Ray Comfort’s Response to Pastor Jesse Johnson’s Critique on The Ten Commandments

« The Attributes of God

MP3s Lectures on Old Princeton: Selection from Greenville Seminary 2012 Conference »

Ray Comfort’s Response to Pastor Jesse Johnson’s Critique on The Ten Commandments

April 10, 2012 by EvangelZ

Ten Commandments

About these ads

Posted in The Way of the Master | Tagged Ten Commandments | 35 Comments

35 Responses

on April 10, 2012 at 11:14 pm | Reply G-knee

EvagelZ, you must be SlimJim’s long lost twin.
- on April 10, 2012 at 11:33 pm | Reply EvangelZ
  
  Hello G-knee, it’s good to see your response. Ha ha, SlimJim is a faithful brother.
  
  Also, I hope to write a paper on the relationship of the Mosiac Law to believers and unbelievers. The paper should cover the Decalogue too. I hope to finish it before the end of May, this year.
  
  It would be great if you could pray for me concerning this future endeavor.
- on April 11, 2012 at 2:04 am | Reply SLIMJIM
  
  Wow, what makes you think that G to the Knee???
on April 11, 2012 at 2:07 am | Reply SLIMJIM

Thanks for posting this!
on April 11, 2012 at 4:15 am | Reply Born4Battle

Having listened to Jesse Johnson’s presentation and now read Ray Comfort’s response I think a couple of comments might be relevant.

Johnson was speaking to the issue of what he saw as a form of “cookie cutter evangelism”. Comfort states on opening that he is only defending the ‘nature and purpose of the Ten Commandments’. There was no challenge to the nature and purpose of the law, only ‘one size fits all’ evangelism. I’m not sure Comfort is completely honest when he says he is not defending what does seem to be a ‘one size fits all’ model of evangelism.

Comfort rightly says that God gave the law ‘written in stone’ to the Jews and the ‘work of the law’ ‘written on their hearts’ to the rest of humanity (I would also say that it is written on ALL men’s hearts). What is the ‘work of the law’? It is a schoolmaster to bring a person to the knowledge of ‘sin’. Therefore, I would say that the issue of sin is where we must get to in evangelism, and not necessarily the ‘Big 10′ AS the Big 10.

I’ve found that it is not difficult in a conversational setting to get to the issue of sin in the world in general and specifically in the human heart. The conversation might, or might not, get to the 10 Commandments specifically. It does not need to for a person to be knowledgeable concerning the issue of sin and the need to repent of it, at least to the God-opened heart (think Lydia).

When I look at all of the evangelistic encounters in the NT, the issue of sin is always the issue, and the issue of the 10 Commandments specifically in a couple of encounters with Jews. It seems that the NT model for evangelism is more about getting to what is ‘written on men’s hearts’ than to that which is ‘written in stone’.

Comfort says in his response:

“Jesse also took issue with my belief that sinners are going to hell for sinning, rather than for rejecting Jesus.”

Jesus said:

“Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.” – John 3:18

There are other issues that could be discussed, but I offer these few as food for thought.
- on April 11, 2012 at 10:25 am | Reply SLIMJIM
  
  Hey brother,
  This comment recieves the most hearty amen from me: “Therefore, I would say that the issue of sin is where we must get to in evangelism, and not necessarily the ‘Big 10′ AS the Big 10.” I see the use of the Law in evangelism does not necessarily mean the 10 Commandments as being used just because it’s well, the 10 Commandments. Other laws could also be used too.
  I have to admit my concern from a light following of the back-and-forth on this issue in the comment section at Cripple Gate makes me have another concern that some (not Jesse, but others) would say the Way of the Master should not be in the evangelist’s aresenal. I don’t think I would go that far, how about you dear brother?
  - on April 11, 2012 at 10:51 am Born4Battle
    
    I agree with you. The use of the 10 Commandments is the perfect tool when speaking to someone’s relationship with God is sentered on them (those specifically under the Law).
on April 11, 2012 at 5:55 am | Reply mennoknight

Wow. What a response. I’m not suprised that Comfort defends himself as he does…far more quotation from old theologians than dealing with the exegetical issues.

I personally know of several churches that have been destroyed by the WOTM people who get cultish about “if you’re not using the WOTM, you’re not REALLY evangelizing”. The WOTM fanatics are constant problems up here in Canada, and they all have the same misconceptions about the law and gospel. I’m wondering if Ray Comfort knows that people who read his stuff come to consistent misunderstandings and I wonder if he ever wonders why?

