<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;The Shack&#8221; is &#8220;The Message&#8221; outhouse.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html</link>
	<description>Don Koenig gives his wordviews on world and Church issues that often relate to Bible prophecy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 18:02:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Don</title>
		<link>http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4090</link>
		<dc:creator>Don</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 12:48:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4090</guid>
		<description>I have no false illusions about how people today view the Church. How would you expect unsaved people and people who reject God&#039;s truth to view the Church? The true Church of God was never popular in the world and the day it becomes popular (before the return of Christ) it will no longer be the Church

You are also confusing the Church with the institutional churches like Catholicism and liberal Protestantism.  If people see through all the phoniness in these that is good. Then they may be opened to hearing the true gospel. There is no one harder to reach with the true gospel than people bound in false religion.

The main purpose of the Church is to teach the gospel of salvation by grace through faith to the whole world. It is high time that &quot;Christian&quot; authors got with God&#039;s program instead of trying to adapt to please the world with their own ear tickling false doctrines.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have no false illusions about how people today view the Church. How would you expect unsaved people and people who reject God&#8217;s truth to view the Church? The true Church of God was never popular in the world and the day it becomes popular (before the return of Christ) it will no longer be the Church</p>
<p>You are also confusing the Church with the institutional churches like Catholicism and liberal Protestantism.  If people see through all the phoniness in these that is good. Then they may be opened to hearing the true gospel. There is no one harder to reach with the true gospel than people bound in false religion.</p>
<p>The main purpose of the Church is to teach the gospel of salvation by grace through faith to the whole world. It is high time that &#8220;Christian&#8221; authors got with God&#8217;s program instead of trying to adapt to please the world with their own ear tickling false doctrines.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clayton</title>
		<link>http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4089</link>
		<dc:creator>Clayton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 06:01:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4089</guid>
		<description>There&#039;s a good book you might want to read to get a view of how people today see the church.  It&#039;s a book called UnChristian, by David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons.  It&#039;s backed by the Barna Institute, which is known for having a fairly accurate view of our culture.  I&#039;d suggest reading that to get a better view of what people today think of the Church, and then by logical progression, how they view the God of said Church.

But then again, perhaps you think that Barna is leading people to Hell in a handbasket as well?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s a good book you might want to read to get a view of how people today see the church.  It&#8217;s a book called UnChristian, by David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons.  It&#8217;s backed by the Barna Institute, which is known for having a fairly accurate view of our culture.  I&#8217;d suggest reading that to get a better view of what people today think of the Church, and then by logical progression, how they view the God of said Church.</p>
<p>But then again, perhaps you think that Barna is leading people to Hell in a handbasket as well?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don</title>
		<link>http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4088</link>
		<dc:creator>Don</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 04:07:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4088</guid>
		<description>You might start with the Bible and the Christian classics like Pilgrims Progress.

I really am not buying your argument that all these postmodern people feel that they are being attacked by the church, by God etc. I think it is a false argument used to justify promoting a heretical book. How and where are Christians attacking postmoderns in our churches? If anything the church is compromising the gospel and their own worship services to appease them.

Postmoderns are not coming to church or God because nobody is getting through to them that they are lost sinners that must repent of their sins and be saved by the blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The Shack certainly is not teaching that. 

Postmoderns want to believe that they can define their own truth and the The Shack appeals because it also does the same..

Postmoderns reject the absolute truths of the Bible and that is why they cannot be reached with the truth. No amount of watering down the gospel to get to their level of  relativism is going to get them to accept what is required of them for their salvation. 

Telling them lies about the nature of God might appeal to postmoderns looking for a form of Universalism or religious pluralism but it does not put them on the path to salvation.

