What do you think?
Rate this book
Exploring Mormon Thought: Volume 4, God's Plan to Heal Evil
The problem of evil is perhaps the greatest challenge to belief in a loving and personal God. The challenge naturally leads us to ask, “Why, God, has this happened to me, to my loved ones, to my enemies?” Or, to ask with the Psalmist, “Where art thou God?” Or, to perhaps echo Jesus, “My God, my God, why hast thou abandoned me?”
In this fourth volume of the Exploring Mormon Thought series, God's Plan to Heal Evil, Blake T. Ostler examines how others in the Christian and Mormon traditions have attempted to provide solutions to this challenge and the shortcomings they contain. Ostler then looks to Mormon theology to offer what he calls the Plan of Agape, or what is perhaps the most robust explanation of how belief in a loving, personal God can be had in light of all of the suffering that exists in the world.
In this fourth volume of the Exploring Mormon Thought series, God's Plan to Heal Evil, Blake T. Ostler examines how others in the Christian and Mormon traditions have attempted to provide solutions to this challenge and the shortcomings they contain. Ostler then looks to Mormon theology to offer what he calls the Plan of Agape, or what is perhaps the most robust explanation of how belief in a loving, personal God can be had in light of all of the suffering that exists in the world.
- GenresReligion
Paperback
Published October 1, 2020
5 people are currently reading
39 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
November 25, 2020
This probably goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. I really don't like this book. I found myself disagreeing with Blake Ostler nearly every step of the way. I find his Compassion Theory and his meandering philosophy generally vapid and a poor intellectual substitute for true religion. There is no way for me to compose an unbiased review of this book, as I cannot suppress my natural negative reactions while reading it.
That said, I do feel that I can make a few points of constructive criticism to express my disdain. Please note that I have not read the preceding 3 volumes, nor do I plan to. It is theoretically possible that Ostler addressed all these concerns in his prior volumes, though, having read this one, I really doubt it.
And thus, I present, the Seven Deadly Sins of a Poorly Written Work of LDS Scholarship - or Seven Ways to Alienate Your Readership:
1) Have no audience in mind when you write. Who is Ostler writing this for? He could be writing this for an audience of high-minded philosophers. But if that's his target audience, why spend so much time telling us about the theories of Howard-Snyder, Alston, and Bergmann? Surely the scholarly would have heard of them. If the target audience is a more general LDS populace, then why start the book off with an intensely abstract discussion of the problem of believing in a God that coexists with evil? I've got no idea who Ostler has in mind as he writes, though I'm quite certain that it's not me.
2) Don't define critical terms. I'll be fair - Ostler does give us some critical definitions. I now have at least a semblance of an understanding of what "genuine evil" is, and how it technically differs from "justified evil" and "genuine moral evil." I don't think I could describe the difference to you in five paragraphs or less, but I guess I know it well enough to graduate from the first chapter. Unfortunately, Ostler also makes very specific, calculated use of other technical terms, such as "open theist," "skeptical theist," "panentheist," and so on without even an attempt at definition. And don't get me started on extremely rare terms of clear foreign origin, such as "reductio," "surd given," "de re," and "simpliciter," which are thrust before the reader's eyes with a flamboyant, almost mocking flare.
3) Nix the proofreader. What are paragraphs good for anyway? Instead of organizing his thoughts in a logically consistent manner, Ostler is all over the place, going from one subject to another within the confines of a single, long paragraph. I'd call this a stream-of-conscious work if I could only understand the technical terms he insists on using and reusing. Don't get me started on the grammar, either. See, for example, this choice selection from the midst of a somewhat awkward description of the Calvinist view of the free will dilemma: "It is irrelevant to this view of 'free will' that there is a form of internal compulsion because we cannot resist God's will and God forms our wants and desires." Even within its run-on paragraph context, I'm not quite sure what the editor is even supposed to do with that.
4) Build a tower. Wouldn't the average person expect a book on LDS philosophy (or "Mormon thought") to contain frequent references to LDS scriptures and the words of modern-day prophets? Well, you won't find that here. Instead, you'll find a carefully constructed intellectual philosophical explanation of God, one that begins with certain fundamental assumptions, and then builds upwards, brick by brick, until it provides some sort of view over the whole of existence. I believe it was Truman Madsen who described such meticulously crafted philosophies as "intellectual Towers of Babel" - and, if you know where he uses that phrase, you know how I feel about it.