I happen to agree with Jesse on the whole issue, and I also have tried to read Ray Comfort to understand him, but I see frightening use of scripture with that fellow. He’s a great guy, a faithful evangelist, and a real catalyst in restoring evangelism to the church…but he’s not a theologian or an exegete (or an apologist…what did you presuppers think about his “debate” with the Rational Response Squad? Personally, I cried.). I think we should take the good from his methods (i.e. the “good person test”), and leave some of the disconnected scriptural validation.
- on April 11, 2012 at 11:08 am | Reply SLIMJIM
  
  Dear brotherMennoknight, it has been a long time you grace us with your presence on Veritas Domain!
  Good observation that Comfort’s response has “far more quotation from old theologians than dealing with the exegetical issues.” Just curious, do you think an exegetical case for the use of the Law in evangelism (I’m not referring to just the 10 commandments, or more accurately, nine) is a lost cause?
  I’ve been talking with some people as of late, and I have to say that I’m rather stunned that there are people who cultishly follow WOTM to such an extent that it’s divisive in the church; While it’s too antedotal, I’ve always felt tha the opposite has been ore true, of people opposing the use of WOTM (maybe they might say I’m one who is divisive!). Concerning the misconception of grace and law that’s going on with those in Canda, what is the misconception exactly?
  Concerning the Rational Responders’ episode, you are right that as a presuppositionalist, I don’t think that was the highlight of Ray Comfort’s ministry. I never finished watching it not because I didn’t try but because Ray Comfort’s method of apologetics (whom also has an anti-apologetics tendency at times it would seem to me) highlight all my concern of a worst case scenario of naive pop evidentialism.
  - on April 11, 2012 at 11:31 am EvangelZ
    
    Dear Brother Mennoknight,
    
    Although I have watched some of Ray’s debates concerning atheism, I was not a fan of some of his apologetical methods. I wished he would of used presuppositionalism, when he debated that couple at ABC who were Atheist.
    
    Also, I do wonder what is the misconception regarding the Law and the Gospel that is going on in Canada that is causing division.
    
    In regards to the exegetical case, do you think one cannot at all build a case for the Ten Commandments relationship to the unbeliever? I agree and I wished that Ray would of used more exegetical insights regarding this issue. But what are your thoughts brother?
  - on April 12, 2012 at 11:09 pm mennoknight
    
    Slim – Honestly brother, this becomes a delicate and surly exegetical issue. One could use God’s moral law in evangelism, which is found in his character and written on the consciences of men, AND is expressed in his moral law given to Israel, in evangelism. The thing is that it’s hard to make an exegetical case that the Gentile nations were judged by Israel’s law. The Gentiles aren’t condemned becasue they broke the 10 commandments. Sodom and Gomorrah were justly destroyed but they weren’t destroyed because they violated 1 of the 10 commandments; the 10 commandments were 500+ years away.
    
    I applaud the WOTM people for getting people focused more on attempting to do “biblical” evangelism, but I cannot tow the line that the law = the 10 commandments and ONLY the 10 commandments.
    
    That’s basically a large portion of the issue at hand.
    
    The misconceptions of the problematic WOTM people are some variations of thus:
    
    1. If you don’t start an evangelistic encounter with by convicting people with the law, you’re NOT doing “biblical” evangelism.
    
    2. “Biblical” evangelism is essentially determined by the methodology.
    
    Two Ways to live = not biblical evangelism.
    The Stranger = not biblical evangelism.
    Just walk across the room = not biblical evangelism.
    Grace evangelism = close, but not biblical evangelism
    Any method on earth other than WOTM = not biblical evangelism.
    \WOTM and WOTM alone = biblical evangelism
    
    3. The law = the 10 commandments and the 10 commandments = the law. EVERYTIME a biblical author uses the term “law”, it’s shorthand for “the 10 commandments”.
    
    4. Anyone who heard and believed the gospel through some other method needs to hear the WOTM method “just to be sure”.
    
    As for the cultish nature of WOTM, I have a friend who had WOTM fanatics (called “wommers” up here) in a church and tried to run the pastor out of the church because he didn’t exclusively promote WOTM as the “official” methodology of their church evangelism. The WOTM fanatics turned absolutely vitriolic and wrote letters the church conference officials, spread total slander against their pastor, and eventually sent the pastor a letter that essentially condemned him to hell.
    
