Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Courageous Movie

I may be too late for a review on Courageous, but I can't let a movie like that come out without at least saying something; despite how late I may be.  All I have to say is that if you have not seen Courageous yet, please do!  I wish there were more movies like Courageous.  It made me cry and laugh (which is quite unusual for me when I watch movies!), and its powerful and passionate message is one our culture desperately needs. 

The acting was good; the aesthetics were good; the story was action-packed, dramatic, and intensely moving.  Courageous just felt like a "movie", and not the low-budget, amateur, stereotypical "Christian" film you might expect. 

It is amazing to see how Sherwood Pictures (the makers of Courageous) has improved exponentially with every film: beginning with Flywheel, then Facing the Giants, then Fireproof, and now Courageous.  The money they make with one film allows them to improve with the next.  We must support their films, so they can make their next ones even better!

To my surprise, some Christians have had some negative reviews on the film.  In response, I would say that perhaps Courageous isn't perfect, but please support the movie so Sherwood Pictures can continue to improve; and maybe their next film will be perfect!  Considering how far they've come, this movie is impressive.

As I understand it, some of these negative reviews said that parts of Courageous were not realistic, in regards to how the police force behaves, or how crime is dealt with.  Personally I wouldn't have known if it was realistic or not, because I don't know anything about the police force; so, for me, it was perfectly believable.  But their point stands; if you are part of the police force, maybe the movie would seem unbelievable to you.  I don't know.

To me, however, the movie seemed perfect.  All in all, it felt like a "real movie".

Conclusion:  I give Courageous 5 out of 5 stars.  If you want to see more quality Christian films made, watch Courageous and support Sherwood Pictures!

View the official trailer below:

Sunday, December 11, 2011

The Truth About Global Warming

This post is from a speech given on December 8, 2011.


Rising sea levels! Savage storms! Starvation! Disease, extinction, death! The world is going to end soon, and it's all our fault. Or is it? 

We have been taught that if we don't stop global warming, the world will quickly burn to a crisp, and it will become uninhabitable for the billions of people and animals that call it home. But is global warming really all that our political and scientific authorities portray it as?

The book Climatism! by Steve Goreham states: "..the scientific evidence for man-made global warming is thin and… global warming has become a political agenda driven by fear." While the propaganda for global warming is all around us, little-circulated evidence shows that global warming is not what authorities are telling us it is.

Today, we're going to look at three things: First, evidence that CO2 does not cause global warming; second, evidence for a naturally-caused climate cycle; and third, evidence that authorities portray global warming deceptively in order to grab power.

To begin, let's look at the evidence that CO2, or carbon dioxide, does not cause global warming. CO2 is allegedly one of the largest "greenhouse" gases; a gas emitted by humans that is causing global warming. 

First, CO2 has risen over the past decade, but the earth has not. As stated in a article by Jason Mick, published last month: "… researchers are struggling to explain why warming has stalled in the last decade even as levels of carbon dioxide -- supposedly the most important greenhouse gas have [risen]."

Second, according to Unstoppable Global Warming by environmental scientists S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery, the current warming has been ongoing since 1850, long before human-generated CO2 was entering the atmosphere.

Third, CO2 levels do not explain the many warming/cooling cycles in earth's previous history, when humans were not emitting CO2 (which I'll get to in a second.)

Fourth -- and this one is important -- in August 2009, MIT Professor Richard Lindzen published a paper proving that CO2's affect on global temperatures is less than 1/6th of what the UN says it is. His research showed that CO2 is escaping into space, like it always has before levels began rising, and it is not causing the greenhouse affect. His work was peer-reviewed, and no one argued with it.

Fifth, evidence shows that CO2 has been a lagging indicator, not a cause, of global warming during earth's past warming periods, which I'll explain momentarily.

Now that we've seen some evidence that CO2 is not the cause of global warming, let's explore some evidence that global warming is part of a natural climate cycle.

According to the book Unstoppable Global Warming, new yet convincing evidence indicates that the earth has been experiencing a warming/cooling cycle for thousands of years. Evidence for this cycle has been retrieved from ice cores, tree rings, seabed sediments, stalagmites from caves, coral reefs, and many other sources. It appears that this cycle repeats itself about every 1500 years. From 600 BC to the present, there have been at least six major warming/cooling periods, including the modern "global warming" (see the image below). 