5) Bury the lede. Ostler finally gets to his point around Chapter 7, where he discusses a "Mormon Process Theodicy." Never mind that the reader hasn't the slightest clue what a "Process Theodicy" is, nor that a good portion of the presumed readership is offended by the constant use of "Mormon" as an adjective. Here in Chapter 7 we finally see the connection between the preceding 6 chapters of pie-in-the-sky theorizing and something resembling LDS theology. We're told about the Pratt brothers and B. H. Roberts, about their views of D&C 88, about how their opinions seem to contradict each other until Ostler comes along and sets it all straight. But why isn't this the first chapter? Why do we have to wade through stories of trials and tribulation, both real and theoretical, that seem to be designed to disrupt our faith in God? Why take the real meat of the book, the only real connection to anything the average reader is likely to care about, and hide it in the middle?
6) Hide your assumptions. In the beginning, Ostler paints the picture of God's evil dilemma through three examples. In one, a three-year-old toddler is kidnapped, sexually assaulted and murdered. In another, a freak parked car accident kills a young girl and breaks a family into pieces. In the third, we are told about smallpox, an awful disease with billions of victims over time. Ostler then artfully stacks these three points up as evidence against God. God did not intervene in any of these three cases: how can we believe in Him if this is so? Is it that he did not want to intervene, that his potential intervention would have some sort of negative effect on mankind, or (the point Ostler is trying to make) that God's ability to intervene is dependent on man's ability to work together with him? My question here is why in the world we think the existence of evil creates a trial for God. Isn't the existence of evil on this world supposed to test man, not God? Isn't it at least possible that some of these maladies are just as much the fault of man as they are of God (for example: a society that sees sex as a commodity rather than an act of love; or our dependence on behemoth, dangerous machines for transportation; or our unwillingness to adhere to basic sanitary and safety measures to prevent the spread of devastating disease)? Is there, perhaps, a deeper motive or thought that causes Ostler to blame deity at the first sign of trouble?
7) Don't help your reader. This is the most troubling point of all, especially for eBook readers. How are we supposed to engage with texts when terms are addressed once, promptly forgotten, and then brought back up dozens of pages later in different contexts? Can anybody follow logical thought that is undiagrammed - or, worse yet, demarcated with the most awkward of shorthand (Point Ca, Point Cb, Point Cc, etc)? Government employees the world round will particularly rejoice at the appearance of endless acronyms: "JG" for "Justifying Goods," "UE" for "Unjustified Evil," "ST" for Skeptical Theist," etc. Better yet - introduce these acronyms and logical points to your readers, force them to take notes to outline your thinking - and then never refer to them again.
It will be no surprise to you that I do not recommend this book for anybody. I worry that my review is a bit harsh. However, as they say, if you plant ice, you're going to harvest wind.
In the end, after all the philosophizing and theorizing is done, I am only left with Goethe's famous lines: "Gib ungebändigt jene Triebe, das tiefe, schmerzenvolle Glück, des Hasses Kraft, die Macht der Liebe, gib meine Jugend mir zurück!"
That said, I do feel that I can make a few points of constructive criticism to express my disdain. Please note that I have not read the preceding 3 volumes, nor do I plan to. It is theoretically possible that Ostler addressed all these concerns in his prior volumes, though, having read this one, I really doubt it.
And thus, I present, the Seven Deadly Sins of a Poorly Written Work of LDS Scholarship - or Seven Ways to Alienate Your Readership:
1) Have no audience in mind when you write. Who is Ostler writing this for? He could be writing this for an audience of high-minded philosophers. But if that's his target audience, why spend so much time telling us about the theories of Howard-Snyder, Alston, and Bergmann? Surely the scholarly would have heard of them. If the target audience is a more general LDS populace, then why start the book off with an intensely abstract discussion of the problem of believing in a God that coexists with evil? I've got no idea who Ostler has in mind as he writes, though I'm quite certain that it's not me.