    This doesn’t suggest that I, or other ministry friends, hate WOTM. We understand that fanatics don’t represent the norm, but one starts to wonder what’s up with the WOTM when the fanatics all come to the same misconceptions after studying WOTM materials. Jesse had dozens of pastors, from dozens cities in Canada and the US, who experienced similar, if not almost identical, problems with WOTM people in their church. I’ve seen it myself and experienced some of it firsthand.
  - on April 13, 2012 at 1:55 am EvangelZ
    
    Hello Brother Mennoknight,
    
    I completely understand by what you mean that this issue is delicate, which is why I am hoping to write a paper on this topic for class before this semester is over. I plan to cover some exegetical issues in order to help shed some light on it.
    
    Also, I think we would all agree that the antique Gentile nations and individuals who lived during the Old Testament times that did not have a written revelation from the Lord, possessed a threshold sense of the difference between right and wrong (called “conscience; Rom. 2:14-15”). This can be traced back to the Garden of Eden.
    
    But just for clarification sake, since the Decalogue is a summarization of God’s moral content of His laws, and since the “eternal” moral elements in the Decalogue, as Pastor MacArthur mentioned, in his response to Ray, reflects the unchanging character of God, do you believe it is universally applicable to sinful Gentiles? In other words, do you believe unbelieving Gentiles are under its curse and condemnation because Jesus and Paul used it when dealing with sinners? What are your thoughts brother?
  - on April 13, 2012 at 2:05 am EvangelZ
    
    I think the WOTM guys who appear to be too radical in Canada do not represent the norm of what WOTM is. In fact Tony Miano addressed the issue of causing division in a church regarding evangelism in his sermon that he preached in the East Coast. Here is the link: http://crossencounters.blogspot.com/2012/04/evangelists-responsibility-to-local.html. Take care brother.
  - on April 12, 2012 at 11:44 pm SLIMJIM
    
    Wow Mennoknight,
    Sounds like a lot is going on up there in Canada. It seems we’re on the same page.
on April 11, 2012 at 6:37 am | Reply Born4Battle

Brannon House interviews Jesse Johnson at this link:

http://www.worldviewweekend.com/worldview-radio/play.php?id=showsFlat-21034

I also agree with Jesse Johnsonl I hate ‘cookie cutter’ evangelism in all of it’s forms, and there are many. I tend to be dogmatic about getting to the ‘sin’ issue, no matter how I need to get there. In today’s culture, just to get there requires using the ‘back door’. It might be talking about all the ‘bad stuff’ in the world and asking the question “What do you think is the problem?”. It’s taking it to what is written on the hearts of all men.
- on April 11, 2012 at 11:16 am | Reply EvangelZ
  
  Hey brother, I do agree with Jesse Johnson that there is no such thing as a one-size fits all method for evangelism. I believe there are many ways to get into the issue of “sin” by not only getting into the Ten Commandments. But “some” responders (not Pastor Jesse Johnson) in Cripplegate will be very dogmatic about this and say you should never use the Ten Commandments because you have God’s laws written in man’s heart. What do you think brother?
  
  But no where in Scripture, from my understanding, gives a prohibition against using the Decalogue because the Law of God is written in man’s heart. I am only bringing this up because some will say this. What do you think brother?
  - on April 11, 2012 at 11:28 am SLIMJIM
    
    Concerning the one size fit all, it’s true…even holding on to the position of using the Law in evangelism, there is more way of bringing the Law to convict sinners, than just the WOTM “script”…such as asking them to name any commandments found in the Bible and going from there, or asking them if they fulfill the two greatest commandments and then proceed from there to show that the two greatest commandments illustrate that there is no way we can ever get “extra-credit” to go to heaven and how hard it is be self-righteous before God, etc.
- on April 11, 2012 at 11:29 am | Reply SLIMJIM
  
  Oh, thanks for the link by the way, I’ll have to get around to listen to it.
  - on April 11, 2012 at 3:02 pm Born4Battle
    
    It was a good interview. COncerning ‘OSFA’ evangelism, WOTM is not the only example. I can think of others that have been propular over the years (a few decades), One thing that has never changed is the matter of sin being the ‘main thing’.
    
