270 thoughts on “FWOTW: vbc1611.com”

        1. No, no, no, Ronnie; getting saved is as easy as A,B,C!
          A – Admit that your a sinner
          B – Believe that Jesus is the Christ
          C – Confess your sins

          That’s it! Of course, the Devil can do all that, but let’s not gt bogged down in theological details…

  1. There is a photo of a confederate flag with info about the church in the web site section on music. Maybe only people of a certain ethnic background are welcome there?

    1. You’d think Indiana would be a part of the North. But some parts of the state haven’t yet gotten the memo that they’re not a part of the South and that it’s after 1965.

        1. This is true. In fact, at one point, Indiana had more KKK members in public office than any other state. Although to be fair, that is an apocryphal account from the inlays (from Indy), I don’t have a source to back it up.

        2. I can vouch for lots & lots & lots of racism all over Illinois & Pennsylvania as well, however everytime I stay in Terre Haute, it feels particularly jolting the apparent lack of concern over embracing things like the confederate flag/etc. I think part of it is that a lot of hotel stayers are the migrant energy & mining workers that are all over southern Indiana. They did have someone (from nearby small community in IL) try to burn down their holocaust museum back when it opened (I think in the 90s).

        1. Dr. Fundystan is right. During the second iteration of the KKKK (1910s-1930s), Indiana was the major state for Klan activity.

    1. Indiana has to be the fundiest place on earth. There are lots of fundies of all stripes. The FBF has big churches in all the major cities – multiple ones in Indianapolis. Then you have those two gleaming towers of fundy learning, HAC and Fairhaven. Then of course in the southern part of the state you have Ron Williams and Hephzibah House. When you include clowns like this guy who is apparently trying to reconstitute the Confederacy in the middle of Big 10 country, you’ve got the whole fundy rainbow.

        1. Sorry Bassenco, hadn’t heard of these crazies. Been out of fundyland for over 30 years, and this site helps me know what’s going on. Heph. House seems like it’s founded on what looks (for all the world) to me as sadism with a particular fascination for the bathroom habits of teenagers. I’d call it sexual sadism, but I’m no psychologist.

          If the folks who run that place are going to heaven, I don’t care to go there.

        2. “If the folks who run that place are going to heaven, I don’t care to go there.”

          Truth. I must agree to that very bold statement.

  2. If they really believe the Bible, they would believe that they actually eat and drink the body and blood of Jesus in Communion and that Baptism saves.

    Now, what are the odds that they confess that as their belief?

      1. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Peter 3:21)
        The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? (1 Cor 10:16)
        Just for starters…

        1. Interesting indeed, but hardly enough proof to add works to salvation and make transubstantiation a credible doctrine. These are definitely go-to verses to support these teachings, but by comparing them with the rest of Scripture and reading them IN CONTEXT, they fall flat.

        2. IMO, only a Baptist or someone trying to cast dispersion on sacraments or baptismal regeneration could interpret them to mean works salvation. In actuality sacraments are doctrinally the gifts of God for the people of God generally, and not meritorious on the part of the receiver.

        3. He said, “…baptism saves.” No slander involved here…just responding to what was written.

        4. I gotcha, but even “Baptism saves” doesn’t necessarily equate to works salvation. Baptism, the eucharist, etc would be gifts from God that some believe are salvific like the gift of atoning death of a Messiah. Ressurection saves, eucharist/communion saves etc can all be said without necessarily being a proponent of the recipient earning their salvation.

          I don’t really see things that way exactly, but one doesn’t necessarily equate to the other.

        1. We also find another metaphor used in 2 Samuel 23:16 & 17 when David refused to drink the water from the well of Bethlehem that his three mighty men had brought him. He [David] “poured it out unto the LORD.” “And he said, Be it far from me, O LORD, that I should do this: is not this the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives?”

    1. Sonny Tolbert is I pervert who allows for the fornication to continue in that place. He did nothing with the truth for the sake of is his so called friendship with Tony York

  3. Okay, I just clicked on their music tab. Down near the bottom is a Confederate flag with the name of the church and KJB 1611 printed on it.

    I am bit confused since Indiana is not a southern state.