2) Don't define critical terms. I'll be fair - Ostler does give us some critical definitions. I now have at least a semblance of an understanding of what "genuine evil" is, and how it technically differs from "justified evil" and "genuine moral evil." I don't think I could describe the difference to you in five paragraphs or less, but I guess I know it well enough to graduate from the first chapter. Unfortunately, Ostler also makes very specific, calculated use of other technical terms, such as "open theist," "skeptical theist," "panentheist," and so on without even an attempt at definition. And don't get me started on extremely rare terms of clear foreign origin, such as "reductio," "surd given," "de re," and "simpliciter," which are thrust before the reader's eyes with a flamboyant, almost mocking flare.
3) Nix the proofreader. What are paragraphs good for anyway? Instead of organizing his thoughts in a logically consistent manner, Ostler is all over the place, going from one subject to another within the confines of a single, long paragraph. I'd call this a stream-of-conscious work if I could only understand the technical terms he insists on using and reusing. Don't get me started on the grammar, either. See, for example, this choice selection from the midst of a somewhat awkward description of the Calvinist view of the free will dilemma: "It is irrelevant to this view of 'free will' that there is a form of internal compulsion because we cannot resist God's will and God forms our wants and desires." Even within its run-on paragraph context, I'm not quite sure what the editor is even supposed to do with that.
4) Build a tower. Wouldn't the average person expect a book on LDS philosophy (or "Mormon thought") to contain frequent references to LDS scriptures and the words of modern-day prophets? Well, you won't find that here. Instead, you'll find a carefully constructed intellectual philosophical explanation of God, one that begins with certain fundamental assumptions, and then builds upwards, brick by brick, until it provides some sort of view over the whole of existence. I believe it was Truman Madsen who described such meticulously crafted philosophies as "intellectual Towers of Babel" - and, if you know where he uses that phrase, you know how I feel about it.
5) Bury the lede. Ostler finally gets to his point around Chapter 7, where he discusses a "Mormon Process Theodicy." Never mind that the reader hasn't the slightest clue what a "Process Theodicy" is, nor that a good portion of the presumed readership is offended by the constant use of "Mormon" as an adjective. Here in Chapter 7 we finally see the connection between the preceding 6 chapters of pie-in-the-sky theorizing and something resembling LDS theology. We're told about the Pratt brothers and B. H. Roberts, about their views of D&C 88, about how their opinions seem to contradict each other until Ostler comes along and sets it all straight. But why isn't this the first chapter? Why do we have to wade through stories of trials and tribulation, both real and theoretical, that seem to be designed to disrupt our faith in God? Why take the real meat of the book, the only real connection to anything the average reader is likely to care about, and hide it in the middle?
6) Hide your assumptions. In the beginning, Ostler paints the picture of God's evil dilemma through three examples. In one, a three-year-old toddler is kidnapped, sexually assaulted and murdered. In another, a freak parked car accident kills a young girl and breaks a family into pieces. In the third, we are told about smallpox, an awful disease with billions of victims over time. Ostler then artfully stacks these three points up as evidence against God. God did not intervene in any of these three cases: how can we believe in Him if this is so? Is it that he did not want to intervene, that his potential intervention would have some sort of negative effect on mankind, or (the point Ostler is trying to make) that God's ability to intervene is dependent on man's ability to work together with him? My question here is why in the world we think the existence of evil creates a trial for God. Isn't the existence of evil on this world supposed to test man, not God? Isn't it at least possible that some of these maladies are just as much the fault of man as they are of God (for example: a society that sees sex as a commodity rather than an act of love; or our dependence on behemoth, dangerous machines for transportation; or our unwillingness to adhere to basic sanitary and safety measures to prevent the spread of devastating disease)? Is there, perhaps, a deeper motive or thought that causes Ostler to blame deity at the first sign of trouble?
