Review One by Carol K. Tharp, M.D.

The Bible for Hope, published by Thomas Nelson and edited by members of the American Association of Christian Counselors (AACC), is one more product based on man-centered soteriology and psychological anthropology which has entered the Christian marketplace. This toxic mixture has come to dominate the belief system of Christian counseling and of much that goes by the name of “Biblical Counseling.” As the church became increasingly uneasy about Christian psychology in the past 25 years, those who majored in this area have increasingly called themselves “counselors” and have attempted to find some biblical base for their ideas. The AACC is described as “the largest and most diverse Christian counseling association in the world” (p. vi). The three general editors were educated at Christian educational institutions which have accepted the mixture.

In addition to the New King James text, this Bible contains dozens of essays with titles similar to the chapter headings of any modern textbook of psychotherapy (e.g. addictions, adolescent development, anxiety, attachment, child development, eating disorders, etc.). These essays are written by a veritable “who’s who” of Christian counselors and others with degrees in various fields. Most are generally noted for their admiration of psychotherapy and counseling psychology. Each one writing the essays is said to be “an expert in that particular field.” It is unlikely that the basic text of this Bible will be used by readers outside of the direction of these “experts.”

The essays place hope in a truncated God with attributes seemingly limited to His own felt needs. The introduction states that “God has called each of us to have a relationship with Him.” This introduction written by the three editors ignores the obvious fact that every creature is inherently related to his Creator and that the relationship is one marked by human sin and rebellion, thereby deserving God’s justice and wrath. This scriptural view of mankind is ignored by the editors and contributors. Instead, God is presented as being in constant need of a relationship with mankind. This god is so desperate to wrap his lonely arms around the created beings that he sets no conditions. As such, God, man, the problem, and the only solution are wrongly portrayed by these essays which are termed “Theme Articles.”

For the AACC, the problem of man is not personal sin or rebellion against the Creator. There is no view of man in need of a blood sacrifice and imputed righteousness because there is no view of God’s righteousness. People are rightfully seen as suffering from sorrow, pain, and tribulation, and the editors correctly state that “Life is full of trouble.” However, people are seen as victims who “groan under the weight of the accumulated sin of hundreds of generations” (p. ix). For the AACC, as for psychotherapists in general, the trouble is outside the person and caused by other people and circumstances. Out of this unbiblical view of man and his problems, the reader is given endless lists and techniques claiming to make things better. Personal rebellion against authority is nowhere in view; the real problem is the personal pain caused by the sins of others, whether occurring at the present time, during one’s early life, or in past generations. Therefore, what the editors see as compassion is focused on victimization. “Loneliness,” “Stress,” “Boundaries,” “Burnout,” and “Attachment” are typical essay titles.

The solutions offered place an emphasis on human self-care. For the editors of and contributors to this Bible, “The only true solution to life’s problems begins in the [Bible]” (p. ix, emphasis added). The Bible supplies the beginning, while human counselors supply what is necessary for the ongoing happy life. By implication, God has not given believers everything they need for life and godliness through their knowledge of Him (1 Peter 1:3). Therefore, the Bible must be supplemented with counseling psychology theories and methods. “With help from God and other believers” (especially those trained in these special theories and techniques) their readers can “move through brokenness and suffering” (p. ix) to “survive, even thrive” (p. x).

Theme Articles

The Bible for Hope “is geared to help believers grow up in Christ and … to be effective helpers.” It is “structured … from a problem to solution format” and offers “Theme Articles” that “describe 116 of life’s most difficult problems and outline the divine path of healing.” It also claims to provide “practical tools, usable strategies and clear direction” to “work through our own life-challenges with God’s help, and assist others in doing the same” (p. x). In other words, it is a Christian psychotherapy manual.

In addition to the 116 Theme Articles, each problem is cross-referenced to “Targeted Bible Passages,” a “Personality Profile” of a Bible person who supposedly struggled with the same issues, and “Soul Notes” that “point out what God’s Word says about this topic” (p. x). As such, this new theme Bible, packaged as an easy-to-use cookbook of counseling, promises to be quite popular. The scenario could actually be as follows:

What’s your problem? Here, read this Theme Article.

Meditate on these passages. Look up the “Key Passage.”

Read the Personality Profile and follow the step-by-step Instructions.

