A More Realistic Alternative to Inerrancy of the Bible

Millions of believers assume the Bible is inerrant—that everything in the Bible is the absolute word of God. I believed this myself for thirty-five years, but I now think this belief is very mistaken and even harmful. It distorts the way we interpret the Bible and prevents us from properly discovering what it tells us.

We sometimes have problems understanding the Bible in its original, unfamiliar settings, but we also have a second problem—we come to the Bible with presuppositions we have inherited from others. These presuppositions accumulated over time and were passed down confidently from one to another, so that when we learned them from our teachers they appeared to be the only way to understand the Bible.

So it is with inerrancy.

Bible

Who Wrote the Bible?

Among believers, there are two perspectives on reading the Bible; one is to assume inerrancy, and the alternative is to approach the Bible without that assumption. It is almost like seeing the Bible through two different kinds of glasses, and they lead to completely different ways of following Jesus. One way leads to great harm to believers, non-believers, and the church; the second leads to love, peace, freedom, and reconciliation.

As a fundamentalist, I saw the Bible through inerrancy glasses. But after decades of wearing those glasses I experienced a paradigm shift that opened the Bible to me in a clearer way and also revealed the dangers of assuming inerrancy.

The key to this paradigm shift was the realization that God did not write the Bible—he did not dictate it, or guide it, or preserve it. Instead, the books of the Bible were written by people who felt a strong connection to God and who wrote about God based on their own experiences, circumstances, the influences of their culture, and their limited understanding of the world. This does not mean the Bible is without value—it is tremendously valuable!

But it is not the very words of God throughout, as though it were one continuous, authoritative book. When referencing passages from the Bible, it is misleading to say ‘God says’ or ‘the Bible says’. A more appropriate introduction is to say ‘Mark says’, ‘Paul says’, or ‘the book of Leviticus says’.

The Old Testament

With this perspective, it is easier to see that God was not the angry, harsh, vindictive God the Old Testament often describes; rather the Old Testament pictures how the authors of those books thought about God. And one of the things that influenced their view was the idea that God was responsible for human catastrophes. Therefore they interpreted their national history in terms of God’s direct actions, so that their successes and reverses were attributed to God, whom they saw as demanding, punishing, and harsh in expressing his displeasure toward both the Israelites and their enemies.

Thus to them it was God who rained down terror on the Egyptians that held the Israelites captive. It was God who directed his people to destroy the Canaanites. It was also God who punished Israel and Judah when they strayed, and who finally allowed them to be conquered by the Assyrians and Babylonians.

However, the Old Testament view of angry God was not the only view. There are also characterizations of the God of love, comfort, and empathy for the brokenness of humanity. In reading the books of the Old Testament we find many wonderful insights about God and life, but the Old Testament books were not written, so to speak, in one voice; because various authors had different understandings about God.

The New Testament

To an extent, the New Testament is similar to the Old Testament in that it was written by individual people and is not God’s very words—but there is a difference. The books of the New Testament center on the good news of Jesus, and most of them are told from the memories of Jesus’ earliest followers. While the Old Testament was written over a period of 1000 years, the New Testament was written within about a generation after the life of Jesus. And it focused on one thing—Jesus.

The Gospels

The word ‘gospel’ means ‘good news’, and the four books are about Jesus’ message of the good news: 1. God is not angry and harsh with us as some of us imagined, but loves us and desires our reconciliation and freedom from our burdens; 2. We can abandon legalistic religious rules and, instead, live a life of seeking the good of others; 3: We are now part of the kingdom of God helping to bring about God’s will on earth; and 4. We have hope of resurrection after death and a life of peace and happiness forever.

The early followers of Jesus wrote in their own words, from their own cultures, and from their own perspectives; but what they share with us is of immense importance. Though some details and emphases vary, I believe we can have confidence in the portrait of Jesus presented in the Gospels from the memories of his earliest followers.

In reading the Bible, this is where I would spend most of my time.