7) Don't help your reader. This is the most troubling point of all, especially for eBook readers. How are we supposed to engage with texts when terms are addressed once, promptly forgotten, and then brought back up dozens of pages later in different contexts? Can anybody follow logical thought that is undiagrammed - or, worse yet, demarcated with the most awkward of shorthand (Point Ca, Point Cb, Point Cc, etc)? Government employees the world round will particularly rejoice at the appearance of endless acronyms: "JG" for "Justifying Goods," "UE" for "Unjustified Evil," "ST" for Skeptical Theist," etc. Better yet - introduce these acronyms and logical points to your readers, force them to take notes to outline your thinking - and then never refer to them again.
It will be no surprise to you that I do not recommend this book for anybody. I worry that my review is a bit harsh. However, as they say, if you plant ice, you're going to harvest wind.
In the end, after all the philosophizing and theorizing is done, I am only left with Goethe's famous lines: "Gib ungebändigt jene Triebe, das tiefe, schmerzenvolle Glück, des Hasses Kraft, die Macht der Liebe, gib meine Jugend mir zurück!"
February 1, 2021
This is a deep book, the philosophy and ideas behind the "problem of evil" presented by the author surely will defy the ideas and conceptions about God many latter-day saints have and the way we deal with tragedy and evil in our culture. Not an easy read as it requires you to analize, question, meditate and ponder in every assertion. A must read for anyone who wonders about the origins of evil and the part of God according to theology and philosophy.
December 5, 2020
Ostler directly approaches the issue of evil and what it means for the nature of God, a topic that philosophers over the years have addressed and which seriously troubles many believers and nonbelievers. He explicates his understanding of an LDS response through considering a variety of other approaches. I wouldn't say this is the last word on the subject, but it definitely contributes in a major way to an important aspect of theology.
December 12, 2020
Luke 10:27 "And he answering said, You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself."
The topics in this series, and the depth of the discussion on each, demonstrates how Ostler invites us to love the Lord our God with all our mind. Though you may not agree with the conclusions in these books, one must admit that readers come away with a deeper understanding of their beliefs and know what questions there are to ask. The series not only offers an in depth look at the possibilities within LDS Theology, but also is like a philosophy 101 course. I personally went from not knowing much about theology/philosophy to feeling very informed on the common topics and issues in the field. That alone is worth the sticker price.
Now to this book in particular. The first part of this book takes the reader on a journey through the history and current discussion in christianity on what is typically called "The Problem of Evil." Ostler explains that in the philosophy world 'evil' just refers to any human suffering. In other words, why do bad things happen to us if God is in control?
He very devastatingly shows how the problem of evil is decisive in showing that the 'Classical View' of God is severely challenged by the issue. He then talks about some of the more current work on the issue by some of the top minds in the field and their arguments. He shows that despite worthy efforts the problem of evil does show that a God who creates ex nihilo (out of nothing) and has essentially all power and all knowledge is shown not to exist in light if the problem of evil.
Ostler then turns to the way LDS theology deals with the issue. He offers not one, but three possible views within LDS theology. He tackles the finitist view (that the reason evil and suffering exist is because God's power is essentially not enough to prevent evil.) He shows that for LDS that want to go this route it is not a sufficient answer. He concludes that many who hold this view want to still give God enough power to prevent many evils, but Ostler asserts that if that is the case then the problem of evil just comes 'in the backdoor' and some further explanation is needed.
The next view discussed is an LDS version of what is called a Process Theodicy. This view is popular among the more philosophy minded LDS intellectuals. The view is essentially that God only has persuasive power and not coercive power as that is consistent with an all loving being. Ostler gives precedent for the view in a certain interpretation of 'intelligences' and the works of Orson Pratt and B.H. Roberts. Though he finds the view helpful and compelling he notes that is has a lot of issues. Not the least of which is how a God that only has persuasive power could do things like raise Jesus from the dead or stop an asteroid from hitting Earth.
Next, Ostler goes into his own view, which he calls 'The Plan of Agape Theodicy.' Agape being the Greek word for the type of love God has toward us. He gives a pretty handy outline of the view and then goes into it in more depth. This view is centered around the unique LDS view that we existed as individuals before we were born and lived with God. He cites Joseph Smith's King Follett discourse namely, "God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself. The relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge. He has power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with Himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits." Building off of this idea, Ostler states that,
"The primary focus of The Plan of Agape theodicy is twofold:
(1) loving relationships of fellowship must be freely chosen and thus entail the possibility of rejecting such loving fellowship; and
(2) we learn to love by facing challenges that call for us to be deeply morally responsible for each other, face challenges that call for compassion from us and develop our own souls to grow in greater light toward deification.
it is also essential to grasp the nature of the experiential learning process. It is often the case that we do not learn from experience the first opportunity that experience affords us to learn a lesson. This theodicy suggests that the world has been ordered in such a way as to serve us to learn when we don’t get the lessons."
