text:
The best-selling book in history remains one of the most controversial. Revered by Christians as God's holy Word, the Bible spans centuries of history, contains a variety of literary styles and culminates in the person of Jesus Christ. But how do we know the Bible is true? Isn't it just a collection of stories and myths? Even if it contains some history, is there any way we can trust it completely?
Answering these questions requires that we understand what the Bible is. It's not a book that arrived in complete form at one point in history. Instead, the Bible was written over a period of some 1,500 years by a number of authors. Although it is viewed as one book, it's actually a collection of many books.
It is called God's Word even though God did not physically write it. Instead, God worked through everyday people, inspired by Him, to record what Christians accept as the Bible. The Old Testament is primarily a record of God's dealings with His chosen people – the Hebrews or Jews. The New Testament continues the record with first century accounts of the life and ministry of Jesus and the struggles faced by new Christians in a hostile culture.
Today the Bible is controversial for several reasons. For example, it is filled with miracles. In the Old Testament, God parts the Red Sea, allowing His people to escape a hoard of angry Egyptians. In the book of Joshua, the sun is said to have stood still, while Jonah records a prophet swallowed by a large fish. In the New Testament the blind receive sight, Jesus walks on water and is resurrected after being executed on a cross.
In a largely naturalistic age, meaning belief only in the material world, miracles are often doubted. The supernatural – anything beyond the natural world – is dismissed or relegated to a second-class status. This often results in doubt about the Bible. Can we trust it to be true? Are we really expected to believe the supernatural events it records? This is a bias that defines miracles out of existence rather than reasoning that if God exists, then miracles are possible.
Asking if the Bible is true, means that we need to have some understanding of truth. What is truth? While this question is often presented as a deep philosophical puzzle suitable only for the "brainy" to tackle, the answer is not so complex. Truth is what corresponds to reality. Consequently, what is real is true, what is unreal is false.
The Bible makes some very distinctive truth claims. It claims, for instance, that God exists. It also claims that He has chosen to communicate with us through His creation, our moral conscience, and via the Bible. Jesus claimed to be God in the flesh and that the only way for human beings to be saved is through Him (John 14:6). Moreover, the death and resurrection of Jesus are also key to Christian theology.
These claims the Bible makes either correspond to reality or they do not. Christians believe that they do correspond to reality, meaning that the Bible is true. God really exists, Jesus is not a myth, and the resurrection really happened. But how do we know this?
Sometimes Christians quote the Bible to prove the Bible. Most skeptics are rightly cautious of this approach. Quoting the Bible to prove the Bible is viewed as being circular reasoning or illogical. After all, quoting the Bible to prove the Bible assumes the Bible is true, which is really the point of contention or discussion.
But if the Bible can be shown to be a reliable document, accurately recorded and transmitted through history, from God to us, then we can build a strong case that the Bible is indeed true.
Evidence for the Bible can take many forms. There is, for instance, physical evidence. We have copies of the manuscripts and throughout history these copies show that the Bible has been transmitted accurately. Despite common skeptical claims that the Bible has often been changed through the centuries, the physical evidence tells another story. The New Testament records are incredibly accurate. There are minor differences in manuscripts, called variants, but none of these variants impact or change key Christian beliefs or claims.
Other physical evidence includes archeological finds. The Archaeological Study Bible presents many notes and articles documenting how archeology has again and again proven that the Bible does correspond to historical reality.
There are other kinds of evidence that the Bible is true. These have to do with internal consistency and coherence. Although the Bible was written over many centuries by different writers, the messages it contains are coherent and consistent. The Bible presents a coherent theology and worldview and presents this material consistently. Moreover, the Christian worldview is robust, reasonable and grounded in history.
Although there are other lines of reasoning to support the claim that the Bible is true, one of the most powerful is found in Jesus. If it can be shown that the four Gospels – Matthew, Mark, Luke and John – present an accurate record of the life and ministry of Jesus, then Jesus Himself becomes an argument in support of the truth of the Bible. If the Bible has been shown to be reliable, this line of reasoning is no longer circular, but rational. In other words, what the Bible records about Jesus, including what He says about God, human nature, salvation and the Old Testament record, can then be trusted.
What does Jesus say about God's Word? He says, "the Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35, NIV), thus testifying to the authority of the Bible. In Matthew 5:17, Jesus said, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them," meaning that Jesus believed and trusted in the Old Testament "Law" and "Prophets." Jesus also said, "It is written: 'Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God'" (Matthew 4:4). Space does not allow a thorough investigation of the views of Jesus on the Bible, but it is sufficient here to note that He believed God spoke through the Bible, He overtly upheld belief in several Old Testament stories, and revered the Bible as holy and authoritative.
The cornerstone of Christian belief is the resurrection of Christ. Even Paul the Apostle admitted that if the resurrection did not happen, Christian faith "is futile; you are still in your sins" (1 Corinthians 15:17). In this sense, making a case for the truth of the resurrection also makes a case for the truth claims of Jesus and, in turn, the reliability and truth of the Bible.
Liberal theologians sometimes point out that our view of the Bible doesn't really matter. So long as we gain strength and insights from it, they say, that is enough. Following this line of reasoning, they remove many miracles of the Bible or simply treat them as myths. This is a mistake, particularly when it comes to the Resurrection of Christ. Our view of the Bible matters immensely, especially if what it claims is indeed true. If it is, as we have argued, then our eternal destiny hinges on how we will respond to Christ and His calling. Will we reject Him or accept Him?
There is much more that could be said on the matter of truth and the Bible. The rest of the articles in this series will address the Bible's reliability, how we got it, how to interpret it, responding to its critics and suggestions for handling seemingly difficult Bible passages.
"I'm glad your faith works for you, but can you really know whether or not the Bible is reliable? Wasn't it written thousands of years ago? How do you know it hasn't been translated and re-translated so much that it no longer says what it used to say?" These questions or variations of them are often asked about the Bible.
Rather than responding "just believe," the Bible calls us to, "Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have" (1 Peter 3:15, NIV). Since Christ is the cornerstone of Christianity, and since what we know about Christ and God's plan of salvation is found in the Bible, it is important that we take questions about the reliability of the Bible seriously. As a result, this article will look at the meaning of "reliability" in both the Old and New Testaments.
Let's first consider the meaning of reliable. In short, reliability means something is trustworthy. It can also mean that something is consistently good in its quality. In reference to the Bible, reliability has to do with whether or not what it contains – from ideas to history to geography and more – is trustworthy or not. If, for instance, the Bible is full of historical and factual errors or blatantly contradicts itself, it's hard to trust it or view it as reliable.
While we will address these sorts of questions in other articles in this series,1the question of the reliability of the Bible is addressed in this article primarily in relation to the manuscript and other evidence supporting the Old and New Testaments. Before getting to the Old Testament, however, our line of reasoning supporting the reliability of the Bible is best begun with the New Testament.
The New Testament contains 27 books, although some are not books per se, but letters. The four Gospels – Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John – are key in establishing what we know about Jesus including his birth, ministry, teachings, death, resurrection, and more.2
There are several lines of reasoning we can take in demonstrating the reliability of the New Testament and, specifically, the four Gospels. First, we can look at the number of manuscripts or fragments available. Second, we can compare existing manuscripts and fragments to see if they are reliable when it comes to what they report. Here we would look for serious contradictions, omissions, additions, errors, etc. Third, we can compare manuscript copies and fragments with copies we have today and find out if there have been significant changes or if the New Testament we have today is reliable. The approach outlined in these three points highlights some aspects of what takes place in the discipline known as textual criticism.
In the case of the New Testament, we have thousands of complete manuscripts and multiple thousands more fragments available. There are more than 5,000 copies of the entire New Testament or extensive portions of it. In addition, we have several thousand more fragments or smaller portions of the New Testament. If these numbers don't seem like a lot, compared to other works of ancient history, the manuscript evidence and copies for the New Testament far outweigh manuscript evidence for other works. For instance, there are less than 700 copies of Homer's Iliad and only a handful of copies of any one work of Aristotle.3So when it comes to manuscript evidence, the New Testament definitely has numbers on its side.
It's also interesting that within the early centuries of the Christian church a number of scholars quoted the New Testament. Amazingly, they quoted the New Testament so much that every single verse of all 27 books of the New Testament is quoted by these scholars with the exception of only 11 verses, all within a few hundred years of the beginning of the Church.4 We could also add the fact that much of the New Testament was written within just a few decades of the death and resurrection of Christ. First Corinthians, for instance, dates from the 50s – only twenty years or so after the death and resurrection of Christ. This is important because 1 Corinthians 15 contains key elements of the gospel message, emphasizing the importance of Christ's resurrection, and claiming that more than 500 people had seen the risen Christ. People who would still have been alive at the time of the writing of 1 Corinthians would have been around to corroborate or criticize the claims made in the letter.
There are many other features substantiating the reliability of the New Testament documents. 5 But what about the Old Testament?
The reason we began with making a brief case for the reliability of the New Testament is because of the claims it makes about the Old Testament. Jesus, for instance, made a number of claims supporting the reliability of the Old Testament documents. Jesus affirmed seven key points in relation to the Old Testament, as explained by Norman Geisler: "Jesus affirmed its divine authority … its imperishability … its unbreakability … its ultimate supremacy … its factual inerrancy … its historical reliability … [and] its scientific accuracy."6 Matthew 5:17-18 sums up the approach Jesus took in confirming the reliability of the Old Testament:
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."
Why is it important that we cite such passages demonstrating that Jesus accepted the Old Testament as reliable? Because, if the New Testament is reliable in its claims, then Jesus is who He claimed to be – God in the flesh, substantiated by His resurrection from the dead. As such, His remarks about the Old Testament are likewise reliable.