Slide from my speech's PowerPoint. (Data from Unstoppable Global Warming.)

What causes these climate cycles? In a word, the sun. 

In 2001, Gerard Bond and a team from Columbia University published a report in the journal Scientist. This report revealed a solar cycle that corresponds to earth's climate cycle. In other words, as the sun's power waxes and wanes, the earth's temperature warms and cools. This link between earth's climate and the sun has actually been known for over four centuries, so this is not new science; it is just that scientists finally know how this link works.

Now, you're hearing me say all this -- that CO2 does not cause global warming, that it's part of a natural cycle -- and you're maybe wondering: But, what about the UN's climate change body, AKA the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)? Didn't they make some official report, saying there was a consensus worldwide among scientists that human-caused global warming was a fact? The answer is yes; but this leads us into our third point: that authorities portray global warming deceptively in order to gain power

First, there was false science in IPCC's report. Now, listen to this: According to Unstoppable Global Warming, IPCC's 1996 report was edited to include the statement about a "human fingerprint" on global warming. The original scientific summary said specifically, in five different statements, that no such "human fingerprint" had been found, but these statements were removed. 

Why? The author of this document publicly admitted making these changes; he was under pressure from U.S. government officials to do so.

Second, other evidence exists that fraud and deception exists in the climate science community. For example, in the infamous "Climategate" email leaks, in 2009 and again just two weeks ago, thousands of emails showed climate scientists manipulating data and covering up information. In one such email, scientist Tom Wigley said to a colleague:

"Mike, The Figure you sent is very deceptive… there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model results by individual authors and by IPCC." 
Here's another interesting quote:

"Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest. Phil, hopefully we can find time to discuss these further if necessary. I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run." - Peter Thorne of the UK Met Office
(Read more email quotes here, and download a torrent of the emails here.)

Now, please note: there is much, much more I could say, in regards to evidence for deception among the climate science community, but I don't have time or room here. I recommend looking it up yourself; you may be surprised what you find. Here are a few resources to get you started:

What disturbs me is how much political power, on a national and international scale, could be gained in the name of "fighting global warming". Politicians are asking for power to regulate this and control that. It looks like a good cause on the surface, absolutely, but when we see evidence that the science might be skewed, doesn't it make you just a little suspicious about why they are so adamant about getting this power? We need to be careful and check our politicians' sources, and never let them grab power on the base of a lie.

In the words of Al Gore: 

 "I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is."


Today, we have looked at three things. First, CO2 does not cause global warming. Second, global warming is part of a natural, sun-caused climate cycle. And third, there are authorities who portray global warming deceptively in order to gain power. 

As you can see, global warming is not what authorities are telling us it is. So, next time you see a policymaker asking for you to vote or support something to give him or her more power to "fight global warming", be careful. Check to see if his or her motives are pure. Because while it's good to be green, beware of when green becomes greed.

Slide from my speech's PowerPoint

Works cited

Cotter, Dianna.  "Carbon Dioxide irrelevant in climate debate says MIT Scientist."  18 August 2009.  Web.  3 December 2011.

"Global Warming 101."  27 January 2011.  Web.  30 November 2011. 

Goreham, Steve.  Climatism!: Science, Common Sense, and the 21st Century's Hottest Topic.  New Lenox:  New Lenox Books, 2010.  Print.

Horner, Christopher C.  Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud, and Deception to Keep You Misinformed.  Washington, DC:  Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2008.  Print.

"Is there a connection between the ozone hole and global warming?"  
13 July 2009.  Web.  30 November 2011.

Mick, Jason.  "Climatologists Trade Tips on Destroying Evidence, Evangelizing Warming."  25 November 2011.  Web.  30 November 2011.

Singer, S. Fred and Dennis T. Avery.  Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years.  Lanham:  Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. 2007.  Print.

"Unstoppable Solar Cycles."  13 March 2008.  Web.  1 December 2011

More recommended reading/viewing

Multi-Million Dollar Christian Film - Needs Your Prayers!

© In Jesus' Name Productions, from

I am thrilled beyond words about this upcoming Christian film, "THE MESSIAH". With a budget of $100 million, and the professionalism of Hollywood, it could become the next big name in Christian films, with a potential to impact global audiences like no Christian film has done in years. This could go beyond "The Passion of the Christ."