You will find your best life now! Pay the receptionist as you leave.

Next, please.

This imaginary monologue reflects how The Bible for Hope is to be used. The Therapeutic Gospel in the essays presents not only a distorted view of man, but it also distorts the object of man’s hope. Using Scripture as a set of self-help techniques has effectively corrupted the modern church and its counseling ministries. This continues to grow as churches turn increasingly from what Jesus has done to “What would Jesus do?”

In a Theme Article about the Holy Spirit, every attribute except conviction of sin (pp. 1400-1401) is presented, completely ignoring the fact that John 16:8 says that, when the Holy Spirit comes as Counselor, He will convict of guilt in regard to sin. The sin nature of man and God’s judgment on sin receive scant mention in the essays. The hope referred to in the title of this Bible is based on a very limited view of God, presenting One who is “more willing to love us, accept us, help us and forgive us than we ourselves are” (p. 1369), but not One who will exercise righteous wrath against rebellion.

Then, as if God’s forgiveness and the believer’s faith in what God says are not sufficient to remove the guilt of sin, the reader is frequently misinformed that “people need to forgive themselves” (p.7). This lopsided god made in the image of man’s wishful thinking can offer no real hope or help. The God revealed in Scripture gives us the “hope of the glory of God” causing us to “glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience; and patience, experience; and experience, hope” (Romans 5:2-4). According to Scripture, this hope will not disappoint.

The laborious man-made techniques filling the essays in this so-called Bible for Hope will surely disappoint quickly. The endless works expected by the AACC would surely drive anyone to the despair Mother Theresa apparently suffered as she attempted to live out the doctrine of a merit-based salvation. God is not seen as the Creator and King who saves and sanctifies, but always as the helper to all who will climb the steps. A serious attempt to follow the steps offered may strengthen the flesh with a fantasy of actually achieving the goals or increase the despair, which may lead to death, or which may drive one to seek Christ through the unadulterated Word of God.

In addition to a distorted deity, The Bible for Hope employs humanistic counseling psychology categories to conceptualize the problems of man. Sin, as it is defined in Scripture, is nowhere in sight. “We are spiritually, physically, and emotionally broken and wounded people living in a broken and wounded society” (p. 323). The therapeutic category “victim” replaces the Scriptural category “sinner.” The causation of human problems is exclusively attributed to “trauma” or “abuse”: “Those whose traumas don’t get healed may grow up to damage others, even their own families” (p. 690). “To be abused is to be touched by evil … fear, grief, anger and guilt often govern abused people’s lives” (pp. 328-329). In The Bible for Hope, environmental determinism replaces personal responsibility for sin.

Therapeutic Terminology and Mindset

Throughout the text, the terminology of counseling psychology is used to describe the problems of man. Scattered throughout the Theme Articles, Soul-Notes and Personality Profiles are the usual terms: wounded, boundaries, transitions, patterns, security and significance, balance, disconnectedness, love languages, recovery, etc. In a fashion most clearly exemplified in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, numerous Theme Articles discuss problems as if they were codified disease entities fully understood as to symptoms, cause, and step-by-step treatment for cure. The word “healthy” recurs again and again and is applied to all kinds of ideas and emotions. The Theme Article “Dealing with a Critical Spirit” has the topic headings: “Characteristics of Judgmental People,” “Causes of Judgmentalism,” and “Cures for Judgmentalism.” Similarly, Articles on “Family Problems” (pp. 38-39) and “Insecurity” (pp.186-187) adopt the same diagnosis/cause/treatment model, clearly implying that the author is truly an expert with full knowledge of the subject. The Bible for Hope boasts of its “problem to solution format” (p. x). In so doing, however, it diverts attention from the real problem (sin and rebellion) and its real solution (salvation/sanctification) to mere symptom identification and reduction. Prescribing aspirin for the fever of meningitis may make the patient feel better for a short time, but it will not stop the progression to system failure and death.