His proposal essentially falls in to what is know as a 'soul building theodicy.' (God lets bad things happen so that we can learn from our experiences and develop a more Godlike character). However, he argues that because of the unconventional view in LDS theology of pre-existing spirits many issues common to a traditional soul-building theodicy are overcome. He focuses a large part of his proposal on the ability of pre-existing spirits to consent to the evil and suffering that they would encounter in this life. He then goes over several possible objection to his view and addresses each issue handily.
He then spends a chapter giving an overview of his view on Christ's atonement and what it means for humanity(introduced in Vol. 2 of this series.) He rejects many of the traditional views, namely the 'penal substitution theory' (that Christ's death literally paid the price for our sins) He also examines some unique LDS atonement theories and critiques them. He asserts that his theory (termed 'The Compassion Theory of Atonement) best fits with the scriptures, lived experience, and moral decency. He also explains how Christ's atonement is essential to his 'Plan of Agape' Theodicy.
Overall I found the book very interesting and informative. Though I may not 100% agree with all of the conclusions, I do feel challenged to be able to articulate why. The greatest benefit of these books, in my opinion, is helping readers thoroughly examine their beliefs and consider if they are justified. It opens the reader up to a variety of possible views which helps keep the reader humble, and more open to the point of view of other faiths and others within their own faith.
The topics in this series, and the depth of the discussion on each, demonstrates how Ostler invites us to love the Lord our God with all our mind. Though you may not agree with the conclusions in these books, one must admit that readers come away with a deeper understanding of their beliefs and know what questions there are to ask. The series not only offers an in depth look at the possibilities within LDS Theology, but also is like a philosophy 101 course. I personally went from not knowing much about theology/philosophy to feeling very informed on the common topics and issues in the field. That alone is worth the sticker price.
Now to this book in particular. The first part of this book takes the reader on a journey through the history and current discussion in christianity on what is typically called "The Problem of Evil." Ostler explains that in the philosophy world 'evil' just refers to any human suffering. In other words, why do bad things happen to us if God is in control?
He very devastatingly shows how the problem of evil is decisive in showing that the 'Classical View' of God is severely challenged by the issue. He then talks about some of the more current work on the issue by some of the top minds in the field and their arguments. He shows that despite worthy efforts the problem of evil does show that a God who creates ex nihilo (out of nothing) and has essentially all power and all knowledge is shown not to exist in light if the problem of evil.
Ostler then turns to the way LDS theology deals with the issue. He offers not one, but three possible views within LDS theology. He tackles the finitist view (that the reason evil and suffering exist is because God's power is essentially not enough to prevent evil.) He shows that for LDS that want to go this route it is not a sufficient answer. He concludes that many who hold this view want to still give God enough power to prevent many evils, but Ostler asserts that if that is the case then the problem of evil just comes 'in the backdoor' and some further explanation is needed.
The next view discussed is an LDS version of what is called a Process Theodicy. This view is popular among the more philosophy minded LDS intellectuals. The view is essentially that God only has persuasive power and not coercive power as that is consistent with an all loving being. Ostler gives precedent for the view in a certain interpretation of 'intelligences' and the works of Orson Pratt and B.H. Roberts. Though he finds the view helpful and compelling he notes that is has a lot of issues. Not the least of which is how a God that only has persuasive power could do things like raise Jesus from the dead or stop an asteroid from hitting Earth.
