test all things”. Or more important “Do not judge, lest you be judged.”
    So be careful not to judge. Anyone. Without exception.
    Far too many thoughts come from christians (little c is intentional) and on comments made about the film: ‘NOAH’ as uninformed, judgemental and lacking any desire to learn why the film was made and also why it stands as largely reliable in terms of being accurate. Yes, accurate. I could tell you here where you can find enough references to the items you criticised as being ‘unbiblical’ (The Essenes Church regards the work of Enoch as entirely Biblical and there are many scenic, visual and subject references in ‘Noah’ that are entirely based on Biblical works (e.g.: The Watchers helping build the ark is a known part of non-canonical writing, I referred to it earlier tonight).
    I could educate you on almost every point but I think you need to either decide to ‘leave and walk away’ or to stay and to study and to learn instead of lining up and throwing the first stone.
    By all means seek God. And please seek His Face. Pray. Consider and by all means make a choice but refrain from judgements. Especially for a film that has enabled many Christians to go out and share their Bible with men who don’t even know it. Think only on that. One man created a film that is giving you an opportunity to share you faith with others in peace. Not to judge. Think about how God is using this film for an opportunity. Use the opportunity wisely. Instead of being so small minded and judegemental.

    • Sure. You may wanna look at the follow up posts to the Noah review before edumacating me.

      I’m aware of the Essenes, non-canonical literature, and whatnot. Extra-biblical sources are just that: extra-biblical.

      And “do not judge, lest you be judged”?

      Seriously? Do you have any clue what Jesus was talking about in Matthew 7?

      Does your understanding mean we cannot judge anything ever, ever if God does? Beyond that, aren’t you violating your own rule by showing up here and calling me “narrow-minded” and “judgmental” and such? That’s pretty judging language partner.

      If you fall under condemnation by your own standards, that’s not a good sign about either you or your standards.

  14. When you start saying a man is demon controlled possesd YOU BETTER BE (full caps expletive deleted – admin) Demon knowing and smelling that dirty hell bound spirit and not just feeling slaty off the boat from the Gulf lie me when I saw all men as fat flesh on my landing from my Marine Crusade…

    You may not like floppy Christians but I did not see any evil done at that Brownsville meeting – though they did look stupid… kind of like David dancing – looked like a clown and his wife was shamed- you know what happened to her right…? not my threat – I hope you have a fine family and your wife gives you more children as you both please. But, try not to label something as (full caps expletive deleted – admin) Demon controlled just because it is uncomfortable to you (that was cool used some cusses without blame)

    • Well, cussing on here isn’t cool.

      I edited your post to remove the needless foul language. See point #4 on this exact post.

      Thanks for your passionate but irrelevant warning.

      Feel free in the future to comment about any article on any other article, just to add confusion to the mix. I honestly don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.

      Where did I say someone at Brownsville was demon possessed?

      Feel free to toss a comment or a challenge on the article where I said that.

      I don’t believe I ever have claimed to know if someone was demon possessed, but if I have, I’ll gladly revisit the article and make appropriate edits.

  15. Oh ahh I was refering to the Brownsville Charasmatic meeting and your siding with the old pastor John Macuther against the Jewish Christian one. I think it was authentic versus strange fire. In it you were saying or at least implying that they were not in touch with God but rather some Dammed spirit of unclean merits.

    I am sorry if I come off as mean but I think you should not judge what you can not see in the heart – you can judge words for truth and say laughing for God is strange- but I can imagine David was laughing and singing in a seemingly silly way when they brought the acr back from that guy who had the insta-God- roid cow farm with it.

    So on in that way – I would say you need to err on the side of no judgement or comment – rather than be like Macuther and say – well they seem strange to me I do not like it they seem filled with a Spirit that is not Godly but devilish….

    I hope it works out for you anyway – even if I am way wiser and fatter than you



  16. Rules of Engagement are reasonable enough.
    Was there any fine print making allowances for us over 55 ? No? 😀
    I’ll resepect your rules and make every effort use my noggin.

  17. I have been digging for a place to ask this question but cannot find it on your web-page. I also don’t need a public response but would like to hear your thoughts. My husband and I have grown up in the Mennonite Brethren Church and share your concerns with the conference and many of its churches and their teaching. We are thinking of sending our son to a Mennonite Brethren camp this summer but are having second thoughts. Should we approach the staff and ask what their stance is on certain issues (contemplative thought, extra-biblical revelation, etc.)? We are curious as to what your thoughts are on this matter.

    • Oh boy.

      Camp? I’m guessing that those issues will almost assuredly be issues that will have multiple answers among the staff (and maybe one of those answers will have a scintilla of biblically-informed thought behind it).

      I spent a few summers working at camp and the staff weren’t exactly “trained theologians”. They were often Christian kids who were maybe 18 or 19 and didn’t have much of a clue about anything.

      If you’re worried about theology in the churches, the camps are probably WAY worse.

      The good news is that those topics may not come up at camp. I’m guessing your kids will be too busy canoeing or participating in insane games to really pick up much in the way of doctrine. The shallowness of camp is also conveniently a great insulator against absorbing too much heresy. Even when some local heretic is spewing insanity in the chapel, most of the kids aren’t listening for a second. There’s too much other stuff fighting for their attention.

      Just talk with your kids when they get back and ask them to fill you in on all that they learned! If something fruity came into their heads, you’ll hopefully be able to make fruit salad fairly quick.

  18. Dear Lyndon, got to know your blog recently via “thecripplegate” series on modesty in the bible: Thank you very much for that indeed – recently I read some complementary deep thoughts from Watchman Nee about the Greek word and meaning of ‘kosmos’ and ‘kosmeo’ (and why the apostle John loves this word so much) which goes into the meaning of ‘perfect harmony and order/arrangement’. There is still much to think over…

    Well, I read your intro here and as far as I learned to know your style of writing, I really like it much better than those flattering souls who meet at “thecripplegate” – perhaps because we both are not living in the US and do not share certain bigoted mentality? A humorous or provocant tone does not implicate for me that someone is lacking brotherly love or even personal love for Christ. If we are grounded in scriptures, anybody should understand the meaning of how sb expresses himself in written – even if not in native language (like myself as a German, but I would like to train on my English then, too). But what really disgusts me is “spiritual hypocrisy” and flattering of men where there is just biblical bulls…. posted. I am anyway too old for theological crap like that (50 yrs), this “cripplegate” is real kindergarten (Hebrews 5,11-14) but not really a sharing of biblical wisdom among brethren.

    So, if you don’t mind me to engage at your blog, I would be happy to feel free to interact with you, as I have learned to know you as an upright soul whose heart burns eagerly for the Lord Jesus and whose brotherly love sometimes shouts out loud “DANGER!!!” to not let the unwise sheep run down into the abyss when other academic trained ‘christians’ tend to give a sniff at your shout because it seems to be too loud in their delicate ears.

    Looking forward to reading from you, brother! Be blessed in Christ Jesus, your sister Corinna from Germany

Share your thoughts

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s