Paul

Paul’s letters are of a different genre than the Gospels. While the Gospels tell the story of Jesus and the good news, Paul’s letters address issues that arose in the churches he established. They are personal and specific to local situations; they are not addressed to us at all! And they are the words of Paul—not of God; therefore we cannot infer God’s revealed truth, or theological doctrines, from Paul’s personal advice and instruction to churches and individuals, because he wrote to specific issues in his own time and culture.

However, Paul’s writing’s are very useful. Though we live almost two thousand years since his original readers, we benefit from his thoughts and insights; but were Paul to visit us today I am sure he would be horrified to find that some believers consider his words equal to the voice of God. Some of Paul’s personal opinions are culture-bound, but that does not prevent me from admiring Paul and his insights on living as a follower of Jesus.

The Dangers of Inerrancy

Understanding the Bible as composed of important books written by humans who were bound by their histories, cultures, and limited knowledge makes more sense than viewing the Bible as one huge document revealed by God, as inerrancy assumes. In fact, using inerrancy as the paradigm for reading the Bible leads to harmful results of all kinds. We will talk about some of those harmful results next time.

In this series:

6 Religious Beliefs that Cause Tremendous Harm
The #1 Most Harmful Belief Among Christians—Angry God
4 Ways that Believing God is Angry and Harsh Hurts People
The #2 Most Harmful Religious Belief—the Inerrant Bible
A More Realistic Alternative to Inerrancy of the Bible (Today’s Post)
4 Huge Ways Believing the Bible Inerrant is Tremendously Harmful
How Legalism Stunts Our Spiritual Growth
How Should We Respond to Those who Teach Harmful Beliefs?

Six religious baggage issues

Photo Credit: Christian Evolution
The purpose of this blog is to support those re-evaluating traditional religious beliefs. If you find the blog helpful, consider following to avoid missing future posts.
In the column to the right, you can follow by email (most dependable), Facebook, or RSS.
Have a great day! ~Tim
This entry was posted in Bible, inerrancy, New Testament, Old Testament, Paul and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

60 Responses to A More Realistic Alternative to Inerrancy of the Bible

  1. scraffiti says:

    Well said Tim! I enjoyed this. I was also taught that the Bible was the be and end all.
    My problem has always been – and I have read it cover to cover – is that once I got the gist of what it has to say, I never particularly wanted to read it any more! I had been told what a great comfort the Bible was. However, I never found it so and thought there was something wrong with me for not getting it. Then there were the many sermons I have sat through over the years that were peppered with Bible verses that were kind of used to enforce an argument (or extort money) rather than teach truth – and truth is always hard to find! I quite agree that the message of Jesus is the part that matters most. I just wish he had written it himself and not left it to others to write many years after the event. This time delay has given the critics their best argument against the gospels and is in truth hard to deal with. It also makes me wonder!

    Like

    • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

      Scraffiti, I have also read the Bible cover to cover based on the understanding that every word was important. There are still books and passages I like to read, such as most of the New Testament and certain parts of the Old Testament (like portions of the prophets with a heart for marginalized and oppressed people).

      It would be great if Jesus had written a book, but perhaps that was what he was about–he always tended to present his message in an open-ended way. Though I wish he had written something, I also learn a lot from how he impacted his earliest followers and would hate to loose that benefit. So I guess we have to take what we have and look forward to learning more in eternity.

      Like

    • I just can’t take anybody seriously who was a fundamentalist for 35 years.

      Like

    • It seems that everybody who posts here thinks that he is some kind of deeper thinker because although he is a Christian he doesn’t believe in the inerrancy of the Bible. Why? How is this somehow a “deeper” view of things? If you believe in things as ridiculous as heaven and hell and the Resurrection, who are you to say that the fundamentalists’ views are not supportable?

      Like

      • Please give me evidence as to why your beliefs are “a more realistic alternative.”

        Liked by 1 person

        • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

          David, as I said earlier I cannot get a sense of your direction so I don’t have a context for many of your questions. I was thinking you might be an atheist, but from this comment it appears that you might be an inerrantist. Would this be the case? If so, I can better address your challenges.