      1. I know they don’t. I am just confused as to why someone in Indiana would fly a southern flag. Come to think of it, trying to understand the fundy never proves profitable.

        1. I’ve seen NeoNazi skinheads in Germany displaying Confederate flags. They (the skinheads) aren’t saying they’re from the Southern U.S., they’re saying they’re racists, and proud of it.

        2. Go to Quebec and you’ll see big rigs sporting Confederate flags on their bumpers. Some Quebecois (Quebeckers) see the secession of their province from Canada as analogous to the Confederacy. The farther east and north you go, the worse it is.

  4. Article 002 “The Greek Texts behind the English translations of the Scriptures” states, “We make no apology for the belief and/or defense of the Book that saved us from hell.”

    Yep. No bibiolatry here folks.

    1. There’s a Superman shirt in there, too.
      Maybe they were having a Superheroes theme one Sunday?

      SuperKingJames! Faster than a speeding unicorn! More powerful than a leviathon! Able to leap tall contradictions with a single bound!
      Look, up on the altar! It’s an RSV! It’s an Oxford! No, it’s SuperKingJames!

    2. What’s with Ezek 16:17 on the guitar?

      I looked it up. In the KJV (as they’d read it) it says:

      “Thou hast also taken thy fair jewels of my gold and of my silver, which I had given thee, and madest to thyself images of men, and didst commit whoredom with them”

      Makes perfect sense to have that on a guitar, right? 😯

        1. He’s just getting ready for the local skinhead meeting that will be held after the service…

  5. Under the events tab:

    The Hyper Calvinism clip is worth listening to.

    He refers to people using the NIV as “having a limp sword” 😯 😯 😯

    From the untitled clip:

    “Some people don’t believe that gravy is good neither but we all know that they are retarded amen. Gravy is still the best food on the planet praise God!”

    1. Yankees? Who are they calling Yankees? They’re in central Indiana, for King James’ sake, not in Alabama.

      Anyhow, people in most of the south do say “banjo.”
      “Banjer” is limited to fairly small areas of Appalachia (plus Camby, Indiana, apparently).

  6. “If you don’t agree, then shame on you.”

    Quite the hospitality program they are running. You weed out everyone who will disagree with you. That whole love your enemies thing Jesus talked about really was more of a suggestion. He really meant sift out your enemies and belittle them so you don’t have to get messy by loving them.

    1. β€œIf you don’t agree, then shame on you.”

      I think this is truth in advertising. It sums up the philosophy of this church and of the whole KJV-only movement.

      1. exactly. And yes, they are being truthful in advertising–which is both refreshing and repulsive at the same time. Refreshing that they are not pulling the old bait and switch. Repulsive because it is so far from the Christ we find in Scripture.

  7. Just minutes ago I was watching a lecture by Sinclair Ferguson. https://vimeo.com/85876179 I quote:

    β€œThis is our fundamental principle of our ministry: we must love our people. That’s more important than anything else. It’s actually more important than our gifts. Because our gifts without love will be like noisy symbols and our ministry will be empty. And I think often for younger men that’s quite a challenge. We go into ministry and we have a deep sense of the importance of truth. But the only people who will gather around you because of the importance of truth are either people who are poorly taught in Scripture or cranks. And both of them will gather round the notion that the most important thing is truth without love. But in the Gospel there is no such reality as truth without love. And so it’s very important for us, especially if we have a real passion for preaching, to understand that what is going to oil the wheels of our preaching, is that the people to whom we preach know that we actually love them. […] I’m sure that for those of you who have been in the ministry for a few years, in a particular congregation, we recognize that this is not a virtue we work up. This is a first fruit of the fruit of the Spirit, which the Spirit brings down. So no matter what happens in the life of the church, you come to a place where you say, β€œI cannot but love them.””

    1. 1 Corinthians 13:

      “If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give away all my possessions, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.”

      This is my Dad’s life verse (although he doesn’t use that term). I’ve heard him quote this passage scores of times.

    2. Perfect. Thanks for sharing that.

      I was actually having a conversation the other day, about something similar, when I told somebody “Well, you can’t argue somebody into believing. They have to WANT to believe.” Later, I remembered I’d read a metaphor for that somewhere that I liked, but couldn’t remember where. Now, reading over these comments, I went and hunted it down – it’s this column written ages ago by Rich Mullins:


      …in which he compares trying to argue someone into believing to trying to explain a joke.