But what about manuscript evidence for the Old Testament? Space does not allow a thorough treatment here, but it is likewise incredibly accurate. Manuscripts that are part of the Dead Sea Scrolls, for instance, clearly show that our modern copies of the Old Testament are incredibly accurate.7
Is the Bible Reliable? Based on the evidence, it surpasses all expectations for trustworthiness.
The Bible is the foundation of Christianity. In it we learn about the human condition, our need for salvation, God's plan through Christ, the everlasting joy that awaits those who trust in Jesus, and more. So far in this series we've looked at the question of truth in relation to the Bible, as well as its reliability. Now we'll turn to the important question, "How did we get the Bible?" In doing so we'll look at four key areas regarding the Bible: inspiration, canonization, transmission and translation. Before we do so, let's look at some misconceptions about how we got the Bible.
Some people think the Bible was all written down about the same time, copied and distributed. But the Bible is not "instant" Scripture and it wasn't all written down around the same time. Instead, the books of the Bible were written over a lengthy period of time by different people inspired by God.
Another misconception about the Bible is that it was merely created by a select few in order to consolidate, gain or maintain power and prestige. Given the adversity faced by the Hebrew people and, later, the persecution suffered by Christians, this explanation is far from plausible. For instance, rather than gaining power or prestige, the early Christians were severely oppressed, while many others were killed – martyred for believing the message of the gospel.
Yet another misconception says there are many different "Bibles" so how can one be sure the Christian version is the right one? This misconception can take different forms. One form sets forth many different "gospels" as proof that the New Testament record of Jesus is not necessarily the true version. What about the Gospel of Thomas? Keep in mind that there are dozens of writings claiming to be Christian gospels along the lines of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. But very few copies of these rival "gospels" exist.
The Gospel of Thomas, of which there are references to more than one version, has distinctly Gnostic influences. In short, the Gnostics believed that the flesh is bad, but the spirit is good. As a result, they denied that Jesus truly came in the flesh, a position the early church countered by writings such as 1 John. Thomas also presents Jesus doing some things very much out of character. In one passage, for example, Jesus causes a boy to wither (die).
It's also important to keep in mind that these additional "gospels" appear in the historical record long after the New Testament manuscripts, making these "lost" gospels highly suspect not only in reference to their content, but their reliability.
Stories and claims about other "gospels" raise important questions about the transmission and translation of the Bible or any historical record. Since we've covered these topics somewhat in other articles in this series,1 we'll only cover the topic briefly here so we can get to the inspiration and canonization of the Bible.
"Transmission" in relation to the Bible has to do with how the contents of the Bible were transmitted through history. If the record of transmission is poor, then the record we have is highly suspect. But if the record of transmission is rich, having a variety of manuscript copies for instance, then we have cause for trusting the reliability of the record.
In the case of the New Testament,2 the transmission of the documents through history is astounding. Not only do we have thousands of manuscript copies, as well as thousands more fragments or portions of the New Testament, but in comparing the New Testament copies we have today in various languages with those available centuries ago we can see the message remains intact. Errors or changes are slight, known as variants, and do not change any central belief of Christianity. When it comes to transmission and translation, then, we can indeed trust the documents.
But isn't it possible to have an accurately transmitted record that is still just a human invention? That's where inspiration comes in. The word "inspire" comes from the Latin, meaning to breathe on or into. Hence, Paul writes in 2 Timothy 3:16, "All Scripture is God-breathed."3 As Geisler and Nix write, "… inspiration is the process by which Spirit-moved writers recorded God-breathed writings."4
Inspiration means that human writers were inspired by God and moved by the Holy Spirit to record accurately what God wanted them to preserve. It does not mean God took control of people in the sense of some occult practices known as automatic writing, where the writer is in a trance-like state. It also doesn't mean the writers of the Bible were simply taking dictation. But it does mean that their words were divinely inspired and recorded. The Bible was written by real people, living in real places, recording real historical events, and also communicating God's real truths.
Now the question remains about how the Christian church ultimately put the parts of the Bible together. This really relates to the New Testament, as the Old Testament was already accepted and codified in the books accepted by the Jewish people as divinely inspired. But following the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ around 33 A.D., the fledgling Christian church found itself struggling for survival and, in the process, writing inspired documents that would later become the New Testament.
The process of canonization has to do with what writings are deemed inspired and thus included in the New Testament canon. The word canon originated in reference to a measuring reed or standard by which something is measured. In reference to the Bible a canon has to do with genuinely inspired writings.
The Church was very methodical in reference to the New Testament canon. Several criteria were necessary in order for a writing to be accepted,5 but we will mention three here. First, the document in question had to conform to the rule of faith, "conformity between the document and orthodoxy, that is, Christian truth recognized as normative in the churches."6 Second, the document required some sort of apostilicity, "which as a criterion came to include those who were in immediate contact with the apostles."7 Third, "a document's widespread and continuous acceptance and usage by churches everywhere" 8 was taken into consideration.
From God to us, the Bible is true, reliable, and inspired.
"Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth." -2 Timothy 2:15 (NIV)
The Bible contains God's messages to us, but if we cannot properly interpret what it says, we're destined to become confused, misinterpret and probably misapply biblical content. As Paul writes to Timothy, we need to "correctly" handle "the word of truth." But how do we go about interpreting the Bible? This article will cover some basic principles of interpretation that will go a long way towards equipping everyone to correctly interpret God's Word.
Interpreting the Bible is part of a field of study known as hermeneutics. While this sounds complicated, its underlying principles aren't that difficult to grasp and can be applied to any written form of communication. Trying to understand what the text says is, in short, hermeneutics.
Applied to the Bible, principles of interpretation are meant to help, not hinder, our ability to make sense of what the Bible records. Another article in this series will address how to handle Bible difficulties, but having a basic foundation in hermeneutics will often help in that area, too.
Unlike some postmodern approaches to written texts that claim there really is no objective meaning to writing, throughout the centuries Christians have interpreted the Bible and continuously drawn out Christianity's essential foundations. The Bible, then, does indeed communicate objective truths.
Perhaps the greatest principle of biblical interpretation is context. Too often passages or portions of Scripture are quoted, cited or otherwise used to make a point or argue against a point when in reality the entire context of the passage is ignored. Although there are many books in the Bible, it is a cohesive whole wherein God distinctly communicates to us. This means that every passage is part of not only its immediate context, but also a broader context.
The words used are important, as is the context of those words. Whenever seeking to rightly interpret the Bible, make sure you understand the immediate context. What is the passage about? What comes before the passage you are examining? What comes after? Along these lines, not only is immediate context important, but so is the broader context. In other words, given a particular passage that speaks to a certain topic, what does the Bible as a whole say on the subject? Don't overlook the immediate context or the broader context.
It's also wise to avoid citing passages selectively just to try and bolster a particular point without keeping the context in mind. That's why theologians caution against building elaborate doctrines on obscure or isolated passages, or doing so by only referencing passages that appear to agree with our particular pet doctrine, while ignoring other significant passages that tend to argue against our position.
In addition to understanding the context of Bible passages, it's also crucial to keep two other related principles of interpretation in mind. These are known as exegesis and eisogesis. Exegesis has to do with reading and interpreting the text by drawing out from it what it is communication. Eisogesis, on the other hand, is when we attempt to read into the text what really isn't there. Exegesis, then, is the right way to approach a passage, as we seek to determine what the author intended, fairly looking at the text to see what it really says. Eisogesis, however, can lead to many errors, especially if we approach a passage with assumptions or presuppositions that really aren't in the text at all.
The "golden rule" of interpretation applies here: seek to interpret a text as others would seek to interpret what you have written or said. In other words, just as we would not want someone reading ideas into what we have said or written that are not there at all, we should not seek to do this with biblical writings either.
Related to biblical interpretation is a concept known as perspicuity. In short, the term means that the Bible is always clear when it comes to communicating truths about the essentials of the faith. There are no great secrets, hidden message or esoteric interpretations that will grant us additional clarity when it comes to the essentials of Christianity. As Jesus said, "I have spoken openly to the world … I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret" (John 18:20).
Biblical clarity on the essentials of the faith brings up a related point. It's important that we do not allow interpretational disagreements on secondary matters to cause division among Christians on essential or primary matters. In interpreting the Bible, then, we should ask ourselves if a particular interpretation of a passage will cause harm to an essential doctrine such as the deity of Christ, the resurrection, the atonement and so forth. If so, we'd do well to study the passage in more detail, keep in mind the broader biblical teaching on the subject and consult resources – including knowledgeable people – to determine if our interpretation is misguided.
A certain degree of humility is in order as well. Human beings are fallible, but our mistakes of interpretation do not mean that the Bible is flawed or lacking in authority. Usually it is our flawed interpretation that is the problem.
Another point to keep in mind has to do with the kind of biblical literature we are dealing with when seeking to interpret a passage. The Bible contains a variety of genres or styles of writing ranging from the overtly poetic, such as the Psalms, to prophetic writings, wisdom literature, apocalyptic literature and more. Knowing what kind of passage we are dealing with often helps our interpretation of it.
Related to this are questions of interpreting the Bible literally or figuratively. Both are valid approaches so long as they are judiciously employed. For instance, when the biblical writers share evidence of the resurrection of Jesus they do so quite literally. Despite some liberal interpretations arguing that the biblical writers are, for example, merely speaking of Christ's resurrection figuratively or as a symbol of some kind, the biblical text is clear that the resurrection is viewed as literal. Even Paul acknowledged, "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins" (1 Corinthians 15:17).