I copied and pasted the following from an email newsletter. (You can get newsletters about "THE MESSIAH" here.)


For the past 3 1/2 years, a team of Christian filmmakers in Hollywood have been working diligently on developing plans for a feature film that has the potential to be the most spiritually significant movie ever made. The film is called The Messiah and it picks up where The Passion left off (planned release Christmas 2013 or Easter 2014). It naturally and powerfully communicates the Gospel message of Jesus Christ -- from the Cross, through the Resurrection, to Pentecost.

Budgeted at an estimated $100 million USD, with state-of-the-art special effects, including being shot in 3D, The Messiah will be an epic film that will wow audiences (by comparison The Passion's budget was $30 million USD). And for the first time in history, the born-again experience, what it means to have a personal relationship with God, will be shown on screen. This means the Gospel message will be communicated in a way that everyone can understand regardless of education or language, and because it will be a mainstream blockbuster movie, it truly will reach everywhere in the world.

The Messiah is in the final stages of funding. A number of investors are currently reviewing our plans and making their final decision on whether to fund the movie.

We are calling on Christians throughout the world to pray for The Messiah and this unprecedented opportunity to leverage a state-of-the-art feature film to take the Gospel to the ends of the Earth.


  • God would move the hearts of the potential investors to fund The Messiah.
  • God would lead the team involved to make the highest quality, God-honoring, God-glorifying, feature film ever made.
  • God would leverage The Messiah once it is released to take the Gospel message to the ends of the Earth and 100’s of millions of people would be saved, and would trigger a worldwide Revival.
  • God would raise up more than a million people to pray regularly for The Messiah.

  • To learn more, please see The Messiah movie page at We also encourage you to read the quotes from Christian leaders and prominent Hollywood filmmakers who have read the script and have been involved with guiding the project.
    "And the gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come." (Matthew 24:14)

    ©2011 In Jesus' Name Productions. All Rights Reserved.
    In Jesus' Name Productions Is A Non-Profit, 501(c)(3) Organization.

    Tuesday, November 22, 2011

    Lessons Learned on Set

    A month ago, I had the opportunity to work on the film set for "Writers' Block". While this post may be a little belated, I wanted to share a few random, interesting things about filmmaking I learned while on set, for those who are curious for a few "insider" nuggets. 

    Lesson #1: On a low-budget, short-schedule production (like "Writers' Block", shot in two weeks in under $20,000), it takes about one hour to film every minute of the movie (or, every page of the script). On the other hand, on a big-budget production with many millions of dollars, filmmakers will film about half a page a day; a page is pushing it. Can you imagine that? That means that for every thirty to sixty seconds you watch on a movie, the filmmakers spent hours and hours filming it! This allows the wealthy filmmaker to make every shot "perfect". 

    Lesson #2: Low-budget movie trick: You can make a room look like it's nighttime in the middle of the day... with a trash bag. Tape a black trash bag over the window, throw in a light that resembles moonlight, and there you have it: a convincing nighttime effect.

    Lesson #3: The difference between normal makeup and movie makeup: Movie makeup is thicker, ideally easy to apply on set, and usually has a slight yellowish tint. (The yellow tint has a better appearance on camera.)

    Lesson #4: Filmmakers almost have their own language. It seems like they have an acronym or nickname for everything. For example:
    • MOS: Stands for "Minus Optical Sound". Meaning: If a shot is filmed "MOS", that means they're not recording sound for this shot. (Implications: The crew is allowed to breath for a few seconds, and the craft services back stage can quickly wash a few dishes and chop a few turkey wraps until the next shot begins, preceded by: "QUIET ON THE SET!!!")
    • Talent: Actors and actresses are referred to as "talent". I'm not exactly sure why, but the term "talent" is used more often than "cast" or "actor/actress".
    • BTS: Stands for "behind the scenes". I'm not sure if I ever heard someone on set say "behind the scenes"; it was always "BTS". It seems everything becomes an acronym in film culture; "1st AD", "2nd AD", "PA", "PO", and many more. It takes a while to learn what all the acronyms mean. (The four above are, respectively: First Assistant Director, Second Assistant Director, Production Assistant, and Production Office.)

    Lesson #5: I found it surprising how many "technical" things go into every shot. What I mean is that the director has so much more to be concerned about than simply what the audience will see; such as, the way the actors speak a line or perform an action, or the lighting, or the framing. So much of the discussions had before every shot involve things that the audience will never see. 