God is presented as the ultimate Rogerian therapist, sinners as victims, and the solution as self-help techniques. “With help from God and other believers, we can not only survive trouble … we are able to move through brokenness and suffering to become wiser, humbler, stronger, and more understanding and caring toward others” (p. ix). “Parents still need to bless their children [with]… positive words, meaningful touch and active commitment in their lives” (p. 43). God “enjoys a good laugh” and “Laughter can be very healing” (pp. 614-615). (This reminds anyone who thinks biblically of Exodus 32:6 when the Israelites molded a golden calf and, now that their god was tamed, “…rose up to play.”) Fatherhood is presented as “Seven tactical steps to becoming a great dad” (p. 516). “Healing people’s self-esteem … people can learn to do this if they follow these [4] guidelines” (p. 961). Jesus is presented, not as a Savior from sin, but as an example of the ultimate therapist respecting “the problems of [Nathaneal’s] skepticism and resistance” (p. xiii). Of the 116 Theme Articles, 78 include psychologically tainted do-it-yourself instructions to cure the problem.

The Theme Articles do not discuss sanctification as presented in the Bible. The over-riding emphasis is on human agency, “ownership” of one’s improvement, and self-mastery. Reliance upon therapeutic human agency is a doctrinal departure from biblical teaching. The industries of Christian and biblical counseling refuse to consider the serious nature of that fact. The do-it-yourself approach to human problems of living continues to be predominant in both secular and Christian counseling and attractive to therapists and customers alike. However, true believers must face the fact that self-help methods and techniques, no matter how “common sense-sounding” or “evidence-based,” are simply rules taught by men (Mark 7:7) and are like “filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6) practiced by “hypocrites” (Mark 7:6).


To illustrate the “do-it-yourself” approach and the “problem to solution” format of The Bible for Hope, the several Theme Articles devoted to “Forgiveness” and “Adolescence” will be reviewed.

In today’s post-modern, atomized, tolerant society, confrontation of personal offense has been replaced with a new understanding of forgiveness. Scripture presents the personal granting of forgiveness as a horizontal transaction between the person offended and the offender (Matthew 18). The offense is always primarily against God and, therefore, involves a “vertical” transaction with the transgression having been blotted out by God for the Christian.

Today, the norm has become a non-transactional, unilateral granting of “forgiveness” with no confrontation, conviction of sin, repentance, nor any requesting or granting of forgiveness. Rather, the offended party simply asserts that he has “forgiven” the unavailable and/or unapologetic offender. By doing so, he will presumably feel better and be ready to “move on,” but no difficult, horizontal interaction takes place for the sake of the offender and, therefore, no vertical transaction occurs. In addition, the one who forgives in this self-centered manner may feed his flesh with self-righteousness. Along with this casual, self-centered focus on what is now called forgiveness, the offended party may also build bitterness, resentment, and a desire for revenge. True Scriptural forgiveness requires a transaction, both horizontal and vertical. It is both a command for the believer and a reminder that God has forgiven us far more than we are ever asked to forgive in the offense of another.

Three Theme Articles address the topic of forgiveness. June Hunt emphasizes the desirability of reconciliation “deciding that you want to be free from the pain of the past” (p. 1258). She misuses 2 Corinthians 5:18-19 where Paul tells believers that the message of God reconciling men to Himself in Christ has been committed to us. This passage is unrelated to the situation in her essay where “a relationship between two people falls into the danger zone.” Hunt offers several “potentially problematic areas” needing a “heart examination” and likens forgiveness to “‘doctor’[ing] two wounded hearts.” Her view of reconciliation is presented as diagnosing the problem and applying the treatment. Her list of “do’s and don’ts” is supposedly helpful to those trying to “guide two people in reconciliation” (pp. 1258-1259). Her methods could be used by any secular counselor and have nothing specifically Christian about them: share feelings in a “healthy” way, understand that there are two sides to every story, and realize that you have the power to change only yourself. One could argue that there is nothing at all Christian about them since we have no power to change ourselves in ways that count for eternity; right and wrong do exist and, therefore, one side may be right and the other wrong; and the word “healthy” lacks definition regarding feelings.

Earl and Sandra Wilson similarly offer a four-fold “pattern for restoration” using several Scripture passages with remarkably solid application to the situation. Even they, however, when writing of Peter being restored in John 21 ignore Jesus’ rough ending in the passage, “If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?” The Theme Articles throughout The Bible for Hope attempt to turn Holy Scripture into sweet emotion (pp. 1412-1413).

Everett Worthington offers a “five-step… Pyramid Model to REACH forgiveness.” He offers a muddle of emotion saying that “unforgiveness consumes the heart like a cancer” and says that, even for God, forgiveness involves “an altruistic, emotional response by the forgiver toward another who needs forgiveness” (emphasis in original). Even more strangely, Worthington says that God can demand our repentance prior to forgiving because “God has an infinite perspective on us.” He advises in his “five-step acrostic to help people experience forgiveness” that the offended person needs to: “Recall the hurt”; “Empathize with the person who hurt you”; “Give an Altruistic gift of forgiveness”; speak aloud or write down your forgiveness to solidify the act of forgiveness; and “Decide whether we can experience the emotions that lead to the changed heart of forgiveness.” He adds that “we might need to talk with the person who hurt us” (pp. 1520-1521, emphasis added).

Teaching on forgiveness today is largely self-centered and so riddled with sentimentalism that few know what Scripture has to say on the subject. A superficial, self-centered view of forgiveness enhances the postmodern isolation of this society. In stark contrast, Jesus’ parable of the unmerciful servant in Matthew 18 will shake any Christian when the Master asks him if he should not have had mercy on his fellow servant just as He had shown mercy and then instructs us all to forgive one another from the heart. Any believer will simply trust God to accomplish that in his heart and life.


“Adolescence” as a time, a concept, a subject, and a problem is almost entirely a creation of the psychotherapeutic industry. This creation has been so successful that few other topics attract so much attention from the average American. Accordingly, five Theme Articles are focused on adolescence directly and several others indirectly. Dawson McCallister notes, “Like Daniel in Babylon, many teenagers today feel out of place, besieged by temptation and confused by what they should be doing at this point in their lives” (p. 1104). This seems to be one of many places in these Theme Articles where the author remembers he should try to relate the subject to Scripture, but typical of these articles, Scripture does not at all fit with the teaching in the article. In contrast, the Bible says, “Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself” (Daniel 1:8), quite the opposite of McCallister’s teenage confusion. P. P. Bliss could never have written his lasting and beloved hymn, Dare to Be A Daniel, if he had seen Daniel through the therapeutic lens of The Bible for Hope. After McCallister describes teens as victims experiencing “loneliness, depression, anxiousness, low self-worth” and feeling persecuted, misunderstood, and rejected due to “increasing sensitivity,” he proposes his solution: “God’s unconditional love and acceptance” (p. 1105), which is a psychologically driven, unbiblical description of God’s magnificent, unfathomable love that required the death of Christ and the response of faith to be received and experienced.

Josh McDowell seems to have left concern with evidence that demands a verdict and instead is concerned about the teen who says, “I can’t remember anybody ever touching me.” He describes the adolescent with “this burden on my back” and with “something in me that makes me want to cry.” However in contrast to John Bunyan’s Pilgrim whose burden was his own sin and who, recognizing that he lived in the City of Destruction, burst out crying, “What shall I do to be saved?” McDowell’s teen lacks “a sense of personal identity.” Bunyan’s Pilgrim left his family “and ran on, crying, ‘Life! life! eternal life!’ So he looked not behind him, but fled.” However, in our psychological society, McDowell’s teen needs “a relational connection at a deep emotional level.” Sin is evidently not the problem for these “burdened” adolescents, since “a lot of young people are good kids.” Therefore, his solution is for parents to “make a relational connection at a deep emotional level” and “love them no matter what they do or do not do” (pp. 410-411, emphasis added).

None of these Theme Articles draw their conclusions from Scripture. Some are so eager to claim a scriptural base for their parenting advice that the entire article is filled with contradictions. This is true of John Trent’s theme that “we were created for blessing.” He attempts to use Genesis 27:26 to show that “Kissing, hugging…were all a part of bestowing the blessing.” Trent insists that “Meaningful touch has many beneficial effects” and says that by “Picturing a Special Future” for our children, “a child can gain a sense of security” (pp. 76-77). He ignores the fact that Isaac’s so-called “word picture” about the smell of his son (Genesis 27:27-29) is in the context of the deceit plotted by Jacob and his mother. In his attempt to promote parents giving their children a “Meaningful Touch” and “A Spoken Message,” “Attaching High Value to the One Being Blessed,” and “Picturing a Special Future” (p. 77), he ignores the fact that Jacob’s blessings in Genesis 49 are Jacob’s prophecies about his sons. Needless to say, Trent does not deal with Jacob’s words to Reuben, “thou shalt not excel,” or with his words to Issachar that he would become “a servant unto tribute,” or with his saying that Dan would be “a serpent by the way, an adder in the path.”