However, there are certain passages clearly intended as figurative. When Christ says he is "the gate" (John 10:7-9), he does not literally mean that he is a physical gate, complete with hinges and handle. Instead, he is using figurative language. When we read in Psalm 91:4 that God will cover us "with his feathers," we are not supposed to literally picture God as having feathers. Again, this is figurative language.
Mistaking figurative language for literal language, or vice versa, is very important when it comes to biblical interpretation. Again, context will often help us understand what is truly meant.
Correctly handling "the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:15) is something we are all called to do. Learning some basic principles of hermeneutics, or biblical interpretation, will help us do so consistently.[1]
[1] There are many helpful resources offering introductions to biblical interpretation. These include R.C. Sproul's Knowing Scripture (InterVarsity, 1977) and James Sire's Scripture Twisting (InterVarsity, 1980). A more advanced work on the topic is Introduction to Biblical Interpretation by William Klein, Craig Blomberg, et. al. (Thomas Nelson, 2004).
While the Bible is the bestselling book in history, it's arguably also the most criticized. There are, of course, different kinds of biblical criticism. Some are considered scholarly disciplines and, at their best, seek to bring to light valuable insights about the biblical manuscripts and their meaning. But more often than not, critics of the Bible are not out to praise it, but to put it down.
The next article in this series – "How do I handle Bible difficulties?" – will offer specific tips on dealing with common critical approaches and passages meant to confound Christians. But this article is more about how to go about responding in general to criticisms leveled against the Bible. As such, we'll look at some common criticisms of the Bible and offer an overview of some of the more scholarly objections.
Christians believe the Bible contains God's words to us – words that contain ideas related to the nature of God, the nature of Christ, the nature of human beings, the nature of salvation, and more. All of these topics are of great significance. If the Bible is in error in any one of these areas, then the insights of the critics are of supreme importance. But if the Bible is trustworthy in what it says, then we'd do well to heed what it says. What, then, do the critics claim and how can we respond?
The first criticism we will address has to do with miracles. Contemporary critics sometimes claim that since the Bible contains so many miracles, it just can't be true. Either these are just made up stories, they argue, or simple people were just tricked. In reality, just one miracle is too much for the modern mind. Why? Unfortunately, much of Western thinking in particular is grounded in naturalism – a worldview that believes that only the physical or material world exists. Based on this perspective, anything supernatural such as a miracle, is immediately suspect. As a result, this sort of critical approach to the Bible immediately casts doubt on key Christian beliefs such as the bodily resurrection of Christ.
There are many ways to respond to this sort of critic. It will be helpful to point out that it is the presupposition that naturalism is true that rules out miracles. But if God exists, then miracles are possible. Another approach involves turning the tables, so to speak, and casting doubt on naturalism. What are the reasons the critic believes in naturalism? This is also a helpful time to offer positive arguments for the existence of God. It may also be beneficial to take the resurrection of Christ as a historical example of an event that cannot be explained reasonably by any other means other than by calling it what it was – a miracle.
Another popular approach of Bible critics is to claim that since the Bible is full of so many contradictions, it just can't be trusted. At this juncture it is often helpful to ask for a specific example of a contradiction. Often, causal critics of the Bible will just claim it is "full of contradictions" as a rhetorical method. In other words, they may not have any specific examples in mind, but are just posturing and hoping no one will challenge them. If the critic does not have a specific example of what they consider a contradiction in the Bible, then politely ask them to offer one, otherwise they are making claims without proof.
But what if they do have one or more specific contradictions that they can cite, chapter and verse? This is where it is helpful for the Christian to have a good understanding of what they believe, why they believe it, as well as some general knowledge on interpreting the Bible correctly. 1 If a critic points out a specific apparent contradiction and you are not able to resolve it on the spot, be gracious and admit that you don't have an answer right away, but will look into it and get back to the person.2
Rest assured, Bible scholars have spent years studying alleged contradictions and discrepancies in the Bible and have offered reasonable answers. There are no instances of such alleged contradictions that would negate the foundations of Christianity or its essential beliefs.
Academic criticism in and of itself is not hostile to Christianity. It is merely a field that studies the biblical texts and tries to interpret them or make sense of them. Such criticism becomes a problem when it casts doubt on the reliability of the Bible. For instance, scholars who question the authorship of the first five books of the Old Testament hold to what is called the documentary hypothesis. This calls into question the authorship of portions of the Old Testament traditionally attributed to Moses and instead argues that several authors wrote the text.
The end result is usually to weaken the force of what the Bible has to say by claiming that it is not really divinely inspired, but a product of many different people and ideas that don't always agree with one another. Biblically speaking, Christ established the authority of the Old Testament repeatedly not only by often citing specific passages, but by general statements such as Matthew 5:17: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them" (NIV). 3
Another academic criticism of the Bible has to do with the New Testament. These critics claim that the New Testament documents can't really be trusted as true history, but are more like legends or myths. Rudolf Bultmann (1884-1976), for instance, sought to demythologize the New Testament, meaning that since modern people cannot accept the sorts of miracles and supernatural stories contained in the Bible, they must be made relevant. The end result, however, is to cast serious doubt on the biblical record and its claims.
But is the New Testament legendary or mythological? Hardly. The Gospels, for instance, record real places, real people, and real events in historical context. They do not read as myths or legends, but as historical records. The New Testament writers were familiar with contemporary myths and knew the difference between what they believed and the myths of their day, prompting Paul the Apostle to warn against "godless myths," for instance (1 Timothy 4:7, NIV; "worldly fables" in the NASB).
First Peter 3:15 calls every Christian to always be "ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you." This means that we all need to be equipped to some degree to respond to Bible critics. Not everyone is called to be an expert in this field, but we should all be ready to make a defense of the truth of Christ as recorded in Scripture.
What's a Bible difficulty? A Bible difficulty is an apparent problem posed by the biblical record. It might be called an error, a mistake, a difficulty, a challenge, a contradiction, or any number of other terms. Critics of the Bible are sometimes hostile in their claims that the Bible is "full of contradictions" or "difficulties," but these apparent problems are also brought up by committed Christians wanting to make sense of God's Word.
Rather than get into a number of specific examples, it will be more beneficial to learn some key tips for handling Bible difficulties. That way, whenever you encounter a seeming problem in the Bible, you will be able to use these tips as a starting point for resolving the difficulty.
Essentially, handling Bible difficulties is a matter of hermeneutics or interpretation (specifically, biblical interpretation). But other factors also come into play when interpreting, such as looking for a reasonable explanation, carefully making comparisons to other passages when necessary, and in general puzzling through possible answers and satisfactory resolutions to apparent problems.
Theologically liberal approaches to the Bible, on the other hand, often simply accept contradictions as part of a flawed record. But if the Bible is God's Word, and if God is all knowing and all powerful, it stands to reason we should be able to trust the Bible.
What are some helpful general tips for handling Bible difficulties? Fortunately, a number of Bible scholars have offered their insights. Here are some tips gleaned from the late Gleason Archer's fine book Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties12
In addition to Archer's helpful tips for handling Bible difficulties, When Critics Ask also offers its share of useful insights. Here's a selection of the advice:
Does the Bible contain some difficult passages? Yes. Are they unresolvable? No. Whenever a critic or sincere believer comes across an alleged Bible difficulty, it has always been answered. "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness …" (1 Timothy 3:16, NIV)
Gleason L. Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (Zondervan, 1982), pp. 15-17.
Norman Geisler and Thomas Howe, When Critics Ask (Victor Books, 1992), pp. 15-26.
Geisler and Howe cover twelve additional "mistakes" in reference to biblical interpretation and handling Bible difficulties. Other helpful resources in addition to Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties and When Critics Ask include Knowing Scripture by R.C. Sproul (IVP, 1977), Exegetical Fallacies by D.A. Carson (Baker, 1984), Scripture Twisting by James Sire (IVP, 1980), and Introduction to Biblical Interpretation by William Klein, Craig Blomberg, et. al. (Thomas Nelson, 2004).