    For an example, the script supervisor is communicating with the sound guy, and with the camera assistant doing slates, to make sure they're all on the same page with which scene, shot, and take they're on. "This is twenty-two charlie, take two?"  "No, this is twenty-two charlie, take three." The script supervisor writes this down, and sound guy puts this in his records, and the camera assistant writes it on the slate. None of these things effect the audience, but they are vital during post-production (editing, etc.).

    There are many other important technical things that the crew needs to discuss; is video village working? How should the sound/light equipment be best arranged, to allow room for important crew to stand by and watch? How's the temperature of the room; is the equipment getting too hot? All these things are very important and time-consuming; and yet, most of their results never impact the finished movie.

    Lesson #6: Last but not least: When on a set, always bring clothespins for weapons. You'll find out why soon enough. :-)

    Sunday, October 30, 2011

    Should Christians Be "Intolerant"?

    Just a quick thought I wanted to share. I was writing about this in a comment (on my post from two years ago about Puritans and The Scarlet Letter), and I decided to share it here with everyone as well.

    "Tolerance" is a word that is used a lot in conversations about religion. "The Puritans were intolerant of other beliefs." "Christians need to be more tolerant." "We need a religion that calls for global tolerance." 

    So, what is tolerance?

    According to
    tol·er·ance [tol-er-uhns]
    1. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry.
    2. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward opinions and practices that differ from one's own. 
    3. interest in and concern for ideas, opinions, practices, etc., foreign to one's own; a liberal, undogmatic viewpoint.
    So, what does it mean to be "tolerant" of another religion or belief? As Christians, we need to be very careful with that word. Being respectful or loving toward another person is one thing; but treating that other person's religion or belief system as if it is just as true or correct as Christianity is another thing.
    John 14:6
    "Jesus answered, 'I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.' "
    As Christians, we shouldn't "tolerate" sin and untruths, in a manner of speaking, but we still should love the people who are sinning, and who are living outside of the truth. In other words, being "intolerant" to sin isn't wrong... it's "intolerance" without love that's wrong. 

    The sin isn't okay, but, alluding to what some Christians have done in the past, we're not going to hang or burn the other person because of their sin. It is because we love the other person so much that we might gently, lovingly persuade them to leave their sin, for their own good. 

    There is a big difference between "intolerance" with judgement (The Scarlet Letter, for an example), and a gentle "intolerance" that exists because we love someone! God never tolerates sin in the Bible, but he always does everything he can to convince people to come out of their sin, so they don't have to be judged. 

    Here are a few verses to ponder:

    Jeremiah 31:3
    "The LORD appeared to us in the past, saying: 'I have loved you with an everlasting love; I have drawn you with loving-kindness.' "

    Ezekial 18:23,32
    " 'Do I have any pleasure at all that the wicked should die?' says the Lord GOD, 'and not that he should turn from his ways and live?... For I have no pleasure in the death of one who dies,' says the Lord GOD. 'Therefore turn and live!' "

    Ezekial 33:11
    "Say to them: 'As I live,' says the Lord GOD, 'I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn, turn from your evil ways! For why should you die, O house of Israel?' "

    Lamentations 3:31-36
    "For the Lord will not cast off forever. Though He causes grief, yet He will show compassion according to the multitude of His mercies. For He does not afflict willingly, nor grieve the children of men. To crush under one's feet all the prisoners of the earth, to turn aside the justice due a man before the face of the Most High, or subvert a man in his cause-- the Lord does not approve."

    Also, read Hosea 11, especially verse 8, which shows the heart of God when he has to bring judgment on someone: 

    "How can I give you up, Ephraim? How can I hand you over, Israel? How can I make you like Admah? How can I set you like Zeboiim? My heart churns within Me; My sympathy is stirred."

    Sunday, October 9, 2011

    Writers' Block: Behind the Scenes, Week 1

    Hello, everyone! Here are some pictures that I've taken during week 1 on the set of Writers' Block (working title). Writers' Block is a comedic, 1940's period piece, produced by Advent Film Group, that teaches a timeless truth: write for God's glory, not your own.