  8. “Nothing is more important in a church than it’s DOCTRINE!”
    from their doctrinal page.

    I am thinking Christ might actually believe that people are the most important part of the church. In fact, didn’t Christ die for people, not doctrine?

    1. “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples…” I’m pretty sure the Messiah didn’t finish by saying, “that ye believe in ONE Bible, and ONE alone – the King James Bible!”

  9. From their doctrinal statement:

    “18) Gossip and backbiting are terrible sins that are not tolerated (1 Timothy5:13). Any person “sowing discord” (Proverbs 6:16-19) against the Pastor or any Church member needs to either get right with God and the person they are gossiping about (Matthew 18:15-17), or find somewhere else to go to Church (Romans 16:17-18).”

    You have to admire them in a weird way for writing that into their doctrinal statement. Most fundy churches believe this but aren’t that honest.

  10. “Sunday morning preaching service” – not the first time I’ve seen it called that; kind of says a lot right there. So, all those churches who call it a “worship service” are off the mark with their focus, then? Anyone else getting a strong whiff of man-centeredness?

  11. 11) The Pastor is the leader of the church under the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. The Pastor is the one person who is to rule the church and preach and teach sound Bible doctrine (1Timothy5:17).

    1. 1 Timothy 5:17, in the Authorized (I presume this is the one they’re talking about), reads: “Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.” Let the group of people who do a good job running the church with which Timothy is associated, or a church that Timothy plants, or one elder per church, but the point is that IF they do a good job they are to be honored above others.


      1. And if we look at that nasty word “context,” the following verse quotes the bit in the OT about letting your oxen have a lick of grain if you are walking them over the cut stalks in order to thresh out the kernels. So other lukewarm worldly yadda yadda translations that suggest that the word translated “honor” should be “material compensation” instead may be, er, on the money.

  12. From their doctrines page:

    “15) Faith healers and 99.9% of all television evangelists are fake and devlish con artists (2 Thessalonians 2:9,10)”

    I love that they put this in their doctrines. I haven’t looked up 2 Thess 2 to check but I am pretty sure it doesn’t specify the exact percentage of TV evangelists who are fake.

        1. Sorry, this brings to mind a possible informercial that starts off with, “Hi, I’m Martin Luther, and let me tell you how I lost fifty pounds!”

  13. Gotta love #10 on the Doctrine statement:

    10) Water baptism has nothing to do with salvation, but every saved person should be baptized and join a local, Bible preaching, Baptist Church (Hebrews10:25).

    Hebrews 10:25 mentions nothing of being baptized and joining any church, let alone a “local, Bible preaching, Baptist Church”.

  14. Okay, I was gonna hit on the “We believe in ONE Bible” but its been done, so instead the sub text under their header–“We believe the King James is God’s word cover to cover.” Wouldn’t this be a false statement if there was any commentary whatsoever, a table of contents, or a glossary? (which all of my KJVs had growing up)
    And Geez, that place reminds me of my grandparents’ IFB church in Ohio. The pastor didn’t go to his parent’s 50th anniversary party b/c it was held on a Sunday and he didn’t want to miss church. Place turned my cousin into an anti-police, anti-government, pro-I’malwaysrighter PCCer. (though she recently unfriended me on Facebook) 😐

  15. I like #14.

    “the complete cannon of Scripture”, can anyone tell me what the complete cannon of scripture looks like, there is a difference between canon and cannon, but maybe they meant cannon πŸ™‚

    1. I’m envisioning something like a t-shirt cannon (the kind they use to shoot t-shirts into the crowd at sporting events), but firing copies of the KJB into the congregation.

  16. >>The Songleader (not praise worship director, pukey pukey pukey) is Brother Rob Freeland.<<

    So good, so rich… I want to know very badly where Dr. Tony York's doctoral degree is from. Anybody know more about this guy? Google doesn't have much.

    1. He is so offended at the words “praise worship director” that he wants to vomit? This is worth fighting over? Where’s grace? Where’s liberty? Where’s the “longsuffering” that his KJV says is the mark of a believer?