text: Kenwood KCA-RC35MR Wired marine remote control Zoom Front Photos Videos Item #: 113RC35MR Review Summary 4 people say In Stock $79.99 Was: -$15.00 : Outlet Savings Free Crutchfield lifetime tech support Free Shipping Scratch & Dent Price Loading... $64.99 Add to cart + Add to wishlist Email me alerts for this product $79.99 New Stock Buy this item and earn up to 65 Rewards points See more offers and ways to save Special Financing Available x By buying this product you'll earn up to 65 Rewards points. When you sign up for a Crutchfield account, you'll be enrolled in Crutchfield Rewards. You'll earn one point for every dollar you spend on gear from us. You can turn your points into Rewards Cards that you can use toward future purchases. You can sign up for an account now, or after you complete your purchase (you'll get credit for the points either way). Sign up for a Crutchfield account Overview Details Staff Reviews Customer Reviews Q&A Articles & Videos Our take on the Kenwood KCA-RC35MR by Ken Nail Stay in control of your Kenwood marine receiver even if it's mounted below decks. The KCA-RC35MR wired remote gives you access to major functions of your Kenwood marine receiver — features like power on and off, volume, source, and track up/down. This wired remote eliminates any need to be in the receiver's line of sight, and its operation isn't affected by bright sunlight. See All Car Stereos that work with this item See more info on this item Highlights:controls select Kenwood marine receiversmounting hardware includedwarranty: 1 yearOur 60-day money-back guarantee Hands-on research from the Crutchfield Labs (what are the Labs?) What's in the box? | In-depth notes Product Research What's in the box? Download owner's manual Marine wired remote (with 8" attached power/ground/illumination/SWC leads) 1-Amp mini-ATC fuse (installed on power wire) Mounting bracket Bolt Lock-washer Wing nut Self-adhesive foam gasket Instruction Manual Scratch & Dent items may be missing non-essential accessories. In some cases the manufacturer's accessories have been replaced with generic equivalents. Our Product Research Team At Crutchfield, you'll get detailed, accurate information that's hard to find elsewhere. That's because we have our own in-house Product Research team — they open the box, verify contents, check the owner's manual, and record dimensions, features and specs. We stay on top of new products and technologies to help people make informed choices. Features Compatibility: The KCA-RC35MR marine wired remote control is compatible with Kenwood marine and in-dash head units that feature a SWC remote wire (blue/yellow). The Kenwood KCA-RC35MR marine wired remote control is designed to withstand the harsh marine environment. Backlit Controls: The Kenwood KCA-RC35MR features source selection, music search, volume up/down, and mute control buttons. The KCA-RC35MR provides backlit illumination so it is easy to see at night. Installation: The Kenwood KCA-RC35MR is designed to be surface-mounted using the supplied mounting bracket and hardware. The KCA-RC35MR offers a 4-wire installation; Ignition (red), Remote (blue/yellow), Illumination (orange), and Ground (black). The attached 4-wire harness is only 8" long and may require the purchase of additional lengths of wire (sold separately). See All Car Stereos that work with this item Product reviews from the Crutchfield Labs (what are the Labs?) Video: Kenwood 2013 Marine Receivers Video: Kenwood 2013 Marine Receivers by Zak Billmeier A marine receiver has to do more than just look good and sound great. It also has to stand up to salt, spray, sunlight, and rough weather. Kenwood designed their 2013 marine receivers and remotes to... Review this product Submit a review and then enter to win a $500 rewards card Kenwood KCA-RC35MR Reviews Average Customer Review: 4 people say: Review this product: Thanks for taking the time to share your experiences about this product. Please be sure to focus your comments on the product itself. Read our Review Guidelines for more information. Review title * Email Your email won't be visible. Please use the email address that is associated with your order. Display name (e.g., JohnD) Your review will be signed using the display name and location * Your location (e.g., Charlottesville, VA) * Your rating Click on a star to rate the overall product on a scale of 1-5 1500 characters left * Your review Attach a YouTube Review Crutchfield Video Review Guidelines Only submit videos that you made or are authorized to use. Do not submit videos that contain music, video or visuals that are copyrighted and belong to someone else. Please see our Review Guidelines for more information. Submit the URL of your YouTube™ video review or product demonstration. e.g., "http://www.youtube.com/v/o79TWHh598U" 500 characters left Pros 500 characters left Cons * Agree to Terms By checking this box you agree your review becomes the property of Crutchfield, that you are over 18 years of age, that you own or have owned this product, and that you are located within the United States or its territories. Please see our Review Guidelines for more information. We reserve the right (but are not obligated to) review all submissions and edit or remove any review in any manner which we deem necessary. Your review should be posted within seven days. Filter by rating: 5 Star: (0) 4 Star: (0) 3 Star: (0) 2 Star: (0) 1 Star: (0) 5 out of 5 Kenwood Remote Written By Steve, Wichita, KS on Thursday, July 03, 2014 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) I use it for my hot tub... works great! Cons: Wish had more detailed instructions to connections Was this review helpful? Yes | No 5 out of 5 great accessory Written By Stormin99, Annapolis, MD on Saturday, July 20, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) Easy install and large keys make control easy. Pros: Large legible keys Cons: None Was this review helpful? Yes | No 5 out of 5 Kenwood KCA-RC35MR Written By Michael W., North Charleston, SC on Tuesday, July 16, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) I was dreaming about a device that could control the radio from across the boat and WHAT. Kenwood made it. How fantastic was this. the device works well and easy to install. Pros: functionallity is great Cons: Trying to figure out where to drill the hole for ease of access while driving on the water. Was this review helpful? Yes | No 4 out of 5 Simple yet sophisticated Written By bigtxp, Cincinnati, OH on Monday, June 17, 2013 I just purchased and installed this remote over the weekend (paired with the KMR-355u headunit) near the transom of my boat so that it is accessible from the water. So far, it does everything as described. The only thing that it doesn't do is turn the headunit on and off (it will put it in standby mode which is very similiar to off). This isn't a big deal for me because I can turn the headunit off at the source but i don't have to get out of the water to control the volume and what is playing. I'm unsure of the longevity at this point, but will keep everyone updated. One thing I would recommend on the remote wiring diagram is to connect the orange wire (illumination) to the power control wire on the headunit instead of wiring it into the power wire (red) on the remote. This will allow your remote to illuminate only when the CD unit is in use thus saving precious boat battery. Great product so far, only reason for 4 stars is that I don't know how long it will last and that is most important to me. Pros: Simple, does the job, looks nice. Cons: none 2 out of 2 people found this helpful Was this review helpful? Yes | No 4 questions already asked Show all answers My KMR-350U receiver in my boat is at the Captain's helm (right side), can I install one remote on the passenger side glovebox area (left) and a "second" remote unit on the stern of my boat (at the rear of the boat)? So, can two remotes be wired to one Kenwood KMR-350U? Thank you. [ bgman Jul 12, 2014 ] 1 answer I forwarded your question to an Advisor and they responded with the following: Although the owners manual for the radio and the remote don't mention installing two remotes tech support is saying you can install two remotes. They say you should have a good battery installed (probably should have a good battery whether you have two remotes or not). The owners manual for the remote strongly suggests professional installation for one, so you should definitely consider professional installation for two. The installer will be able to determine the best method for the connections, but tech is saying you can connect the wires from each remote to the wires of the Kenwood radio. Again, a professional will be sure everything is grounded and protected as it should. If you would like to discuss further you can contact an Advisor directly by phone (1-800-324-9695) or online chat. [ Krissy Staff Jul 15, 2014 ] How many can I hook up to my stereo? Can I just wire 2 of them together? [ Don May 25, 2014 ] 1 answer I bought two remotes and had them installed without any problems. One was placed by the driver and the other on the left side/rear. The wires meet at the reciever and I have not had any problems with the two remotes. [ MATTHEW May 26, 2014 ] Currently have the Kenwood KMR- 525 installed in the boat. I would like to install two of these remotes in the boat. What else is needed to be ordered besides two of these remotes. Also what kind of communication wire is needed between the remote and receiver? Thanks! [ Grant Mar 16, 2014 ] 2 answers The Remote Works Great. No Special Cables Are Needed To Hook Them Up. Each Remote Needs A Connection of 4 Wires. 12V+ , Gnd , A WIre For IlluminatioN, And 1 Wire For Communication. It's Best To Get Your 12V+ From The Same Place That The Radio Is Connected That Way Is Has Power When Your Radio Does. The Gnd Wire Can Connect To The Closest Ground Source. The Illumination Wire can Connect To You Dash Lights Switch Or Just Connect To The Same 12V+ source As above. The Communication Wire Connects To The Wire Labeled "Remote" On The Back Of The radio. Since Your Connecting Two Units Follow The same Procedure For Each. All wires Can Be Standard 16 Or 18 Gauge wire. [ ANDREW I Mar 18, 2014 ] Correction. KMR-555U [ Grant Mar 17, 2014 ] which marine stereo is this remote compatible with? [ Troy Jan 23, 2014 ] 1 answer Of the current models this remote is compatible with the KMR-358 and KMR-555u. You can find the 555u here: http://www.crutchfield.com/p_113KMR555U/Kenwood-KMR-555U.html?tp=61742 When looking at marine receivers you can click on the Accessories tab, then click on marine remotes to see the remotes that are compatible with that receiver. [ Jeff Staff Jan 23, 2014 ] For a more in-depth review and enhanced detailed information on the Kenwood KCA-RC35MR, please visit the Crutchfield website product page (/ISEO-rccbcspd/p_113RC35MR/Kenwood-KCA-RC35MR.html ). × Front

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Good news everyone: Jobless claims on a weekly basis fell to a five-year low according to the Labor Department.
Bad news everyone: Yet still more people remain jobless.
And why is that? Because Obama doesn't care about jobs.
When you reckon out the newest jobless figures using the Obama's best calculus, the weekly decline doesn't mean that fewer people are unemployed.
That would be asking way too much from an administration that seems phobic about private-sector job creation.
"Applications for jobless benefits decreased by 37,000 to 335,000 in the week ended Jan. 12, the lowest level since the period ended Jan....


text:
Today's Signal to Noise Ratio = 19:437
Other stuff David Brabant - .NET Topology Suite Polymorpher - Another Simple VB.NET Binary Tree Ayende @ Blog - Book Review Part 2: Data Binding with Windows Forms 2.0: Programming Smart Client Data Applications with .NET mab - How to determine size of object in memory (like a sizeof for reference types) John Wood - Is OOP Bad for Business? Scott Hanselman - Open Source versus Source Out in the Open Jack Vaughan - Review: Red Gate SQL Bundle 5
Career stuff Better Living Through Software - 1TB Moonshot? Dan Farber - Learning from the masters: Creating a $1 billion company Scott Sehlhorst - Targeted Communication - Status Reporting Jeffrey Phillips - The downside of telecommuting Mitch Denny - Thoughts on Community Dinners
Local (Boston) .Net stuff Thom Robbins - Code Camp 5 Sessions Update
Builder stuff Marc Holmes - Enterprise Solutions Build Framework
Xml stuff Brenton House - Kirk Allen Evans talks about sorting XML with System.Xml.XPath.XPathExpression
Security stuff Emergent Chaos - Man Charged For Notifying USC of Vulnerability
Web stuff Alex Papdimoulis - More Dynamic-er Than Yours Peter Van Ooijen - RADical ASP.NET in VS 2005 without messing it up right from the start
Agile stuff Johathan Cogley - Pair Programming Presented
(0) |
Post RSS |


text:
Nike Lunar Force 1 "City Pack" Quickstrikes – Available
April 27th, 2013 by Aaron Hope | 5 comments
London, Milan, New York. Three world cities, three fashion capitals united by their inclusion in this new Nike Lunar Force 1 "City Pack". These Lunar Force 1 Lows take inspiration from their respective cities, with London taking on a classic tartan plaid, Milan opting for a sexy black leather look plus tortoise shell accents, and New York paying tribute to the Bronx Bombers with a Yankees-inspired pinstriped navy blue rendition. These Lunar Force 1 City Quickstrikes are sure to be highly sought after in their hometowns as well as by collectors abroad, so check out more below and act fast to grab yours from Concepts.