Next, Ostler goes into his own view, which he calls 'The Plan of Agape Theodicy.' Agape being the Greek word for the type of love God has toward us. He gives a pretty handy outline of the view and then goes into it in more depth. This view is centered around the unique LDS view that we existed as individuals before we were born and lived with God. He cites Joseph Smith's King Follett discourse namely, "God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself. The relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge. He has power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with Himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits." Building off of this idea, Ostler states that,
"The primary focus of The Plan of Agape theodicy is twofold:
(1) loving relationships of fellowship must be freely chosen and thus entail the possibility of rejecting such loving fellowship; and
(2) we learn to love by facing challenges that call for us to be deeply morally responsible for each other, face challenges that call for compassion from us and develop our own souls to grow in greater light toward deification.
it is also essential to grasp the nature of the experiential learning process. It is often the case that we do not learn from experience the first opportunity that experience affords us to learn a lesson. This theodicy suggests that the world has been ordered in such a way as to serve us to learn when we don’t get the lessons."
His proposal essentially falls in to what is know as a 'soul building theodicy.' (God lets bad things happen so that we can learn from our experiences and develop a more Godlike character). However, he argues that because of the unconventional view in LDS theology of pre-existing spirits many issues common to a traditional soul-building theodicy are overcome. He focuses a large part of his proposal on the ability of pre-existing spirits to consent to the evil and suffering that they would encounter in this life. He then goes over several possible objection to his view and addresses each issue handily.
He then spends a chapter giving an overview of his view on Christ's atonement and what it means for humanity(introduced in Vol. 2 of this series.) He rejects many of the traditional views, namely the 'penal substitution theory' (that Christ's death literally paid the price for our sins) He also examines some unique LDS atonement theories and critiques them. He asserts that his theory (termed 'The Compassion Theory of Atonement) best fits with the scriptures, lived experience, and moral decency. He also explains how Christ's atonement is essential to his 'Plan of Agape' Theodicy.
Overall I found the book very interesting and informative. Though I may not 100% agree with all of the conclusions, I do feel challenged to be able to articulate why. The greatest benefit of these books, in my opinion, is helping readers thoroughly examine their beliefs and consider if they are justified. It opens the reader up to a variety of possible views which helps keep the reader humble, and more open to the point of view of other faiths and others within their own faith.
December 14, 2020
You really can't do better for a technical philosophical study of the Latter-day Saint religion. Ostler is a serious scholar and brings a rigorous application of analytic philosophy to bear on Latter-day Saint ideas. This applies to all four volumes of Exploring Mormon Thought and equally well to this fourth volume, "God's Plan to Heal Evil". One of the things I ask myself before and after reading a book is how much I can learn from it. And with Ostler it's always a lot. Not only do you get a serious study of Latter-day Saint beliefs but you also get a deep engagement with the leading ideas in the modern Christian theology with thinkers like Alvin Plantinga, Charles Hartshorne, William Hasker, and William Rowe. Whether or not you end up accepting Ostler's views on the various subjects you are certainly well-equipped with resources to think better about them.
December 20, 2020
I really enjoyed arguing with this book as I read it! Ostler's style is technical and casual, and perhaps, off-putting (I haven't read the other volumes in this series though I am quite intrigued by them now!).
I don't agree with all of Ostler's assumptions, but he makes a compelling argument for his position and reading his thoughts were quite helpful in clarifying my own points of disagreement with his assertions. Lots of interesting stuff here for those who want to dabble in more theoretical/philosophical engagement with Mormon responses to the problem of evil.
I don't agree with all of Ostler's assumptions, but he makes a compelling argument for his position and reading his thoughts were quite helpful in clarifying my own points of disagreement with his assertions. Lots of interesting stuff here for those who want to dabble in more theoretical/philosophical engagement with Mormon responses to the problem of evil.
December 16, 2025
3.5 stars
Good info, but it felt disjointed and unpolished. Almost like he had a bunch of mini essays he put together. I felt lost a lot because there wasn’t much structure to the overall argument.
Second half much better than first half. His distillation of process theology was incredibly useful
Good info, but it felt disjointed and unpolished. Almost like he had a bunch of mini essays he put together. I felt lost a lot because there wasn’t much structure to the overall argument.
Second half much better than first half. His distillation of process theology was incredibly useful
September 22, 2022
Parts of this volume are admitedly over my head. But there are real nuggets in Ostlers interpretation of the scriptures that have reshaped my appreciation for the gospel.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews