I couldn’t help, but notice the following:

“I could go into this virgin territory and start a new church with a clean slate and build the kind of church that I wanted.”

Did you ask yourself what kind of church God wanted?

Gabriel’s tongue in the cheek comment that the “dream” be disguised as an ancient document and authorities be convinced that it is a long lost letter of Paul so that it could be included in the Bible, takes it even further.

It begs the question: Is God’s will still important to today’s pastors, or is it merely an issue when they try to justify their controversial decisions.

I also cannot understand why pastors would want to introduce charsimatic tendancies and practices in churches and congregations that feel more at home with the more orthodox way of worship, and, why they are taken aback when the meet stern opposition. Surely there are many other churches that would not be opposed to it. Or do the issues of salary, pension and benefits come into play again?

I guess this comment makes me one of the mumbling and vhuntering Prysbetrians.

All the best

I will be carrying that boulder of debt – or cross, if you will – on my back until the day I die.

[Note: I certainly have no one to blame but myself in this matter, having incurred the debt through my own free will, confident I could pay it back; things changed.]