  17. The suit jacket and camouflage pants are pretty classy (first picture). Reminds me of picture day in basic training where they had you put your dress uniform on over your utilities and handed you a clip on tie, then shot you from the chest up. I am not sure why these places make such a big deal about the KJV. If that is the standard you choose, then keep it to yourself and go about your business. It is good to see that the KJV is the official Bible of ‘Merica

  18. “We believe in old fashioned hymns and spiritual songs…”

    At least they admit up front they don’t sing the Psalms. They’re proudly separated from those heatherns. πŸ™„

    1. Well, if you sang psalms, you might have to do Psalm 150 and encounter the worship music paradox: follow the Bible or years of Baptist tradition.

      [This would be a good place to reference Colossians 2, which I’m fond of doing: “See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.” According to that chapter, people who make up BS rules are either immature believers or false teachers; so where does that leave my strict fundy Bible “college”?]

        1. Fundies would leave out the part in Ps 150 about dancing and loud cymbals and stuff. But since I read that chapter in the ESV maybe the dancing and cymbals and tambourines were added in by the translators. Let’s ask a fundy!

      1. They taught me, “Always follow the Bible, not the traditions of man!”

        So as an adult as I studied what the Bible had to say about music, I came to the conclusion that the traditions I grew up with weren’t in Scripture and I chose to exercise my liberty in Christ and listen to CCM. And they got mad at me and judge me for being worldly, although I did the very thing that they taught me to do!

  19. This is a church like no other church in our area!!!

    I’m sure that the above statement is true, and no one else is like them (pukey, pukey, pukey).

    The big ugly kid!!, and I mean UGLY

    I keep thinking that a child wrote the web site and neglected to put his thoughts in comments.

  20. Going by the way most of the people here rip the church in question apart at the seams, I’d say there’s lot’s of charity going on. πŸ˜‰

    Also, if anyone who actually cared, fully understood the textual “debate”, instead of just buying into the rhetoric of the publishing houses and their unfaithful “translators”, you might even start to care that every word of God is truly important.

    But, since textual “criticism” ( and its acceptance ) has long ago become the norm for apostates, this site doesn’t really surprise me in the least. πŸ™„

    Yes, Victory Baptist is way out in right field…but I see no difference between you people sniping at them and them sniping back at you. I’m going to hazard a guess and say that most of you either belong to “Reformed” churches and support their “bible colleges”, or something similar to it.

    “Religious infighting”, I believe is what some call it. I call it “the pot calling the kettle black”, and “two sides of the same religious coin”.

    Jesus Christ and His Spirit evident here? Not from what I can see.

    1. Assuming your serious, the problem it seems that most people have is they worship the created more than the creator. Like I mentioned above, if that is truly what your church believes, than it should be a matter of course, nothing to stake your whole existence as a church on. I am pretty sure they even got rid of the brazen serpent in the Bible when what had formally given them life, turned into an idol. for the record, I am a member of a luke warm IFB church.

    2. A couple of thoughts…

      this site tends to focus on the extremes within IFB churches. Do you really think a web site that says “pukey, pukey, pukey” should be taken seriously??

      Jesus was very harsh of false religious teachers, so it could be that the folks here are being more Christ-like than you think.

      While I happen to believe that the KJV is the best translation, I do not in any way believe the nonsense and heresies that this church is promoting. God gave his word in Hebrew and Greek; every other language is a translation and not inspired (as God uses the term).

      1. Gr,

        Like you I imagine, I’m a formal equivalency guy– mainly because of verses such as Matthew 4:4, but also because the use of dynamic equivalency would require the translator to have a complete knowledge of the intent of the author in order to translate the text correctly. In my opinion, that’s not a safe approach when dealing with scripture. The primary reason why I prefer the KJV, however; is that I trust the textual sources. That said, these guys are trying to pass off human theories as doctrine when attempting to prove that the KJV is the only translation anyone (at the very least any English speaking person) ought to be reading. Some of what the extreme KJVO folks teach crosses the line into heresy (as I see it) and some of the other stuff they say, frankly strikes me as just nuts. Still, it really seems like a waste of energy to spend a lot of time critiquing what these “true Bible believers” have produced. The writing is adolescent, the self-righteousness as well as the number of various kinds of errors are almost overwhelming, and, as you say, how can we take any adult seriously who uses the words “pukey, pukey, pukey?”