Read more →


text:
What's going on, Albuquerque?
Welcome toDuke City Fix
Sign Upor Sign In
Weh, Udall face off in second and final debate
Lack of jobs forces locals to flee
'Spirited Debate' between Udall and Weh
Absent Senate debates set for today, Friday
• "Sunday Poetry" with The Ditch Rider Johnny_Mango
• Daily Photo by Dee
• "Morning Fix" with Phil_0, Sophie, once banned twice shy, Kitson
© 2014 Created by Duke City Fix.
Badges |
Report an Issue |
Terms of Service
Please check your browser settings or contact your system administrator.


text:
"Too short; Change narrator"
Shortest story to meet, have mediocre-level-of-erotica sex immediately, be hero, fall in love, move in together, get engaged. And narrator failed to rise to level of passion in her voice and expressiveness when reciting erotic terms and sounds. There were a small # of times that the narrator seemed to mess up when reciting. I'm not sure she was comfortable with these roles. I will not be investing in any other stories by this author nor, possibly, this narrator, certainly not as a narrator in erotica. Though I would consider this author if the stories were longer. Makes me feel sorry for the narrator and her love life or her imagination after hearing her rendition of passionate sex, though I wouldn't call it erotica. Sad either way.
"3.5; Romantic tale; more like teen characters"
This love story about Garrett and Mia was a good one. The romance was good, and it had me rooting for them. There were sad parts to their story but nothing that made me cry, and there was a hard-fought-for happy-ending. It was good that everything didn't come easy to them. It made it all seem more real. The story flowed well and made sense. I really enjoyed having two narrators. And some of the side characters were great additions. Mia and Garrett came together in a supportive community. That was the easy part of the story. The angst and struggle was almost entirely between Mia and Garrett only.
The one aspect I didn't like was that Mia's financial ability to buy a house was not explained. And listeners are told she had a "substantial" down payment for an expensive fixer-upper in Virginia, I think. And that she refused to use money from her parents. She bought the house at 26-years of age with money she saved while working as an accountant in Atlanta since graduating college. So the money for the house purchase is barely explained. And that lack of detail and explanation was problematic for me.
Other than that point, I enjoyed the story and didn't identify any other lapses of continuity. Still, the story was just okay for me. Though I enjoyed some of Mia and Garrett's joking banter, found their warmth and sexual desire and expression for each other endearing and great to watch, it all remained at the okay level for me. I think it's because their story always felt like it was about very young people. Most of the story occurs 8 years after they graduate high school. So, presumably, they are about 26 years old. Nonetheless, it often felt like, sounded like, a story about 19 or 20 year olds. The story swings between the present and the past which may have contributed to the story feeling like it was about very young adults. And you have to really be listening to know when the story swings back to the past. I would've liked some indication or warning when this was occurring b/c it was confusing to me the first few times. But I finally adjusted, somewhat, and other times, I had to rewind to be sure.
I'm 44 years old. And I prefer stories about more mature—either in age or action or both—characters. So this story might appeal more to a much younger listener.
"3.5; Barely a romance; Good suspense"
This was an ok suspense tale. But the romance part took a backseat to the suspense and was not as developed or attended to. But, when it was the focus, the romance part was okay too. The sex scenes, of which there were about 2-3 detailed acts, were done well. They were sexy and somewhat romantic but not what I would call explicit or erotic. But there was enough detail to be steamy. However, if that's not your thing, they are so rare that you can forward through them.
Overall, the book was just mediocre. It was nothing I couldn't stop listening to. Simultaneously, it was also not a story that I couldn't bear listening to or had to fast-forward through parts. So that's a good thing.
The characters were likeable. Clarissa, the h, was smart and strong, even more than Erik, the H, at times and admittedly. I generally don't like stories based on the character getting amnesia, but it wasn't the primary trope used in this story and was temporary. So it worked out okay. As a result of Clarissa's amnesia, the story swings between past and present, but it's not done constantly and not for lengthy portions.
The suspense part included shootings, but there was no gore or detail in the violence. And the main characters didn't seem to revel in their violence. So much of the story skimmed the top of life, making it an ok story that was not light fare but nowhere near being deep or having any real depth at any point, either. But that was not the attempt. Therefore, I think the author achieved what she sought in this story.
The end comes together a bit too prettily after several struggles to survive and have a desirable end together, but it was also plausible. And the struggles all made sense and took the story beyond the basic light tale where everything seems to be great and happens so easily for the characters. Some outcomes depended on good luck and happenstance but not so much that I viewed the story as implausible. So, again, overall, it was okay. But I prefer a bit more romance than suspense in these types of stories.
"Cryin', needy female; poorly written romance"
This story didn't work for me, and the narrator didn't help. Though I'm unsure which was the biggest problem for me, but I think it was the story. Still, I must add that the narrator's tone and cadence didn't work well for this story. But I grimaced much more often at the story, at what was said and not how it was said.
The military suspense part of the story was ok. But the romance aspect, which comprised most of the story, was bad. The phrasing was the biggest problem, which means the writing was the big problem. Like saying that a kiss "opened more than her lips; it opened her soul." And, after looking at his eyes, "she knew she could heal him." This was after Christy knew Kyle for less than a day. And Christy actually said, "Take me; I'm yours," twice. REALLY?! And there were many, many more examples. I got so irritated I stopped listening. I could only finish the book in tiny bites at a time. Then I finally gave up and fast forwarded to the last chapter of the book. I made it through 7 agonizing hours of this story. I actually frowned while listening to their first sex act, and I NEVER have a problem with sex in the stories I listen to. I actually think that was the first time that happened to me. The romantic relationship seemed entirely based on loneliness. And Kristy—who I refuse to refer to as the h, or heroine—cried 2x on her first date and during the subsequent sex act with Kyle, the H. The tears were juvenile and inappropriate and very poorly timed. The first tears weren't explained and happened during sex. And the second cry seemed to be pity-me tears. She was a whoosy, needy female character, which I hate. She cried several times during the story, almost always in front of Kyle, and all of the times were like the tears of a spoiled child with a scary sense of undeserved entitlement. Kristy spoke of loving Kyle after 3 days and not as though she was contemplating being able to love him. No. She said she did love him. Plus, she actually went looking for him when he didn't contact her after their 2nd sex act, I think. It might have been after the first time. She pursued him and acting in ways that are reminiscent of a person who is mentally unstable relationally. There's so much more I can say about how very bad and unhealthy Kristy acted and how, therefore, poorly contrived the romantic relationship with Kyle was and was portrayed. The only positive thing I can say, in relation to their relationship was that the sex scenes were pretty good. The exception to that statement is that there were many times when the description of the sex act, their positioning, was quite confusing. So, try this book at your own risk. No more of this author for me. Geesh!
"Another "I see dead people" w/ little twists"
This story of paranormal detective Victor, is about equally focused on a crime and on romance. Though there's no mushy stuff with it between the male romantic characters, not really. It was an okay crime mystery, but I had some problems with some of the political points of view that were hidden in several comments. For one, Victor referenced his sexual orientation as a "lifestyle" in comparison to a hetereo person as though being gay is just a choice of how to live instead of an inborn preference. Victor's wisecracks—presumably the author's attempt at light humor or some levity—didn't quite work for me either. And he told a ghost to "talk to the hand" with no acknowledgement of this being a very outdated statement.
Victor is somewhat likeable except for his failing witticisms. He's not a player, not super hot, just a dedicated paranormal cop w/o friends and family who's hoping to get laid while keeping his sexual orientation a secret at work. And he lands it with non-paranormal cop Marks (Jacob Marks) who is the opposite of Victor and is also very dominant. Marks treats Victor fine but doesn't seem to be a nice guy, a caring guy, but, instead, is a power-hungry guy, one who gets off on having power as an authority figure. They work on paranormal detective teams.
The story is listed in erotica but is not full of sex, though the sex scenes are somewhat explicit, especially the last two. There are three sex scenes, and none of them include actual intercourse. The sex scenes are written very well; they are not the same-o-same-o. The author paints a vivid pic of what's going on, which is great. Similarly, the author has a knack for writing common concepts in new ways. Like it was very interesting that the perpetrator—which is a relatively common type of paranormal creature that I can't name w/o spoiling things—was described in action in this wonderfully bizarre and strange way, which was cool. It's not clear what it is initially. And Victor saw ghosts who were newborn as well as adults, which was a twist on the "I see dead people" thing.
"Interesting lightly erotic take on vintage female"
This lightly, barely erotic book is not a romance, and it is nowhere near a finished story. The main characters are married couple Ewan and Lilliane and Ewan's medical doctor friend, Phillip. Side characters include a French Canadian maid and friend of Lilliane and Ewan's butler James. And almost all of the action occurs at Ewan's Draper Estates.