Each Article lists steps by which parents, whose deficient parenting is always implicit in the cause of the problem, can correct their ways. The editors of The Bible for Hope surely hope that the readers will not read the Bible, as their claim to be “consistent with what Scripture teaches” would be largely rendered null and void. The American phenomenon of “Adolescence” rages on, loosed from any solid moorings in Scriptural truth, with the troubled lives of children and their parents further fueled by the false teaching of counseling psychology. The Bible for Hope adopts that psychology and continues that trend in their commentary.

Therapeutic Gospel

Throughout the Theme Articles of The Bible for Hope and utterly consistent with the Therapeutic Gospel, the personal subjective experience of pleasure is assumed to be the ultimate objective of successful counseling. “To feel a deep, throbbing passion about our well-being in this world is as natural as breathing. And nothing is wrong with that” (p. 165). “The quality of family life is crucial to our happiness, emotional well-being and mental health” (p. 294). “Consider the following [nine are listed] suggestions for gaining and maintaining emotional well-being.” The first suggestion is that “Healthy Faith Fosters Self-Worth” (p. 1040). “What can we do to exchange negative attitudes for positive ones?” (steps to “a positive attitude” are listed) (pp. 1174-1175).

In contrast to Jesus’ call to His disciples to deny themselves, The Bible for Hope consistently teaches self-love, self-worth, and “healthy” (meaning not low) self-esteem. The following are examples: “Jeremiah had a difficult life, but he had high self-esteem”; “Positive self-statements are honest and will help reverse years of negative self-esteem”; “Low self-esteem is caused by self-hate”; and “Self-hate leads to hating others” (pp. 960-961). That classic example of eisegesis with an agenda is in a Theme Article also advising: “Stop Degrading Oneself … Use Positive Reinforcement … Learn to Value Others” as methods to achieve positive self-regard or happiness (p. 961). Statements such as “Everyone needs a parent’s blessing to be affirmed and assured that he or she is good and has a promising future” (p. 43) and “God calls us to find our own worth in Him” (p.49) ignore Romans 3:12 where we are said to have turned away and become worthless. Can anyone read the fifth chapter of Revelation and still think that elevation of my personal worth can be a goal of the Christian life? “Worthy is the Lamb that was slain.” May we simply say, “Amen.”

Health and physical well-being figure too prominently as life goals in The Bible for Hope as they do in the secular therapeutic culture. Concerning Leviticus 13, one writer concludes, “If God cares so much about our health, then so should we” (p. 146). “Numerous studies have shown that higher levels of religious commitment produce healthier life styles and are related to lower blood pressure and reduced hypertension” (p. 403). “When we are feeling overwhelmed … it may be time to cut back, say no, or slow down” (p. 423). There is no hint of what Paul says in Philippians 2:17 about being “offered upon the sacrifice” nor is there any concept similar to Paul’s words in 2 Timothy 4:6,7, “For I am now ready to be offered…I have fought a good fight.” There is no suggestion aligned with Jesus’ directive to deny the self, take up your cross, and lose your life that you may find it. One would find it necessary to ignore the essays and go to the text of Revelation 12:11 to find that we overcome not by therapy, but by “the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.” The AACC teaching in this Bible opposes that of Charles Spurgeon whose advice was always: “Work yourself to death, and then pray yourself alive.”

Except for one Theme Article on Suffering (pp. 646-647), the over-arching concept of hope presented throughout The Bible for Hope is the attainment of pleasure and self-worth.

Deadly Mixture

Finally, the content of the thematic additions to The Bible for Hope is a mixture of truth and error. Understandings, concepts, descriptions, treatments and goals common to the pseudoscience of counseling psychology, while predominant, are mixed with reasonable interpretations and applications of Scripture. The Key Passages and Soul Notes, being tied directly to Scripture, are often orthodox and reasonable. The Personality Profiles, however, are usually corrupted by psychological categorization and agenda bias. In this author’s opinion, 35 of the 116 Theme Articles are reasonably biblical though rather superficial. Most of those are on the level of what is found in popular devotional booklets. The Theme Article on Trauma is devoid of any Scriptural reference, being entirely secular-psychological. Most of the Theme Articles reveal the ecumenical mindset where Jesus is used as a way to fulfill my felt-needs rather than the way to deal with my real need. The steps advised in most of the cases could be used equally well by Muslims, Buddhists, or atheists.