    3. What I find amusing about the KJVO crowd is they accept a bible translation commissioned by a man who had his own religious ax to grind (not even an IFB ax, mind you) and would generally be considered sexually immoral by today’s fundies. Why accept the bible that came from a man you wouldn’t even eat with? Not only that, the KJV of today isn’t the same as the KJV of 1611.

      FTR, I am not a member of any local assembly nor do I support any religious college whether it be Catholic, protestant, or right-wing racist extremist.

    4. Nieuport, You’re a bit new to this site, but welcome. You’ll see that we cover all points of the spectrum including IFB and all points of the theological spectrum up through those who have left the faith. We’re not all Calvinists, or anything else, except recovering fundies. Or not. Welcome.

    5. Assuming you’re not a poe (hard to believe, given your non-sequitar about Reformed churches), I am really interested now. What is this secret knowledge you have about the texts that none of us grasps? I assume it something much bigger and better and secreter than the arcana peddled by the baptists at the two seminaries I went to. Inquiring minds want to know.

    6. “…you might even start to care that every word of God is truly important.”

      Okay. What do you mean by “word”?

      Do you mean a single word, as in “the”? Or perhaps another single word as in “apostrophe” (a noun), or a verb such as “be”?

      Frankly, the single words coming from the mouth of God have no more meaning than the single words do coming from the mouths of men. Words in and of themselves mean precious little, except as they are combined to produce a message.

      Not to mention the fact that God didn’t speak English. It wouldn’t have helped if He did, seeing as no one else spoke it.

      Words are used to convey meaning. And the same meaning can be conveyed in many, many ways. Just look at all the times God gave a message to a messenger, and the messenger conveyed the message using different words than God said exactly. Look even at the Gospels to see how many variations there are of the same events and words of Jesus.

      The message can be the same when the words vary. The message is what is important.

      You have been gulled by not understanding how language has changed. And again, God didn’t even speak English.

      Instead, the Scriptures were given in Hebrew — which varied and evolved over the centuries, Aramaic, Greek (the common Greek, not the more aristocratic dialect). God evidently was a fan of different languages.

      If you are concerned with the individual words spoken by God, you need to read the Scriptures in the Original languages and their original dialects. Warning, you will need to know all the different variations of Hebrew — its script and language changed a lot over the years!

      On the other hand, I am more concerned with the message. And in the tradition of the writers of Scripture (who almost never quoted another passage completely correctly!), I contend the individual words are not so important.

      1. rtgmath,

        You bring up a valid point with regards to the importance of capturing the meaning of a speaker when translating. Sometimes, particularly when dealing with idioms, it might seem that by translating the words as literally as possible we are actually losing the intended meaning. Nevertheless, without trying to start a debate, I don’t think using dynamic equivalency is a safe approach when translating scripture. For example, the translator may misunderstand the message actually being conveyed or there may be more to the text than the obvious surface message. For those reasons, I’d personally prefer to see explanatory notes or else the dynamic equivalency translation in the margins.



        1. “or there may be more to the text than the obvious surface message …”

          Wonderful point, Ben. It all comes down to the question, Did God send his Word to be understood by those who heard it, or to be misunderstood by those who heard it?

          The difference between esoteric and exoteric…

          If you believe God planted secret words or phrases in the Scripture which radically alter the meaning of the message, then you believe in an esoteric interpretation of Scripture. That is, God did not mean what He said to be understood by all, but only to an elite (“remnant”, if you will) who could decipher the true intent. Thus the doctrine of the Rapture was only discovered in the 1700s, and none of church teaching beforehand had ever viewed Scripture in this way before. God evidently darkened the minds of the godly and ungodly alike so they could not see the TRUTH (TM) of the Scripture in this area.

          On the other hand, if you believe that God said what He meant, that Scripture was a means of communicating the divine will to people, at their particular time and place in their particular circumstances, and that God was not monkeying around with being secretive, then you believe in an exoteric revelation. God meant what he said. It was relevant.