The Shack may connect with biblical illiterates but it is a very subtle deceptive connection.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You might start with the Bible and the Christian classics like Pilgrims Progress.</p>
<p>I really am not buying your argument that all these postmodern people feel that they are being attacked by the church, by God etc. I think it is a false argument used to justify promoting a heretical book. How and where are Christians attacking postmoderns in our churches? If anything the church is compromising the gospel and their own worship services to appease them.</p>
<p>Postmoderns are not coming to church or God because nobody is getting through to them that they are lost sinners that must repent of their sins and be saved by the blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The Shack certainly is not teaching that. </p>
<p>Postmoderns want to believe that they can define their own truth and the The Shack appeals because it also does the same..</p>
<p>Postmoderns reject the absolute truths of the Bible and that is why they cannot be reached with the truth. No amount of watering down the gospel to get to their level of  relativism is going to get them to accept what is required of them for their salvation. </p>
<p>Telling them lies about the nature of God might appeal to postmoderns looking for a form of Universalism or religious pluralism but it does not put them on the path to salvation.</p>
<p>The Shack may connect with biblical illiterates but it is a very subtle deceptive connection.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clayton</title>
		<link>http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4086</link>
		<dc:creator>Clayton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 01:15:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4086</guid>
		<description>So what are the &quot;sound Christian books&quot; that would capture the attention of someone who has felt attacked by the church, by God, who has felt the stinging pain of betrayal, of guilt, and the pain that Mack deals with?

And again, what I was saying is that this book can be a really good addition to conversations that are happening between a believer and another person.  the conversations are more important than the book itself, but the book can breach the walls and opposition that people have built up due to hurts and pain that have built up over the years.  I would not think that the book by itself is sufficient, because there are potential issues, but why not have it be a complimentary resource?

Unless of course you have other suggestions that are better?  And thinking in terms of someone who might be hostile to the Gospel, because while JI Packer or Dallas Willard, or Lee Strobel or others might be solid theologically, I don&#039;t see them really connecting with your average 20-30ish adult in the ways that The Shack can.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So what are the &#8220;sound Christian books&#8221; that would capture the attention of someone who has felt attacked by the church, by God, who has felt the stinging pain of betrayal, of guilt, and the pain that Mack deals with?</p>
<p>And again, what I was saying is that this book can be a really good addition to conversations that are happening between a believer and another person.  the conversations are more important than the book itself, but the book can breach the walls and opposition that people have built up due to hurts and pain that have built up over the years.  I would not think that the book by itself is sufficient, because there are potential issues, but why not have it be a complimentary resource?</p>
<p>Unless of course you have other suggestions that are better?  And thinking in terms of someone who might be hostile to the Gospel, because while JI Packer or Dallas Willard, or Lee Strobel or others might be solid theologically, I don&#8217;t see them really connecting with your average 20-30ish adult in the ways that The Shack can.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don</title>
		<link>http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4084</link>
		<dc:creator>Don</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 23:51:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4084</guid>
		<description>You simply are not getting it, the book is heretical for the reasons pointed out by Dr. Geisler. There are plenty of sound Christian books to recommend to people where people can get the correct view of God. We do not need to recommend books that are really a different gospel to try to win over a postmodern generation because they have chosen to reject the absolute truths about God taught in the Bible. You cannot spin the truth about God and Christ and make true converts to Christ. What would Paul really say about preaching a different gospel then the one given?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You simply are not getting it, the book is heretical for the reasons pointed out by Dr. Geisler. There are plenty of sound Christian books to recommend to people where people can get the correct view of God. We do not need to recommend books that are really a different gospel to try to win over a postmodern generation because they have chosen to reject the absolute truths about God taught in the Bible. You cannot spin the truth about God and Christ and make true converts to Christ. What would Paul really say about preaching a different gospel then the one given?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clayton</title>
		<link>http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4081</link>
		<dc:creator>Clayton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:38:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4081</guid>
		<description>And to read this within the context of a conversation can allow believers to correct some of the theological points that are misleading.  I have found that to be valuable, because yes, there are people who read this without having a grounded theological framework to process the book, and it can be precarious, but were there perhaps people who said the same things about &quot;The Chronicles of Narnia?&quot;  I mean, we don&#039;t want people thinking that Jesus is a Lion do we?  Because according to 1 Peter 5, I thought the devil is the Lion...