In a Theme Article “Knowing God,” Larry Crabb exemplifies the confusing mixture of sacred and secular, Scriptural and psychological, that typifies the content of The Bible for Hope. In his article, Crabb rightly criticizes the church for which “helping people to feel loved and worthwhile has become the central mission” but gives as his reason for his criticism: “it doesn’t work.” He correctly states that the Gospel teaches “values like turning the other cheek, esteeming others as greater than ourselves,” but then wrongly adds humanistic “self acceptance” to his list. On the one hand, he says we need “a tender insistence that something matters more than how we feel,” but then he calls for “a passionate sensitivity to our deepest struggles.” He combines the statement: “the point of Christianity is not us but the God who cares for us” with the claim that “it is healthy to face the pain in our souls, to feel bad when others violate our dignity, how desperately we long to feel loved.” On the one hand, he says, “feeling better has become more important than finding God.” But on the other hand, he states that “to feel a deep, throbbing passion about our well-being in this world is as natural as breathing.” As Crabb moves back and forth between the biblical and the psychological, he seems to see no problem with what he calls “natural.”

The two strands of ideas, scriptural and psychological, though artfully intertwined, when carefully examined through the lens of Scripture, reveal an ugly pattern of mismatch and contradiction. True believers, when confronted with such writing, should hold fast to a “hermeneutic of suspicion” lest they be led astray by casually accepting a beautiful fabric that turns out to be a filthy rag.

As evidenced from the “Introduction” of The Bible for Hope, it is a handbook for the Therapeutic Gospel. It is designed to address specific “problems” with specific formulaic solutions. It is to be used as a “tool” by Christian/Biblical counselors. Its cookbook style could make it very popular.

The problem is that the true Gospel is not “therapeutic” in the sense that the world understands that concept. Compassion is only one of God’s attributes. Divine justice and perfect righteousness in God call for His wrath and judgment upon sin. Jesus is far more than “Our very best model” (p. xii); He is our perfect sacrifice who made atonement for our sin. He is the Lamb who was slain. The Holy Spirit causes believers to feel guilt, shame and sadness in the face of our own personal sin. David speaks of this when he is so overwhelmed by his own sin that he is “as a deaf man…that openeth not his mouth” (Psalm38:13). The believer concerned about the “ thine own eye” (Matthew 7:4) will not purchase The Bible for Hope.

Scripture does not present man as a victim, but rather as an enemy of God set in his rebellious ways and in need of redemption from the bondage of sin. The cure is never self-improvement; redemption calls for poverty of spirit. The goal of life is not personal pleasure; it is God’s glory. God does not exist to serve us but rather we exist for His pleasure and for works ordained ahead of time for us to do. The means God chose to bring glory to Himself was not therapy/therapist, but rather the simple preaching and teaching of the Word of God. The application of that Word to the heart in justification and sanctification is a work of God. We are thus transformed by a work of God in our heart.

The AACC has taken the text of Holy Scripture where God meets with His people and used it in the same way the Israelites used the Ark of the Covenant in 1 Samuel 4 as a method to achieve victory over the Philistines. As evidenced by the disaster that followed, God does not view it as small error to use His revealed Word as a handbook for earthly “victory.” A.W. Tozer said, ” God, being who He is, must always be sought for Himself, never as a means toward something else…. Whoever seeks God as a means toward desired ends will not find God.… The mighty God, the maker of heaven and earth…will not aid men in their selfish striving after personal gain….Yet popular Christianity has as one of its most effective talking points the idea that God exists to help people get ahead in this world” (Man: The Dwelling Place of God, pp. 56,57).

The Bible is the place where God meets fallen man to let us know of His holiness, of man’s willful failure to meet God’s demands, and of God in the flesh having paid the ransom for our sin. May we repent as did the Israelites in 1 Samuel 7, feel realistic fear as they did at what is coming against us, and wait on the Lord, who will come with loud thunder with the real victory in His own time. Meanwhile, may we set up our Ebenezer stone saying, “Thus far has the Lord helped us.”

(PsychoHeresy Awareness Letter, July-August 2008, Vol. 16, No. 4)