    Now, I apologize that a lot of these pictures are not the best. It's because I did not want to distract people with my flashing camera, so I usually took pictures without the flash. The result is not always the best lighting on my part. However, the actual lighting on their cameras, which you'll see in the finished movie, looks beautiful!

    This is the old firehouse where the movie is being filmed. (The movie actually takes place in a film studio in the 1940s.)

    These two windows off to the right are for the rooms where they've been filming. Notice the black plastic bags over one window, used to block out the sunlight!

    A typewriter - one of the props used in the movie
    Down this hallway are the two rooms where most of the filming takes place.

    The actors go on set, while the director watches on video village.

    Jason Burkey plays "Chip Leninskovich".
    Director Peter Forbes talks with the two lead actors, Jeff Rose as "Stu Harvey" and Jason Burkey as "Chip Leninskovich".
    The director gives "directions" to the actors

    On set, in "Stu's office"

    Setting up between scenes

    Jason ("Chip") and Jeff ("Stu")

    Learn more about Writers' Block by visiting the official movie website:

    Tuesday, September 27, 2011

    Film Updates

    Last month, I shared with you that I began an internship at a small film company.  At the time, I didn't specify which film company it was.  But now... I think it's time I let you know. 
    The film company is Advent Film Group, the Christian company I mentioned over two years ago that produced Come What May.  They have since produced two more movies, Hero and Alone Yet Not Alone (co-produced with Mission City Productions); both of which are in post-production.

    According to their website, Advent Film Group "is an independent film production and distribution group established to create excellent Christian films by raising up excellent Christian filmmakers".  Their mission is to raise up the next generation of Christian filmmakers, through their intensive training workshops, internship opportunities, Associates Program, and other forms of training.

    To learn more about Advent Film Group, go to their website by clicking on the image below:

    Now... I have some exciting news!  Next week, Advent Film Group is beginning production for a a new movie called Writers' Block (working title).  Writers' Block is a comedic, 1940's period piece, produced under a low budget, as a part of Advent Film Group's "Associates Program".  Watch the video below to learn how the Associates Program works:

    As part of my internship for Advent Film Group, I'm going to be able to work on the film set for Writers' Block.  This will be my first experience on a "real" film set, and I am very excited!


    On a slightly different topic, I want to point out that I've added a new feature to my blog that will allow you to follow it by email.  You'll find the gadget on the sidebar.  Just enter in your email address, and Google will send updates right to your email every time I post!  (Seems convenient to me!)  Note: I will not get your email address.  This service is handled completely by Google.  I just want to clarify that.  It's a pretty cool little gadget, though, isn't it? :-)

    Sunday, September 11, 2011

    Book Review: The Bravehearted Gospel

    This book is radical.

    I like radical.

    This is the kind of book that makes you uncomfortable, that says things that are not normally said, that opposes our culture, that dives into those difficult areas we normally never explore, and brings a truth we so desperately need to hear.


    The title of my blog is "Pursuing the Truth". This book, The Bravehearted Gospel by Eric Ludy, is one of the few books I've ever read that captures the essence of that idea so perfectly and entirely. It is one of the few books I've ever read that is simply bursting with the concept I think of when I say... "Pursuing the Truth." 

    Truth. This book is just oozing with it.

    This book is about a new way -- or rather, an old way -- of looking at Christianity and our relationship with Jesus. It is "new" in the sense that it is very different, in certain respects, from the church at large today. It is "old" in the sense that it is what the basis of Christianity is all about. This is what Christianity used to be like... but something has been lost.

    For all who are craving something more in the Church... for all who are concerned about the modern state of Christianity... for all who desire a Christianity that "actually works"... for all who are hungering for more meatiness, meaning, power, and adventure in their walk with Jesus... this book is for you!

    I would encourage you to watch the short film below. This very powerful short film embodies much of the essence of this book (the voice you hear is the author, Eric Ludy). If this film stirs you at all... the book, The Bravehearted Gospel, will stir you even more.