Oh how confused I am...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And to read this within the context of a conversation can allow believers to correct some of the theological points that are misleading.  I have found that to be valuable, because yes, there are people who read this without having a grounded theological framework to process the book, and it can be precarious, but were there perhaps people who said the same things about &#8220;The Chronicles of Narnia?&#8221;  I mean, we don&#8217;t want people thinking that Jesus is a Lion do we?  Because according to 1 Peter 5, I thought the devil is the Lion&#8230;</p>
<p>Oh how confused I am&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clayton</title>
		<link>http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4080</link>
		<dc:creator>Clayton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:33:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4080</guid>
		<description>I can definitely agree with you about some theological problems with this book, and that is why i don&#039;t think that you can use this as a textbook.  God often chooses to reveal himself to people through conversations and relationships, and I know from having read this book with people; some have been more willing to enter into a dialogue with me about who God is.  Here is where I believe that the book shines, in that people who are opposed to the wrathful God that they grew up hearing about in Sunday school get to see that God is love (1 John) and that he enters into our pain to bring healing.

Don&#039;t hear me wrong, I do believe that God is holy, and that his wrath must be satisfied; but don&#039;t recall ever having met a single person who is attracted by that view of God.  Perhaps this will justify you calling me a heretic, but It is the love and mercy of God that draws people to repentance, not the fire and brimstone.

So is it possible God is using this book to express his love to people who have been hurt by the Church&#039;s repeated attempts to convert them by force?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can definitely agree with you about some theological problems with this book, and that is why i don&#8217;t think that you can use this as a textbook.  God often chooses to reveal himself to people through conversations and relationships, and I know from having read this book with people; some have been more willing to enter into a dialogue with me about who God is.  Here is where I believe that the book shines, in that people who are opposed to the wrathful God that they grew up hearing about in Sunday school get to see that God is love (1 John) and that he enters into our pain to bring healing.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t hear me wrong, I do believe that God is holy, and that his wrath must be satisfied; but don&#8217;t recall ever having met a single person who is attracted by that view of God.  Perhaps this will justify you calling me a heretic, but It is the love and mercy of God that draws people to repentance, not the fire and brimstone.</p>
<p>So is it possible God is using this book to express his love to people who have been hurt by the Church&#8217;s repeated attempts to convert them by force?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don</title>
		<link>http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4076</link>
		<dc:creator>Don</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:55:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4076</guid>
		<description>Changing delivery to reach a postmodern generation does not include inserting heresy. Paul did not become a heretic in order to give the gospel. 

Christians that write Christian fiction about the nature of the Father Son and Holy Spirit ought to have Orthodox Theology.

&lt;strong&gt;I think Dr. Norman Geisler points out the problems with The Shack better than anyone so I will let him point out the problems in The Shack. I also include his conclusion.
&lt;/strong&gt;


&lt;blockquote&gt;Problem One: A Rejection of Traditional Christianity 
Problem Two: Experience Trumps Revelation 
Problem Three: The Rejection of Sola Scriptura
Problem Four: An Unbiblical View of the Nature and Triunity of God
Problem Five: An Unbiblical View of Punishing Sin
Problem Six: A False View of the Incarnation 
Problem Seven: A Wrong View of the Way of Salvation
Problem Eight: A Heretical View of the Father Suffering
Problem Nine: A Denial of Hierarchy in the Godhead
Problem Ten: Ignoring the Crucial Role of the Church in Edifying Believers
Problem Eleven: An Inclusivistic View of Who Will be Saved
Problem Twelve: A Wrong View of Faith and Reason
Problem Thirteen: It Eliminates Knowledge of God
Problem Fourteen: It Entails Divine Deception  