The story seems to be a lite and partial take on the movie "Hysteria" that tells of Mortimer Granville creating the first vibrator. It's a story about dealing with Lilliane's "affliction" with the help of Phillip in order to avoid institutionalizing her. The only potentially problematic aspect of the story is the question of whether or not Lilliane's "treatment" causes her emotional and/or mental distress that's really harmful. In the end, that's in the eye of the beholder and might bother some listeners.
The story ends very abruptly and without any sense of closure. But it is a good story that is told well. It's not a rehash of the old, which is great. It flows well, makes sense, is plausible on the extreme side of life, and the narrator does a fine job with it.
Don't look to this story for pristine adherence to Victorian language. But, from my little knowledge, the story seems to do a very good job of adhering to the social and marital views of that time as it pertains to females and marriage, especially. I hope part 2 of this story will come to Audible.
"Fabricated drama drowning in sex"
This book was like listening to someone shriek even after the reason for shrieking has long past and the person should've calmed to the point of being able to use her normal voice or just being too tired. This story lived in high drama and angst without ceasing, and 95% of it was fabricated, not organically formed through various situations. This is a story of Chantel's (a deceased past lover of Phillipe) obsession with Phillipe, Phillipe's obsession with Chantel and Gemma, and Gemma's obsession with both of them. Gemma is the h, and Phillipe is the H in this tale. Writer and heroine, Gemma, performs a sort of an investigation of Phillipe as she meets with him to write a story about him, per his requests. Simultaneously she tries to answer for herself and her readers whether or not Phillipe is really the villain the world speaks of him being while also fighting her attraction to him.
The only positive in this story was the occasional way the author wrote with understated eroticism. But it was too rare to carry the whole very contrived story. And the narrator did a good job with the exception of her overly-French pronunciation of Chantel while speaking with no French accent the rest of the time. She, unnecessarily and in exaggerated form, pronounced Chantel's name with a false and poorly done French accent. Yes, the story takes place in France, but Chantel was born and raised in America. And Phillipe was acted with no French accent AT ALL!
To really enjoy this book it seems to be that you need to be the sort of person who buys into the idea that a person can "feel" where another person is in a crowd w/o actually being able to see them, the sort of person who lives and acts primarily on intuition and connection and how it leads a person's behavior and beliefs, and the sort of person who sees more positive than negative in succumbing to what one "feels" instead of what is logical or what one understands through analysis or serious consideration, thought and sees little wrong with living much of one's life in that way, on feeling and not thinking. It's a type of intuitive-based or rationalized hedonism excused by always saying "I couldn't stop myself." Apparently I'm not that type of person, though my Myers-Briggs type points to me being on the intuition band-wagon but not enough to enjoy this story. I prefer stories that have the primary romantic characters be more thoughtful, use their brains as much as their bodies and their emotions/passions. It's also helpful if you like stories dependent on and thus, full of journal or diary readings. I don't. Chantel's journal if read by Gemma throughout the story.
Also, is there something that draws women to visual artists like painters and sculptors? I think there's an idea or myth that males who practice those artistic forms are more attuned to the female form, can appreciate it and are, therefore, more sensual. That idea seems to be integral part of this story. If you're into that, then maybe this story will appeal to you more. I was very relieved when the story was over.
This is a tale of a gullible, needy, very sexual female writer named Gemma caught up in her too-quick attraction to Phillipe who enjoys playing "head games"—as she admitted—with her by using his dead ex-lover and obsession, Chantel, as his main tool. Gemma acts as a strong woman when she's engaging in her journalistic inquiry with Phillipe but at no other time with him. Unfortunately, these moments are brief and too easily concluded when Phillipe turns on his charm or uses his "head games" with her. Additionally, her reason for meeting Phillipe and being at his home, her goal to write a story about him and Chantel, is treated as an afterthought. Not once does she take any notes the few times she asks questions. She's too busy having sex with him or having sexual fantasies about Chantel or Phillipe or both. Not once does she have any contact with an editor or anyone connected with publishing this story supposedly so desired by the public. This is supposed to be a story of a lifetime, and it's treated with great nonchalance except as a trope for her being there and having sex with Phillipe. More astounding is the fact that she never expresses any serious concern about being painted nude by Phillipe while being on "the job" as a journalist. Clearly that would be proof of her lack of objectivity and crossing all professional lines while completing her story, but she doesn't even hint at hit. She makes one statement about her lack of objectivity and then never thinks of it again. I want tell whether or not she actually writes the story.
One example of this story's many contrivances is this exaggeration: Phillipe is rubbing Gemma's vaginal area and listeners are told that he can feel her wetness through her pants. Either Gemma has on no pants and/or those are the thinnest pants ever. But we are told that she has on "slacks," so it's hardly explainable or plausible. One example of how this story is consistently over-the-top. Also, Phillipe seems to use his negative reputation to keep Gemma from knowing him, from being sure of him, from no longer seeing him as an enigma. Once he told her, "Oh, and Gemma, you should always doubt my intentions." This was another contrivance, a failed attempt to make Phillipe seem mysterious or something. It was just irritating to me. The story was lessened for me for another reason. It was nothing new. It used statements I've heard in too many similar type stories. Things like, "Don't close your eyes; don't ever hide from me" and "I want to take you here" [in relation to anal sex] and the ever-present, "greedy pu**y." Grrrr. Too common. Overdone. It's so much like much of the romantic-erotica books out there taken to the 1000th degree unnecessarily and unceasingly. A person's head would explode if she existed in this type of high drama all of the time.
It was also strange that Gemma had no problem getting naked for Phillipe, a complete stranger she's known for less than a week, so that he can paint her. There was never any indication that she was "free" with her body like that, that she felt no shame in ever showing her body. This is especially strange considering she had studied his paintings of his "obsession," Chantel, who looked very different from her and had a different type of body, which he clearly found desirable and called "perfection" to Gemma.
I'm unsure if Gemma and Phillipe's sexual interactions occurred too quickly, if their "relationship" wasn't really given a chance to develop before sexual acts occur. I think I would've liked for things to go slower, to progress with more hesitation, more query and not just one-sided curiosity as was the case here, Gemma's curiosity. Before their first sex act, Phillipe masturbating Gemma, there was never a clear indication that Phillipe even found Gemma appealing. It didn't seem to be explained or quite make sense that they were suddenly sexing it up. To use an analogy, it was as though one person was on the far left and another person on the far right, then, all of a sudden, they were together in the middle. But it's never revealed how they moved from their corners, how the distance between them disappeared, how they got from opposite places to the middle, together.
The sex scenes written about were between Phillipe and Chantel, as told through her diary entries, and Phillipe and Gemma. The story doesn't waste any time including sex in the story. The first sex was self-masturbation. And this story is full of sex, which usually, I don't mind. But I tired of it here. The story could've been much shorter and, likely, better without so much of it. The first time Gemma and Phillipe have intercourse, Phillipe talks about what it was like having sex with Chantel. I think I get what the author is trying to do by forcing the absent and dead Chantel into Phillipe and Gemma's "relationship," but I don't think the author succeeded beyond adding strangeness, which I don't think was the author's intent. Instead, the whole story just came across as exceedingly unhealthy and, as a listener, somewhat boring and very, very tiring.
This story doesn't end with a HEA. I think the ending was to leave open a sequel. On both points I can say two things: no HEA is appropriate b/c I certainly didn't have one listening to this story, and, point 2, the sequel doesn't matter b/c this is my first and last Ella Frank novel.
"LOOOTSSS of sex w/o substance; ok story; 2.5"
Let me first say, I love sex in the stories I listen to and often, the raunchier the better. So it's very, very telling that even I thought there was too much sex in this story. But it helped me learn that, apparently, I like a bit more substance with my sex. I liked that Carly, the h, was strong and that there was a bit of struggle in her coming together permanently with Jake, the H. I also liked that they were "regular" people, w/o wealth or power beyond the common social structures. Carly made furniture, and Jake was a policeman. There were at least 2 menage (M/M/F) sex scenes in all of the sex, and the sex was explicit. Carly loved performing oral sex, and there was one act of anal sex, I think. It may have been 2, but I'm unsure; there was just so, so much sex. As a result, some of it became repetitive too. There are only so many options for variety with sex. And this story didn't include any BDSM stuff, though they used handcuffs 2x, I believe. There was so much sex that the author was having to try to reach for some variety. It still didn't work for me. I began to forward through much of it, which is unusual for me. In between the sex, the story was ok. I wish that the author had focused more on the story b/c it wasn't a bad one. My one exception to this is the way the author handled the subject of child molestation, but her attempt was not a total wash. It was just shared a bit too easy and overcome or handled in their lives a bit too easily as well, it seems. There were some struggles, but it still seemed a bit too pat, simplified. I think I'm done w/ this author, but she might appeal to some others.
"Mild, romantic, intergalactic war tale; 2.75"
It's a story about two people finding their "life mates." The story was too mild for my taste. It worked ok in all the important ways, but it was simply ho-hum. I didn't find it quite boring just inadequately engaging. Still, I liked that the romance unfolded in a realistic, not-too-fast & not-too-slow way. And Jared, the H, a shapeshifting king of an alien planet, and Kelsey, the h, a geologist and earthling, were likeable characters. I liked that Kelsey was described as a tall and not slight woman, about 6', though she was still described has having delicate hands and feet. Jared was 6'4", so it worked. The sex was nowhere near explicit and sort of overly dramatized romantic. But the story worked overall. It was more about expressing love and connection, which is not a bad thing. I think there were about 2 sex scenes in the book. So sex was nowhere near the focus of the book, though the romance still was. I also liked the secondary characters and believe I would enjoy their stories in future book, though I won't be rushing to purchase any. Though the story was about aliens and alien warfare, the focus was not on alien technology. Still some, like time travel, is used. There's no attempt to explain how it works nor is there a focus on it, but it's there. There's a bit more focus on the abilities of the aliens, and there are "alien" names, though all they take a back seat to the romance and war action that is generalized. There's not a lot that makes these actions any different than it would be in a non-alien story. This is not necessarily a bad thing to me but might be for some expecting something else. Ho-hum.