    As always, here are a few of my favorite quotes from the book, to give you even more of an idea of what this book is made of. :-)
    "Most people today attempt to make a sales pitch for the gospel as if it were sweet plums and fairy dust, when it more accurately should be cast as an adventure full of blood, death, insurrection, trouble, persecution, and certain difficulty, with a shocking and ultra-dramatic final chapter in which the good guys win. In my opinion, this adventure dimension should be our sales pitch."
    "Christianity is about a kingdom, a glory, a power, a love, a grace, a righteousness, an eternal triumph, and yielding to the all-powerful King who is bringing it all about."
    "All I care about is this Someone [Jesus] who has intoxicated my soul with effusive passion. I love Him so much it hurts with the most beautiful hurt."
    "The gospel life is an adventure, plain and simple."
    "The bravehearted path... [is] a violent and effusive love story between a Bridegroom and His bride, in which the Bridegroom radically spends His life to rescue His bride and then the bride, in turn, radically spends her life for the fame and renown of her Groom."
    "The stuff of the Bravehearted Gospel is the stuff of frontline soldiers. It's the stuff of martyrs and mighty men."
    "The Bravehearted Gospel is not just another idea; it's historic Christianity. It's the way it has always been and must always continue to be."
     Interested yet? Read more about The Bravehearted Gospel, or buy it on Amazon.


    Another Word...

    Now, I have a few comments I want to make on two of the concepts in the book. But, I would encourage you to read the book first, and then come back and read my thoughts... because you won't be able to amply appreciate these thoughts out of context.

    Thought #1 

    In chapter 10, Ludy talks about Christians trying to be "cool". I think I agree with him in this chapter, but we need to be careful; I don't think there's anything wrong with wearing cool clothes, unless their immodest. It's the heart that's important. I don't think there's anything wrong with "being cool" in general, unless it means doing things that are immoral. (You can still wear torn jeans and be 100% on fire, in love with Jesus.) 

    Cool is fine -- unless you're changing what Christianity is in order to be cool. And I think that's his point.

    Thought #2

    In the section of the book entitled "The Canon-mind", Ludy talks about having a "canon-minded" view of scripture, versus an "open-minded" view. (By the way, this is an awesome chapter -- I highly recommend it. You can read part of it here.) Once again, I think Ludy is right, but we need to be careful. :-) 

    Open-mindedness isn't necessarily a bad thing, as I see it. When he talks about open-mindedness, he's talking about being open and receiving all forms of faith and all perspectives, and treating them on the same level as GOD's truth, as if they're all "just as right". As he says on page 183, "It's all-accepting, tolerant of all thoughts, opinions, ideas, and religions." Of course, that is wrong. Ludy is right on that.

    But open-mindedness doesn't always have to mean that. I'm not talking about unquestioning acceptance of all other beliefs; I'm talking about avoiding the "Matthew Brady" stereotype. Brady, in the movie "Inherit the Wind", was a falsely portrayed Christian who believed in Christianity and Creation "just because". He had no reasons or evidence for his beliefs; he believed it with unquestioning certainty simply because "the Bible said so", because that's just what he believed. (Whereas Eric Ludy presents a very sound reason for trusting the Bible in this chapter! Again, I really recommend it.)

    Brady had never read or looked at the other side -- not once -- and he was proud of it. He was unreasonable, and irritatingly unpersuadable -- not because he was firmly grounded, convinced, and confident in the truth -- but simply because that's what he had chosen to believe, and that was that. He was "close-minded". (Read more about my thoughts on Inherit the Wind and Matthew Brady.) 

    When Christians have this mindset, it is very hard for nonbelievers to find us believable. "And why do you believe that? Oh, because the Bible says so..."

    The Bible is the source of all truth. But if it is, (which it is), it should stand up against all other false beliefs and worldviews. An open-minded Christian, as I see it, knows that the Bible is 100% true, the source of all things true and right... but will look at other views anyway, for the sake of arguing with and persuading nonbelievers. 

    "And, why do you believe that?"

    "Well, let me show you why I know the Bible is true, and why all these things are true..."

    This way, we have an answer. (1 Peter 3:15-16)

    An "open-minded" Christian, as I see it, goes into the world of foreign, false beliefs, armed with the knowledge and assurance that the Bible, that Christianity, is the only correct way... not because they are seeking other alternatives with an "adulterous"-like heart, but because they are looking to prove that God is right -- for the sake of persuading others, and for a strengthened faith in their own heart. I guess this is a biased way of searching out truth, but I believe it is right... it is biased with the truth.


    Well, if you're still reading this article, what are you waiting for?! Go to Eric Ludy's site right now and check out his book, The Bravehearted Gospel. (Then, of course, buy it... either on Ludy's site or on Amazon.) You will never be the same!