Conclusion
          The Shack may do well for many in engaging the current culture, but not without compromising Christian truth. The book may be psychologically helpful to many who read it, but it is doctrinally harmful to all who are exposed to it. It has a false understanding of God, the Trinity, the person and work of Christ, the nature of man, the institution of the family and marriage, and the nature of the Gospel. For those not trained in orthodox Christian doctrine, this book is very dangerous. It promises good news for the suffering but undermines the only Good News (the Gospel) about Christ suffering for us.  In the final analysis it is only truth that is truly liberating.  Jesus said, “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free” (John 8:32).  A lie may make one feel better, but only until he discovers the truth.  This book falls short on many important Christian doctrines. It promises to transform people’s lives, but it lacks the transforming power of the Word of God (Heb. 4:12) and the community of believers (Heb. 10:25). In the final analysis, this book is not a Pilgrim’s Progress, but doctrinally speaking The Shack is more of a Pilgrim’s Regress.&quot;

*Dr. Geisler has a BA, MA, ThM, and PhD (in philosophy). He is an author of some 70 books and has taught philosophy and ethics at the College and Graduate level for fifty years. He is currently Distinguished Professor of Apologetics and Theology at Veritas Evangelical Seminary (www.VeritasSeminary.com). His articles and materials are available at www.normgeisler.com.  
&lt;/blockquote&gt;


&lt;strong&gt;For the complete explanation of each of the problems that Dr Geisler points out about The Shack read the following article.

http://www.normangeisler.net/theshack.html&lt;/strong&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Changing delivery to reach a postmodern generation does not include inserting heresy. Paul did not become a heretic in order to give the gospel. </p>
<p>Christians that write Christian fiction about the nature of the Father Son and Holy Spirit ought to have Orthodox Theology.</p>
<p><strong>I think Dr. Norman Geisler points out the problems with The Shack better than anyone so I will let him point out the problems in The Shack. I also include his conclusion.<br />
</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>Problem One: A Rejection of Traditional Christianity<br />
Problem Two: Experience Trumps Revelation<br />
Problem Three: The Rejection of Sola Scriptura<br />
Problem Four: An Unbiblical View of the Nature and Triunity of God<br />
Problem Five: An Unbiblical View of Punishing Sin<br />
Problem Six: A False View of the Incarnation<br />
Problem Seven: A Wrong View of the Way of Salvation<br />
Problem Eight: A Heretical View of the Father Suffering<br />
Problem Nine: A Denial of Hierarchy in the Godhead<br />
Problem Ten: Ignoring the Crucial Role of the Church in Edifying Believers<br />
Problem Eleven: An Inclusivistic View of Who Will be Saved<br />
Problem Twelve: A Wrong View of Faith and Reason<br />
Problem Thirteen: It Eliminates Knowledge of God<br />
Problem Fourteen: It Entails Divine Deception  </p>
<p>Conclusion<br />
          The Shack may do well for many in engaging the current culture, but not without compromising Christian truth. The book may be psychologically helpful to many who read it, but it is doctrinally harmful to all who are exposed to it. It has a false understanding of God, the Trinity, the person and work of Christ, the nature of man, the institution of the family and marriage, and the nature of the Gospel. For those not trained in orthodox Christian doctrine, this book is very dangerous. It promises good news for the suffering but undermines the only Good News (the Gospel) about Christ suffering for us.  In the final analysis it is only truth that is truly liberating.  Jesus said, “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free” (John 8:32).  A lie may make one feel better, but only until he discovers the truth.  This book falls short on many important Christian doctrines. It promises to transform people’s lives, but it lacks the transforming power of the Word of God (Heb. 4:12) and the community of believers (Heb. 10:25). In the final analysis, this book is not a Pilgrim’s Progress, but doctrinally speaking The Shack is more of a Pilgrim’s Regress.&#8221;</p>
<p>*Dr. Geisler has a BA, MA, ThM, and PhD (in philosophy). He is an author of some 70 books and has taught philosophy and ethics at the College and Graduate level for fifty years. He is currently Distinguished Professor of Apologetics and Theology at Veritas Evangelical Seminary (www.VeritasSeminary.com). His articles and materials are available at <a href="http://www.normgeisler.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.normgeisler.com</a>.
</p></blockquote>
<p><strong>For the complete explanation of each of the problems that Dr Geisler points out about The Shack read the following article.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.normangeisler.net/theshack.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.normangeisler.net/theshack.html</a></strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clayton</title>
		<link>http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4074</link>
		<dc:creator>Clayton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 06:16:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-4074</guid>
		<description>&quot;True Christianity can not change it is founded on unchangeable truths. The foundations have been laid and they are given in the New Testament.&quot;