    BTW, there are some good discussions going on in here!
- on April 11, 2012 at 8:13 pm | Reply EvangelZ
  
  Thank you Born4Battle, I will check out the audio once I get an opportunity. Grace.
on April 13, 2012 at 10:55 pm | Reply itsadiel

Hello brethren. This has been a fascinating exchange for me. I agree with Jesse also. Is it OK to use the Ten Commandments to help bring the knowledge of sin to the person? Yes, and I do it often actually, but not exclusively. I just think that when we do use the TC we shouldn’t tell the people that they will be judged by the them lest they mistakenly assume that working on Saturday is one of God’s charges against them. I think this is what it comes down to:the eternal transcendent moral law of God is not restricted to just the Ten Commandments. God’s moral law includes includes everything and anything the Scripture condemns the Gentiles for, such as being ungrateful and unforgiving, and excludes anything the Scripture does not condemn the Gentiles for, such as working on Saturday. Honestly, what has trouble me most about this exchange has been the hyper sensitive and ultra defensive reaction that Living Waters has responded with. It *almost* seems like the WOTM method has become an idol. Anyone who criticizes it is seen as a persecutor who probably doesn’t evangelize and if he does, he surely doesn’t do it biblically. Yet if the WOTM method is THE ONLY biblical method then men like Paul Washer do not evangelize biblically. When you ask them about this they remain silent, or they block you from commenting on their posts. Brothers, how did Noah preach righteousness? Did he walk people the good person test? Or did he confront sin? The issue is sin, we need to confront sin. We can do that by pressing God’s greatest commandments on the person (love God and love your neighbor), or by speaking about the depravity of the human heart, or by pressing Jesus’ “whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me” sayings, or explaining what it means that in Adam all die, or by using the Ten Commandments. What matters is that we confront sin and then proclaim the Savior. Grace and peace brethren.
- on April 13, 2012 at 11:43 pm | Reply SLIMJIM
  
  Brother,
  “e issue is sin, we need to confront sin. We can do that by pressing God’s greatest commandments on the person (love God and love your neighbor), or by speaking about the depravity of the human heart, or by pressing Jesus’ “whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me” sayings, or explaining what it means that in Adam all die, or by using the Ten Commandments. What matters is that we confront sin and then proclaim the Savior.”
  I agree with you; for my own personal evangelism, I’ve always thought the two greatest commandments was the nuclear option, used in the case of those who think they could be all self-righteous and can earn “extra-credit” to wash away their own sins; I do think that all of Jesus’ instance of citing the two greatest commandments were evangelistic usage, and it’s not necessarily the 10 commandments only that we use (which is really nine, minus the sabbath, at least in my theology).
  - on April 14, 2012 at 12:33 am itsadiel
    
    Yeah, the two greatest commandments are good because they press not only the judicial aspect of our problem, we’re guilty of transgressing God’s law, but also the relational aspect, we were created to participate in a loving relationship with our Creator which we have wickedly rebelled against. But yeah brother, I think ideally we want to avoid cookie cutter one size fits all scripted “ask this, then say this, if they say this you say that” approaches. In my opinion nothing beats a good understanding and grasp of the Scripture and sensitivity to the leading of the Holy Spirit. When I disciple new believers in evangelism my main focus to is to teach them sound biblical doctrine. I show HBKS and a few WOTM witnessing videos, just so they get the principle of law to the proud and grace to the humble. But I stop short of giving them the impression that the WOTM good person test is THE WAY of evangelizing. I emphasize truth – Christ and who He is, what He has done, the attributes of God, the sin and depravity of man, the impending judgment, Christ’s atonement satisfying God’s wrath and risen from the dead, repentance and faith, regeneration – and then encourage them to share that truth.
  - on April 14, 2012 at 10:16 am EvangelZ
    
    Hello Itsadiel, thank you for your gracious reply towards the WOTM. And yes, I agree with you, the fulcrum of the matter in this discussion so far is exposing sin.
    
    We could expose sin by introducing to the unregenerate sinner, the two greatest commandments, which is a summarization of the Decalogue (Matt. 22:37-40), the Ten Commandments (except the Sabbath; cf. Col. 2:16), which also reflects the eternal and universal character of God’s moral law, the other moral laws in the NT, and other verses that helps bring about the exposure of lawlessness. The greatest sin of course is rejecting Christ as Lord and Savior (Jn 8:24; cf. Rom. 10:9).
    
    In light of all these lists, some will also ask for clarification, “can I use passages such as Mark 7:20-23, 1 Cor. 6:9-10, etc.? Just for the sake of interest or a point of clarification, I think those passages such as Mark 7:20-23 and 1 Cor. 6:9-10, which are not apodictic laws, are great and can definitely be implemented in evangelism because it shows that those who belong in the roll call of the damned are Hell-bound.
    