          Like

      • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

        David, I don’t think the people here are necessarily deep thinkers, but most of us do see the Bible through different glasses. Having been a fundamentalist for so long, and struggling with numerous fundamentalist beliefs such as inerrancy, eternal torment in hell, legalism, penal substitution, and creationism, I can only conclude that these harmful views are not supportable–not even by the Bible itself.

        I can speak more on each issue if you like. And let me say that I appreciate your comments and challenges.

        Like

  2. then why even believe in a book or God if it is full of errors?

    Like

    • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

      This is a good question, Susan. But if we were to apply it to all books, we would never read any because they are all filled with ‘errors’. All books are written by people. No book is a final authority–not in history, science, medicine, philosophy, nor any other field. However, even though no book is inerrant, they do add to our knowledge and our understanding of the world.

      But I would not really characterize these books as having ‘errors’. Instead I would say that they present viewpoints, based on the current level of knowledge, which are influenced by the perspectives of the writers.

      Like

      • fiddlrts says:

        I like that idea that it isn’t helpful to say that there are “errors,” so much as to understand that the writers wrote from their knowledge and experience. To some degree, this would be like saying that Homer and Shakespeare had “errors” in their writing. The point of both isn’t to gain historical or geographical knowledge, but to absorb the truths of human nature and experience from their fascinating tales. The whole approach to the Bible as a detailed instruction book for life and society is problematic, and gives rise to the question of inerrancy in the first place. If one looks at scripture like I believe Christ did – as the story of God’s interaction with humankind, with everything pointing and relating to the incarnation itself, then the details cease to *need* to be perfect in every point.

        Like

      • It depends on your purpose in reading. If you read Huckleberry Finn, you might of course say that everything in it is erroneous, since it didn’t happen in real life. But are you actually reading the Bible this way, or are you reading it for “inspiration?” That is a whole other thing. It doesn’t matter if you take it literally or not. If you do not read it in a critical way (that is, as you would read any other work of literatue) , then you are “believing” in it; that is, you are having “faith” without evidence.

        Liked by 1 person

        • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

          David, I don’t read the bible for inspiration, though I do find certain passages inspiring–just as I do in Huckleberry Finn and other books. Neither do I ‘believe in’ the Bible, but I do find the Jesus in the gospels, written from the memories of his earliest followers, very compelling.

          Like

    • Chas says:

      It contains errors and contradictions because it was written by men. If it were the Word of God, or inspired by God, it would be perfect, as God is perfect. Believe in the Perfect, not the imperfect.

      Like

  3. gcleaver2014 says:

    Tim–yours is the kind of commentary that should appear in the front and back of all Bibles! (And as a reminder for good measure, another copy of your commentary should be inserted between the Old Testament and the New Testament.) Belief in Biblical inerrancy is a misguided and dangerous mistake causing harm to both the church and its message to the world. I too held that belief far to long and it had a very insidious effect on me.

    Like

    • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

      Cleaver, you are so kind. But I do wish every believer better understood this issue. An erroneous approach to the Bible can only produce erroneous results. I will talk about some of the harmful results of inerrancy next time.

      Like

      • Chas says:

        Tim, One thing that comes out of our experience is that we once believed that the Bible was inerrant, but have been led by God out of that error, which means that He intended us to use it as if it was inerrant at first, but because we have now become more mature, He now wants us to use it differently. We understand much better than we did, because we have moved closer to God and so can hear Him much more clearly. Where we once needed to hear what He was saying to us by His interpreting the Bible for us, we are now able to hear Him directly, so we are no longer dependent on using the Bible as a starter to guide our thoughts where He wants them to go.

        Like

        • And how do you know this? Did God tell you? How is your belief any different in believability from the belief that the Bible is literally true?

          Liked by 1 person

          • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

            From this comment, it seems more likely that you are an inerrantist (as I asked you in another response). If so, the answer to your question here is that there are numerous reasons to conclude that the Bible is not inerrant. I have already written about many of them if you are interested.