While i believe that what you say here is absolutely true, I think what Whitney was saying is that while the content of the Gospel does not ever change, the method in which we deliver it can and must change and evolve in order to relate to the culture in which it exists.  Consider sharing the truth of the Gospel with a group of indigenous people...you must rework the timeless truths into a format that can relate to the audience.

Even Paul said that he has become all things to all people in order to save people (1 Cor 9:19-23).  Or take the Gospels, Luke wrote to a Gentile audience while Matthew likely wrote to a Jewish audience.  The content remains the same, while the method f delivery remains fluid.  Young is just taking the timeless truths of the perfect love which exists in the trinity and shows it to the audience in a way that they can connect with.

Also, it might be wise to remember that it is not a theological or apologetical textbook.  It is a fictional story which is drawn from theological truths, much like the Left Behind series or many other books that you&#039;d find in your local Christian bookstore.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;True Christianity can not change it is founded on unchangeable truths. The foundations have been laid and they are given in the New Testament.&#8221;</p>
<p>While i believe that what you say here is absolutely true, I think what Whitney was saying is that while the content of the Gospel does not ever change, the method in which we deliver it can and must change and evolve in order to relate to the culture in which it exists.  Consider sharing the truth of the Gospel with a group of indigenous people&#8230;you must rework the timeless truths into a format that can relate to the audience.</p>
<p>Even Paul said that he has become all things to all people in order to save people (1 Cor 9:19-23).  Or take the Gospels, Luke wrote to a Gentile audience while Matthew likely wrote to a Jewish audience.  The content remains the same, while the method f delivery remains fluid.  Young is just taking the timeless truths of the perfect love which exists in the trinity and shows it to the audience in a way that they can connect with.</p>
<p>Also, it might be wise to remember that it is not a theological or apologetical textbook.  It is a fictional story which is drawn from theological truths, much like the Left Behind series or many other books that you&#8217;d find in your local Christian bookstore.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary</title>
		<link>http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-3782</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2009 15:12:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/the-shack-is-the-message-outhouse.html#comment-3782</guid>
		<description>One of the problems of our modern secular world is the massive intrusion or the storyteller. We have been conditioned to allow ourselves to enjoy the parts of a story we like or believe and to suspend our disbelief regarding anything we don&#039;t seriously consider truth. This is what happened to me as I read The Shack. It was billed as a true story and i read it as such. I kept telling myself &quot;This could happen.&quot; But I started reading lies well told. At first i suspended disbelief. Pretty soon I realized I&#039;d been had. At that point I had to keep reminding myself that this is just a clever novel. In the end I find that I&#039;ve been duped by my own willingness to submit Godly wisdom and discipline to my enjoyment of the American storytelling culture; namely movies. Sorry, Lord.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the problems of our modern secular world is the massive intrusion or the storyteller. We have been conditioned to allow ourselves to enjoy the parts of a story we like or believe and to suspend our disbelief regarding anything we don&#8217;t seriously consider truth. This is what happened to me as I read The Shack. It was billed as a true story and i read it as such. I kept telling myself &#8220;This could happen.&#8221; But I started reading lies well told. At first i suspended disbelief. Pretty soon I realized I&#8217;d been had. At that point I had to keep reminding myself that this is just a clever novel. In the end I find that I&#8217;ve been duped by my own willingness to submit Godly wisdom and discipline to my enjoyment of the American storytelling culture; namely movies. Sorry, Lord.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