    But if someone ask me, “why unbelievers are Hell-bound or what is the standard of God when it comes to defining sin or what gives it reality? then I think using moral apodictic laws such as the Decalogue (Exodus 20) and the two greatest commandments (Matthew 22:37-40), are effective because it reveals sin in a transparent manner (1 Cor. 15:56). Not only is it effective because Jesus (Matt. 5) and Paul (1 Timothy 1:8-10) used it when confronting sin, but because the use of the written revelation of God’s moral apodictic laws, tends to light up the consciences of unregenerate unbelievers who have the work of the Law written in their hearts (though they suppress it).
    
    Thank you for responding and visiting our blog brother. Blessings to you and your ministry. Our prayers are with you.
  - on April 14, 2012 at 10:18 pm SLIMJIM
    
    Z,
    “Just for the sake of interest or a point of clarification, I think those passages such as Mark 7:20-23 and 1 Cor. 6:9-10, which are not apodictic laws, are great and can definitely be implemented in evangelism because it shows that those who belong in the roll call of the damned are Hell-bound.”
    
    Those are good lists to go through with the lost in evangelism to see as you put it, if they are on “the roll call of the damned” and whether or not they are hell bound.
on April 15, 2012 at 5:41 am | Reply itsadiel

I have a question I’d like to get everyone’s thoughts on.

Jesus said that all the Law and the Prophets “depends” (or hangs) on the greatest two commandments. Does this not mean that the greatest two commandments are more than merely a summary of the the TC but the very foundation of everything, of which the TC are an application? Right?

The TC were an application of the two greatest commandments which are written on the heart of every man. Most of the application is universal obviously (except the sign of the Mosaic Covenant, the Sabbath command). To love the Lord with all you’re heart and your neighbor as yourself under the Mosaic Covenant would demonstrate itself on the fulfillment of all of its demands including the dietary restrictions and observance of the festivals etc. But as a Gentile it would demonstrate itself as simply loving God perfectly and doing into others as you would have them do unto you ie loving them perfectly.

Also, Paul said that the law was not made for the righteous but for lawbreakers. What about Adam and Eve before the Fall? They weren’t yet Lawbreakers so what was the work of the Law written on their hearts originally? Again I think it was the two greatest commands on which the TC hang and of which the TC are a sort Israel specific post fall application.

Please share your thoughts brethren. I’m just trying to sort these things out.

Adiel
- on April 15, 2012 at 7:08 am | Reply Born4Battle
  
  Good questions. I’ve always seen the two given by Christ (and Deut 6:4 & Lev 19:18) as a sort overarching statement of the Decalogue, with half of the 10 being vertical in nature concerning our relationship with God half horizontal in nature concerning with temporal matters and relationships with our ‘neighbors’. I’m not sure the term ‘application’ is the best term, but there definitely is an aspect of application here, as I see it. My most recent significant thought concerning the 10 and the 2 is that I can retire at night thinking I have not violated some of the 10, but I can say the same about the 2. Both are ‘law’ and I fail completely with the short list, which is a summary of the 10.
  
  Either set of commandments only have a chance of fulfillment if I am IN Christ. Although I will never see that fulfillment in this life, but praise Him, who is conforming me more and more to the image of Christ as time passes this side of eternity!
  
  Thoughts of a regular guy not in seminary.
- on April 15, 2012 at 9:51 am | Reply EvangelZ
  
  Brother Itsadiel,
  
  Thank you for your response. I will be going to church today. We will try to get back to you concerning this matter at our earliest convenience. Those are good questions.
  - on April 15, 2012 at 10:06 pm EvangelZ
    
    Hello Itsadiel,
    
    I have not forgotten about you. This question will require more explanation and it is not a verse that is to be taken lightly. I hope to get back to you on this to provide more insights regarding the word “fulfill” and the implications of what it entails for us in evangelism. I hope to do that once I get some things done for school.
    
    But as of now, here is my short response to alleviate some of your thoughts. In regards to your question you said, “Jesus said that all the Law and the Prophets “depends” (or hangs) on the greatest two commandments. Does this not mean that the greatest two commandments are more than merely a summary of the the TC but the very foundation of everything, of which the TC are an application? Right?”
    