"Wonderful tale of developing love & changing"
What a wonderful tale of widowed, prudish Mrs. Russell being loosened by the rake-ish Mr. Mirkwood as their "business arrangement" takes an unexpected turn, including the endearing development of a friendship. As a result, both of them were changed in surprising and, at times, unwanted ways.
The story had a strong h. It was paced well. It had engaging characters, including but not limited to the h and H. And everything was plausible, including all of the dialogue and how people engaged with another. There was little internal dialogue, so the focus was on seeing not telling the story, which was great.
The story does not have any explicit sex scenes though it's full of sex scenes due to the story's basis. But they are not explicit. They are, however, sensual and revealing without any rawness or, what I would consider, detail. The only possible concerning term for some listeners—though not me—was cock. And for some people, it might not have enough heat. The heat level is barely a simmer. And I, a person who enjoys heat in a book, still find the book so enjoyable. The level of heat worked appropriately in this telling.
And there's an undercurrent of mild humor; not in a "ha ha" way but constantly smile-worthy. Sorta cute. It was so delightful to watch them push each other's buttons. Mrs. Russell's buttons were generally related to sex and bedroom action, and Mr. Mirkwood's buttons were generally related to his moral development and business astuteness.
And supplementary pleasure was watching their neighborhood, their tenants and farmers also change, improve as they were given opportunities for a fairer more just life. The story flowed. I looked forward to listening to it and didn't want it to end. The narrator doesn't have a big repertoire of voices, but the differences were adequate enough to keep up with who was talking and when. Though, this was due, in large part, to the author's story structure. I can't speak to the author's ability historical accuracy, and that type of detail matters little to me overall. So I will look for more from this author.
"2.75; Macho H; too quick love & sex"
The story is a tale of how a male operative, Colby Winters, falls for his accidental captive, Mia. Both characters were ok. Mia is not a weak heroine, though she never seemed to be bothered by Winter referring to her as "chic," "doll," or "babe." All of these names irritated me, which he also used generally in reference to adults females. And I liked the small bit of sly humor as well as these ok sex scenes. But none of these inspire me to read more by this author. And I forwarded through parts and slept through others with no meaningful difference in me understanding or liking the story.
This story might go down, in my 1000+ audible buys, as having the worst timed first kiss EVER! The author's attempt to explain the highly inappropriate and worst timed kiss was admirable. But I don't think there is any way a kiss at that time (don't want to spoil anything) could be explained. It occurred after about an hour into the story; there was really no sexual tension or clear attraction between the two nor any indication that either were very hard up for sex. So, the kiss made absolutely no sense especially not then. I never get when story characters have sex and the like while in mortal danger especially not with a stranger, even less when it's a stranger that the character doesn't really like or trust. It could just be me so….
The action could be great for some listeners, but it wasn't for me. Mia got in trouble more than once requiring rescue. There were several rescue acts, which were written well, I think, but they didn't keep my interest. They made sense and were plausible. In fact, it showed Winter to be human, to not be bulletproof which was good, since he was a bit overly macho most of the time. The horrible exception was some of the mushy words he used and did so very shortly after meeting and starting to have sex with Mia. They seemed to come out of nowhere, and he had little problem saying them even while acknowledging they were out of the norm for him. So it just didn't piece together well, seemed implausible.
Report Inappropriate Content
If you find this review inappropriate and think it should be removed from our site, let us know. This report will be reviewed by Audible and we will take appropriate action.


text:
I want one.
I want one.
Hey Jon, double bevel but still fairly asymmetric? Looks nice.
one man gathers what another man spills...
nope... as close to 50/50 as one can get by hand
Great looking knife!
I've spent the last couple of days (well, parts of them really) looking for double bevel honesukis, and it turns out there are not a whole lot of them, and definitely not with wa handles.
Any info on price for this beauty?
i think its going to be $205... based on demand so far, i'm not even sure if this first batch is going to make it to the website... i'm trying to get pics done this week though.
i like them as well. if only i didn't just buy an ipad. lol.
hopefully i can get one in the future if there's more of these coming.....
im guessing its probably going to be a while before these go up on the site? bummer.
Just trying to find time to take pics


text:
Miniature Pinscher Puppies for Sale
• Female • $1,299
• Male • $1,299
• Male • $600
View More Puppies for Sale
Breed Group: Toy
Weight: 8-10 lbs
Height: 10-12.5 inches
Color(s): clear red, stag red, black and tan
The Miniature Pinscher, also known as "The King of the Toys" is a feisty little breed with a sense of humor, terrific energy, and is very courageous. This breed is very eager to learn and experience new surroundings. However, if given the chance this energetic fellow will escape from confinement. Usually seen with a docked tail and erect ears, this breed will be sure to steal your heart.
Miniature Pinschers are very loyal, alert, and playful. This breed does require proper socialization as a puppy, as they can be weary of strangers. They are peppy little dogs that enjoy the company of their companions. This breed if properly socialized can do well around children and other pets.
This breed needs proper exercise, as they are very inquisitive and vigorous. This breed is recommended for households with only well-behaved children and would do well with other pets if properly socialized. Very headstrong, this dog requires consistency and firm handling otherwise may become somewhat of a tyrant.
Miniature Pinschers have a very spirited personality, which requires energy and patience. A very low maintenance breed when it comes to grooming. Wipe down with a cloth daily to remove excess hair would be sufficient for this short haired and average shedding breed.
This shorthaired toy breed does not require much maintenance when it comes to the coat. Acceptable colors for this breed are as follows, solid clear red, stag red, Black and Rust, Chocolate and rust. The Miniature Pinscher is most commonly seen in Stag Red and Black and rust, however other colors are available.
As with many toy breeds, this dog can be rather difficult to house train. Consistency is the key to training this sometimes stubborn little dog. This intelligent breed is very eager to learn and if given the proper training, will thrive.
Definitely an energetic fellow that requires exercise. Good for apartment life, but a regular romp and play would quickly satisfy the curiosity of this breed. A few short walks per day should also be sufficient. This eager little breed is sure to keep your on your toes.
If you are looking for Miniature Pinscher puppies for sale from reputable Miniature Pinscher breeders or to adopt Miniature Pinschers from a Miniature Pinscher rescue then make sure you understand as much about the dog breeds you are interested in as you can. Every puppy breed is different. Begin your research by reading the breed information about the Miniature Pinscher puppy above. Search our dog breeds section to find Miniature Pinscher puppies that make great pets.
Are you knowledgeable about a certain breed? Share what you know!
We provide the only safe marketplace for Miniature Pinscher dog breeders to list and rehome their purebred Miniature Pinscher puppies. Miniature Pinscher dog breeders listing puppies on Next Day Pets are required to verify their identity for your protection. Most dog breeders with Miniature Pinschers for sale offer health guarantees and may be shipped worldwide. With over 100,000 active dog breeders, we can assure you you'll find the perfect puppy for your family.


text:
Did you know you can search by date? Simply enter a date (ie. 12/31/78, August 1969, etc.) into the search bar, and press SEARCH for the results.
Below you will find Bobby Ace & His Cards From the Bottom of the Deck Programs for $500 - $999
Tom Constanten,
Jerry Garcia,
Mickey Hart,
Phil Lesh,
Bob Weir


text:
Saturday Science Links: October 25, 2014
In science news this week, read about magical nose cells, 45,000 year old thigh bones, and the weirdest looking dinosaur ever.
The Resource Finder has powerful filtering features — check out the tutorial to learn more.
In science news this week, read about magical nose cells, 45,000 year old thigh bones, and the weirdest looking dinosaur ever.
Wright reminds us that robust Christian faith takes evidence on board, but fuses reason with faith, hope and love.
From science and religion blogs: quantum uncertainty and God, the remarkable fact that we have come to understand our place in the created order, and the role of theology in making wise choices about the use of technology.
We should celebrate the many times that our churches and colleges encourage scholarship. I saw several delegates at Synod stand up and speak directly about the importance of supporting scholars who engage the science and religion dialogue. The recent Synod decision was a move in the right direction.
In this series, James Kidder provides an intriguing study on transitional fossils and the evolutionary history of modern humans. He begins by discussing the fossil record, explaining how new forms are classified. He then explains the physically distinguishing trait of humankind—bipedalism. From the discovery of Ardipithecus, the earliest known hominin, to the australopithecines, the most prolific hominin, Kidder focuses on the discovery, the anatomy, and the interpretation of these ancestral remains.
The new Gallup survey shows in broad strokes the challenge we face. But more nuanced surveys find that only 8% of Americans are convinced creationists whose beliefs are dear to them, and only 4% are convinced atheistic evolutionists whose beliefs are dear to them. The vast majority of Americans are not sure of their position and are open to a conversation.
Written by BioLogos Fellow of Biology Dennis Venema, this series of posts is intended as a basic introduction to the science of evolution for non-specialists.
This weeks in Origins news: studies of a skeleton uncovered in 2007 provide clues about rapid human evolution in the Americas, our climate and Christian stewardship, a few BioLogos folks give interviews, and some cool links to miscellaneous finds.
Would those genuinely interested in learning about evolution benefit from a careful explanation of why these common objections don't hold water? Here the answer seemed to me to be "yes."