          Paul condemned the sects of his day that were esoteric. Essentially, they made boatloads of money revealing their secret teachings to their followers. Today, the believers in Bibilical esoteric revelation make boatloads of money revealing their secret teachings to their followers. Funny, though. No special godliness arises as a result of learning such things. No special grace is given to those let in on the secrets. Rather the opposite, as those in the know get puffed up as a result of their special knowledge. And the secrets are usually wrong. Such esoteric theology has been predicting the return of Christ since Christ left, but He hasn’t returned yet!

          No, the safest translation methodology is dynamic equivalency within the boundaries of historical context. I agree that word-for-word translations are necessary as a way to check, but even word-for-word exchanges use dynamic equivalencies. Multitudes of words have no equivalent to English. Context is invaluable.

          So I appreciate your note. But I think I am on solid ground here.

        2. rtgmath,

          “No, the safest translation methodology is dynamic equivalency within the boundaries of historical context.”

          If we weren’t dealing with scripture, I would probably be more inclined to agree with you on this. While I agree with the premise that God did not send His words to confuse us, we do have the example recorded in Daniel 12:8 & 9 where the prophet didn’t understand what he had just written and God did not at that time explain those things to him. We also have Messianic prophesies in the Psalms and also in the fifty-third chapter of the book of Isaiah where the messages could have been (and still could be) misunderstood by the reader. I am not saying that there will be a deeper meaning of the text that would necessarily contradict the obvious surface message, but there may also, for example, be an allegory intended that is not as readily visible. I think the dynamic equivalency methodology, is limited by the understanding of the translator(s), and since we are dealing with the words of a being with infinite understanding, its use carries the risk of essentially misquoting The Almighty. I am not against its use in the margin notes, but I still maintain that I think a formal equivalency methodology is inherently less risky.

          Maybe we could agree on the use of italics.

  21. I live 10 miles from this nut shack! Even the fundamentalist churches in our area think these guys are crazy. The rebel flag and most of the content on their site is just an embarrassment.

    On behalf of the good citizens of Indiana and decent human beings everywhere, I apologize. πŸ˜€

    1. Hello fellow Hoosier! I live pretty close to there, too. I had no idea this church existed. I thought Good Shepherd BC was the worst around there. I guess I was way off. I do know of a Hyles type church in Eminence though.

    2. You say you live close to this “nutshack” as you call it. That doesn’t mean you have a right to talk bad about the Church. Have you ever stepped foot inside the doors and sat down for a service? No you have not! You people who bad mouth VBC are a bunch of sissy libs who hate God and Gods people! Oh yeah, also want to add… the Confederate Flag is AWESOME! No, I’m not a member of VBC. Member of a different King James Bible believing Church.

    1. You can stand anywhere and throw a rock towards any point of the compass, and have a greater than 50% chance of hitting an IFB church. Sadly.

  22. Bible Doctrines #2: “The Trinity is a is a Bible fact…”.

    (1) It’s cute how the proper noun Bible modifies fact in that sentence
    (2) I don’t know how familiar they are with the Scriptures if they think the Trinity is a doctrine taught directly in Scripture.

    1. I’m also a huge fan of how on doctrine 3B basically quotes Col 2:9, and then cites 3 references that aren’t Col 2:9. That’s a strange way of footnoting/proof texting.

    2. Parts of speech are flexible these days! Heck, anything can be made into a verb (e.g. Google), or twisted into bizarre hybrid adjectives. Don’t get me started on “impactful.”

      1. ‘facebook’ is also a verb.

        …and don’t get me started on that multi-faceted F-bomb which can function as several different (yet expressive) parts of speech, all in one sentence.

  23. First thing I thought of when I read that last line was, “All our site are belong to us.” ‘You have no chance to survive, make your time,’ indeed…

    1. lol–old time worship really means American worship around 60 years ago.

      My friend was taking a church history class from a non mainline denomination (we won’t point fingers).
      The professor drew a time line on the chalk board. At the far left was Jesus, then pentecost, and then Paul. Then there was a chunk of history labeled “C”. And then the Reformation and into the present. The professor stated he labeled that part “C” because it can stand both for Catholic and Crap.
      Revisionist history is always so kind.
      My friend didn’t go back.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.