    Although Matthew 22:37-40 (cf. Dt 6:4-5; the shema; Lv 19:18) has been said to be a summarization of the Decalogue, I think it could also be referring to other laws and writings of the OT prophets too. In Matthew 22, the Jewish people and the leaders that were addressed were commanded by Christ to love God with all of their being. They were to obey everything that the Law and the Prophets in the OT said (see v. 40 as the qualifier).
    
    Not to sound redundant, but just for the sake of clarification, whenever the NT uses the term law and prophets together, that is a reference to the whole of the OT book. Moreover, when you see synonymns such as law, law of God, law and prophets, Scriptures, or the Word of God, it usually designates the entirety of the OT. The only way it does not is when the context indicates a more restricted interpretation. For example, 1 Timothy 1:8-10, in light of its context, seems to give more of a narrow interpretation. I think you could make a case that it is referring to some of the commandments in the Decalogue.
    
    To get to the main point of your statement, it appears that the two great commandments that were addressed to the people of the Torah were to obey everything that the Law and the Prophets said. As a result, I believe that Matthew 5:17-18 is referring to the whole of the OT entirely. It is not only referring to the Decalogue or the two great commandments in Matthew 22:37-40.
    
    Luke 16:16-17 states, “The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since that time the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. 17“But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail.” In other words, the law and the prophets continued until John (John was an OT prophet). In this context, Jesus is the fulfillment of everything in the OT up until that time of John.
    
    I will get back to you on this statement and question:
    
    “Also, Paul said that the law was not made for the righteous but for lawbreakers. What about Adam and Eve before the Fall? They weren’t yet Lawbreakers so what was the work of the Law written on their hearts originally? Again I think it was the two greatest commands on which the TC hang and of which the TC are a sort Israel specific post fall application.”
  - on April 16, 2012 at 6:00 am itsadiel
    
    Actually my very first blog was about this very thing, how Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law and Prophets. I would definitely be very interested in hearing you expound not only on my question but also specifically on that topic. Maybe that can be a whole new post (so that it doesn’t get buried in these comments). God bless!
  - on April 16, 2012 at 7:51 pm EvangelZ
    
    Hey Adiel, thanks. I was planning to do a research paper that will cover this topic for class. I hope it will answer your question (s) once I am done. Keep me in prayer.
  - on April 17, 2012 at 4:24 pm Adiel Corchado
    
    Here is sermon that I recently heard on Matthew 5:17-20 by Charles Leiter that I think is very interesting. I’m not sure if you’re familiar with him. http://72.26.207.59/sermon_u002/lakeroad/audio/119818145_15087.mp3
  - on April 17, 2012 at 6:45 pm EvangelZ
    
    Thanks brother. I will check it out. Maybe I could use it for my research paper.
  - on April 18, 2012 at 3:25 am Born4Battle
    
    I downloaded Charles Leiter’s teaching and listened to it during my early morning workout. Excellent teaching concerning how Christ fulfilled the law. Presented in such a manner that even a caveman can understand it. It’s a keeper.
on December 7, 2012 at 5:01 pm | Reply Veritas Domain Milestone: Half a Million Hit Mark « The Domain for Truth

[...] Ray Comfort’s Response to Pastor Jesse Johnson’s Critique on The Ten Commandments [...]

Comments RSS

	Janez on Some more May 2013 Van Tillian…
	SLIMJIM on Some more May 2013 Van Tillian…
	SLIMJIM on Some more May 2013 Van Tillian…
	SLIMJIM on Some more May 2013 Van Tillian…
	Justin on Some more May 2013 Van Tillian…

The Domain for Truth

Ray Comfort’s Response to Pastor Jesse Johnson’s Critique on The Ten Commandments

35 Responses

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Apologetic Links

Blogroll

FEEDJIT

Greek Resources

Logic Links

Ministry Links

Philosophy Links

Sitemeter

Uncategorized

WTS bookstore

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Top Posts

Meta

Archives

Pages

Follow “The Domain for Truth”

April 2012
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
« Mar				May »
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30

The Domain for Truth

Ray Comfort’s Response to Pastor Jesse Johnson’s Critique on The Ten Commandments

Share this:

Like this:

35 Responses

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Apologetic Links

Blogroll

FEEDJIT

Greek Resources

Logic Links

Ministry Links

Philosophy Links

Sitemeter

Uncategorized

WTS bookstore

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Top Posts

Meta

Archives

Pages

Follow “The Domain for Truth”