A few months ago Zondervan published the anthology Four Views on the Historical Adam. This valuable new resource addresses one of the most common questions Christians have about evolution: how does the Adam of the Bible fit with the scientific and historical evidence about early humans?
We now take for granted an understanding of the Christian story that was largely worked out by Paul and later theologians. Even though the Gospels were composed after Paul's letters, they were concerned to tell the story itself in all its strangeness as it had been preserved by the first generation of Christians. And what we find in the stories themselves is the shock and wonder and surprise that the resurrection caused.
Today's Origins News Roundup features challenging and exciting new ideas about evolutionary theory, fossil finds that add to our understanding of how carnivores and humans developed, some interesting science history from England, and more on American views of evolution.
Today's origins news roundup features an end-of-year look at some of 2013's major science highlights, a brief glimpse at what to watch for in the new year, and a few great science and faith resources from the past few weeks.
This week's Origins News Roundup features highlights from a recent conference of evangelical theologians, exciting human fossil finds, tell-tale lice, and a few words from the Pope.
"It's tempting to think that the church needs to decide quickly which of these [original sin] scenarios is right, and which ones must be wrong. I believe the church is better served by taking its time, holding several different scenarios in tension for a while as we think through the implications of each."
So what then does Resurrection mean? For Benedict it represents a new dimension of reality breaking through into human experience. It is not a violation of the old; it is the manifestation of something new.
To understand more clearly where Polkinghorne lies on the larger landscape of science and religion, let's consider his approach to the Resurrection. Many contemporary thinkers, including some theologians and clergy, believe that "science" has somehow made it impossible to believe in the Resurrection, the deity of Jesus, and even belief in the transcendent God of the Bible.
Christian theology asserts that humans are spiritual creatures, a unity of body and spirit or "soul," integrated, not reducible downwards to mere matter or upwards to mere spirit.
The God who created the cosmos is the God who came to us as a child in Bethlehem.
The Denisovans, an extinct hominid group that interbred with modern humans, made the news again lately with the publication of a more detailed study of their genome. One of the many interesting findings was that the Denisovans share the same chromosome 2 fusion that modern humans have.


text:
His first game of the night on Feb. 5 at the local alley, 2365 East St., was a perfect 300.
It was a good start, but hardly a surprise, considering Kelley, 23, of Modesto, averages 242 per game and had bowled 19 perfect games before, including one earlier in the men's league season.
By the end of the night, he would log a series score of 879 for his team, the Pound Aways, and set a record at West Valley Bowl.
It was his 26th series above 800, and third at the alley.
According to Herb Hunter, owner of West Valley Bowl, the previous series record was 860, set by Galen Gentry in 1982.
Kelley said he just concentrated on how he starts and how he finishes.
"After the first seven strikes, it wasn't really setting in my mind what I was going to do," he said. "My logic with 300 games is get the first one — the next two are a little bit easier. The first strike and the 10th are always the hardest ones."
Well into his second game on Feb. 5, he realized he had bowled 20 strikes in a row, and the rare achievement of back-to-back 300 games was within reach. The pressure was on, and his shot in the 10th frame appeared off-target.
"I didn't get into it all the way, so I'm begging the ball, 'Please come back, please come back,'" he said. "I got a lucky break and got a strike."
The next shot was solid, and his teammates — including Benny Sanchez Jr. of Tracy, Benny Sanchez Sr. of Oakdale and Cody Stocke of Modesto — were concentrating just as hard as Kelley.
Kelley's 12th throw of the second game didn't hit the head pin like he wanted, but it sent pins scattering, and the team watched them topple one by one.
"It was like a slow-motion strike," Sanchez Jr. said.
Kelley couldn't help but think of his potential for a third consecutive perfect game. Only 21 bowlers in the U.S., two of them in California, have achieved a perfect 900 series since 1997, according to the United States Bowling Congress.
Hunter, who also plays in the Strikers league, said that by the end of Kelley's second game everyone was paying attention
"It got real tense," he said. "It's really quite a feat."
Kelley started with his 25th consecutive strike, but on the second frame he left the No. 2 pin standing.
He relaxed and bowled nine more consecutive strikes, then left the No. 10 pin standing on his final roll for a score of 279 and a series of 879.
Kelley, who started competing at age 7, has participated in the Professional Bowlers Association western region tournaments.
When he's not on the lanes, he works the front desk at Yosemite Lanes in Modesto, his regular job for the past six years.
That's where he and co-worker Stocke met the Sanchez father-son duo three years ago after Sanchez Jr. bowled a 1,105 four-game series, the first 1,100 series at the Modesto lanes in seven years.
They formed their team for leagues in Modesto, and in September 2012 Sanchez Jr. convinced the others to visit West Valley Bowl once a week for the 36-week Strikers league.
Most nights they don't even worry about scores, Kelley said — they got into the Tuesday night league for the camaraderie.
Sanchez Sr. said bowling gave him new vitality after he had a heart transplant in 2004, and also gave him a chance to be inspired by younger people, like Kelley.
"Nick and Cody, both of these guys are like my own sons," he said. "They became a big part of my life with this game."
• Contact Bob Brownne at 830-4227 or email@example.com.


text:
Main Content
On February 5, 2012, every NFL fan will be glued to the television watching an epic battle for gridiron supremacy at Lucas Oil Stadium during Super Bowl XLVI. Make sure that you're ready to cheer on the best of the best in these mesh shorts from Reebok. Featuring the Super Bowl logo embroidered on the bottom left leg, two front pockets, a back pocket and elastic waist, in these comfortable shorts you will be you ready for the big game!
- 100% Polyester fabric
- 19.5" Outseam
- Elastic waistband with drawstring
- Imported
- Lightweight mesh shorts with a solid fabric lining
- Officially licensed NFL product
- One back pocket
- Quality embroidery
- Two front pockets
49ers Customers also liked:
Special event items are produced by manufacturers only after the outcome of a game or event. These are advanced sale items and will ship immediately after they are received in our warehouse.
Manufacturer direct items are shipped directly from the manufacturer. These items are not available for international or expedited shipping.
Customized items can be personalized with options such as your name, your favorite number, and/or designs. Some options may be limited by league rules.


text:
INGLEWOOD, Calif. (April 26, 2013) — Betfair Hollywood Park will have an early post time of 11 a.m. Saturday, May 4 for the simulcast of the 139th Kentucky Derby from Churchill Downs.
Gates will open at 7 a.m. both Friday, May 3 and May 4. Betfair Hollywood Park will import all of the Kentucky Oaks program Friday and the complete Derby Day card Saturday. The first import from Churchill Downs is scheduled for 7:30 a.m. both days.
The second week of the Spring/Summer season begins Thursday, May 2. Post time is 1 p.m.
There are two stakes races on the May 4 card at Betfair Hollywood Park, topped by the $150,000 Mervyn LeRoy Handicap, a Grade II and the first prep for the $500,000 Hollywood Gold Cup, which will be run for the 74th time July 6.
In addition to the LeRoy, which is for older horses at 1 1/16 miles over Cushion Track, the other stakes to be offered is the $70,000-added Cool Frenchy for 3-year-olds & up at five furlongs.
Entries for the Mervyn LeRoy and Cool Frenchy and the rest of the May 4 program will be taken Wednesday, May 1.
The Kentucky Derby Day festivities will also include the Derby Dream Contest, where the fan that comes closest to picking the correct order of finish in the Kentucky Derby will win $1,000, and the start of the Triple Crown Challenge. This is a free contest where fans receive four selections in the Derby. If they have the winner among those picks, they will advance to the Preakness two weeks later.
Copyright © 2009-2014, Hollywood Park. All rights reserved.


text:
For her hilarious portrayal of Frau Blucher in Young Frankenstein, Andrea Martin is up for her fourth Tony Award nomination (having already won one for My Favorite Year). To celebrate her good fortune, the ever-popular comedianne agreed to answer your questions! Click and watch!
Broadway Flea, tasty Thai treats and Jenn Colella's birthday! That's what If/Then's James Snyder is serving up on this week's episode!September 23, 2014
Dylan H. Thompson chats about the pros and cons of wearing his birthday suit onstage in the all-nude off-Broadway musical comedy Naked Boys Singing.August 29, 2013
Enjoy this video first look of new Cinderella stars Carly Rae Jepsen, Joe Carroll and Fran Drescher!February 18, 2014
Tony-winning Aladdin star James Monroe Iglehart says goodbyw to his vlog with a great episode that includes a chat with Disney honcho Thomas Schumacher and the final "Ask a Genie" segment...plus, there's an amazing musical send-off!October 3, 2014
Wicked leading ladies Alli Mauzey (who plays Glinda) and Nicole Parker (Elphaba) put on pretty party dresses and hit the city's hottest 2009 Tony after-parties.June 11, 2009
"Wicked" original cast members Kristin Chenoweth & Idina Menzel sing "For Good"January 20, 2010
Correspondent Amber Milt is on location in NYC as Annie looks for its new leading young lady to headline the show's national tour. We hear from the hopefuls who would love to step onto a stage and belt out, "Tomorrow."August 15, 2014
Broadway.com catches up with Alex Sharp and the cast at the opening night of Simon Stephens' The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time.October 7, 2014
In this week's episode, we find out about Al Pacino's Broadway return, new passengers On the Twentieth Century, NPH's latest triumph and lots of Broadway wedding bells!October 22, 2014
See clips of Denzel Washington in August Wilson's 'Fences'April 26, 2010
High-tech neon suits and a dark stage are all that iLuminate: Artist of Light needs to light up the night at Off-Broadway's Duke Theatre. Take an illuminating look behind the scenes at this inventive dance troupe's mind-blowing show.December 13, 2012