            How do inerrantist know the Bible is inerrant? It is an apriori assumption–a presupposition. I concluded that the Bible is not inerrant–or even directed by God–by realizing that the Bible does not speak with one voice; it is not consistent. And I no longer approach the Bible with an unfounded presupposition that it is inerrant. I take the writers as they are–people who have very strong feelings about their relationship with God but writing from the limitations of their eras, cultures, and understandings of God.

            Like

  4. Love the post. Please keep sharing your thoughts – this is a great conversation to have.

    The word Bible in any Romance language means Library.

    It’s evident to me that Jesus himself referred to sacred texts by their individual character. He quoted from the scroll of Isaiah, he quoted the Psalms of David, he made extensive reference to the writings of Hosea and Ezekiel. Jesus also referred to what was written in the Law vis-a-vis. the Ten commandments as well as other laws from Deuteronomy. In other words, there was no “The Bible” as a codified single book for either Jesus or his disciples. They had, instead, sort of a working library of sacred writings and scripture in which even what we call the Old Testament was not codified until well after the Crucifixion.

    I think that leaving room for the scriptures to breathe by avoiding the man-made “inerrant” descriptive enhances the ability of the divine message to move more freely. For instance, it allows me to focus on the social justice and return to faith message of Ezekiel, rather than focus on the way he frames his discussion. Scripture leads someone to encounter the divine, not because some human in some century or another has declared to be perfect and unquestionable, but because the scriptural message speaks to the human soul, and engages us with the divine. Those early writers struggled with their own limitations to try to express their encounters with the Divinity of God and the effect it had on their perceptions. To me, that only serves to lead me deeper into pondering the message and workings of God and I find my faith strengthened because of it.

    Like

    • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

      Country, you make many excellent points; but so many people don’t know about them or they dismiss them out of hand. Perhaps this is because they fear to deviate from their tradition. Or perhaps it is just easier to follow an ‘authority’ instead of having to think through Bible passages.

      Like

      • Chas says:

        The Holy Spirit guides us to the meaning that God wants us to have from any given Bible passage, BUT that meaning might not be suitable for someone else. The inspiration is in the reader, not the writer.

        Like

    • How do you know that what you say is true? How do you know that there is a “Divine” at all. You have pulled it out of nowhere just as those who take the Bible literally have pulled their beliefs out of nowhere. Where is your evidence that you are right and they are wrong?

      Liked by 1 person

      • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

        David, I don’t know much about God other than what Jesus tells us about the loving Father. So far your comments have all been challenges, which is okay, but I don’t get a sense of what your position is. What do you believe or understand?

        Like

  5. Schuh says:

    Thanks, Tim, for identifying what I think to be a key step toward a more fruitful engagement with the Bible: the realization that God did not write it. Evangelicals often talk about “taking the Bible seriously,” but for decades I hardly gave a thought to where it actually came from. Studying the Bible now as the work of real people struggling to understand God and their role in God’s unfolding purpose in their particular time and place makes for a richer and more engaging experience. I’ve discovered the Bible to be a more complex and beautiful book than I ever knew.

    I do struggle, though, with Paul. I see his genius in adapting Judaic faith for a Greco-Roman audience, and his reflections on the nature of love, for example, are timeless. But very largely his concerns are not my concerns; he offers theological solutions to problems I don’t face.

    But more than ever, Jesus emerges as the central focus of my interest. Though the gospels are theological reflections on second-hand testimony likely written 40 to 70 years after the events they describe, their portraits of Jesus are vivid and enigmatic. It seems to me Jesus’ words of comfort and challenge remain tremendously relevant, as trustworthy and authoritative as ever.

    Like

    • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

      Schuh, I really like how you expressed your comments so richly. I especially enjoyed your statement: “Studying the Bible now as the work of real people struggling to understand God and their role in God’s unfolding purpose in their particular time and place makes for a richer and more engaging experience. I’ve discovered the Bible to be a more complex and beautiful book than I ever knew.” Well said and very true!

      Like

    • Chas says:

      I too always struggled with Paul, because he was trying to address problems in churches in which he had influence. Many of these problems arose from the fact that some/many people in those churches did not truly believe. They were therefore influenced by worldly things and by the personal weaknesses arising from their upbringing. After quite a short time of following God’s guidance, He required me to steer clear of Paul’s epistles, unless it was necessary to use something from them to give understanding to someone else.

      Like

      • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

        On the other hand, once I understood that Paul was only human and not a source of doctrinal revelation, I found that he was very influenced by Jesus’ message of the good news; the entire tone of Paul’s letters is in the light of love, peace, and reconciliation among humanity.

        Like

        • Chas says:

          Tim, what do you make of his views about women not being allowed to speak in church? Women both speak in tongues and prophesy, through God’s empowering. Paul’s words give unenlightened church leaders the ammunition with which to silence such women, to the potential detriment of their church. You were enabled, by God’s empowering, to see that Paul’s words were his own and therefore you were able to take authority over them, but without that empowering, those who do not see might take authority over those who see only dimly.

          Like

          • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

            Good question Chas. I don’t think God poses any limitations on women. Whether women are allowed to speak in church seems to me a cultural issue, as it was in Paul’s day in the cities where he wrote his advice about women in the church.

            I think as we pursue the best for everyone, as Jesus told us to do, we must see women as equals in every way as our sisters in Jesus.

            Like

          • Chas says:

            In particular, women possess qualities that men to not. Where these are ignored, or are undervalued, the group/relationship suffers.

            Like

  6. I agree with this wholeheartedly. When I attempted to read the Bible as the inerrant word of God I actually couldn’t. There were so many examples of a wrathful God, and women in various parts of the old testament are just not viewed in a very equal lens. I couldn’t sit down with it, so I didn’t benefit from it. Now, I look it at as the account of various people who had connections with God. I think of the time they lived in, and the motivations of any rulers who may have handled the translations. I can read it now. I focus on what resonates with me, and politely put the rest aside.

    Like

    • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

      Marisol, I am glad you were able to change your approach to reading the Bible; isn’t so much more helpful now?

      You mentioned that when you read it as inerrant you had problems with things like “so many examples of a wrathful God, and women in various parts of the old testament are just not viewed in a very equal lens.” Most inerrantists do not have these problems; they just accept that God IS wrathful and women ARE unequal. This is not healthy for any of us.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. sheila0405 says:

    Tim, my computer has been giving me so much grief, which is why I am late to this party. I’ve been following the readings in the Catholic Lectionary since the new year, and some of what I read has encouraged me, while other parts have left me feeling very upset. I’m glad for this reminder that the Bible is about people’s perceptions of God. Right now I’m not really sure about who or what God is. Even Jesus has some harsh words in the Gospels. So, I am still on a journey. I haven’t gone to church in months because I just don’t feel safe there anymore. My dad’s health has been awful for the last nine months or so, and he continues to struggle to recover from a series of events. When things settle and my brain feels like it can think again, I’ll be back on my WordPress account. Anyway, thanks for this, and I am looking forward to the next installment.

    Like

    • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

      Sheila, I am sorry to hear of your dad’s health problems.

      I can’t say that I understand who or what God is; but I know what Jesus says about him, and that is sufficient for me. I am not sure we can know more about God than that.

      Like

  8. rogerwolsey says:

    Great stuff. So important for people to realize that the Bible can by taken seriously – while not taking all or even much of it, literally. On a similar note, here are 16 Ways Progressive Christians approach and interpret the Bible: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogerwolsey/2014/01/16-ways-progressive-christians-interpret-the-bible/

    Like

    • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

      Thanks Roger, I think your 16-point summary is excellent though, of course, each individual has different emphasis on each point and would likely add others. I recommend your post to all my readers who would like to pursue the topic.

      Like

  9. Pingback: 4 Ways that Believing God is Angry and Harsh Hurts People | Jesus Without Baggage

  10. Pingback: 6 Religious Beliefs that Cause Tremendous Harm | Jesus Without Baggage

  11. Pingback: The #1 Most Harmful Belief Among Christians—Angry God | Jesus Without Baggage

  12. Pingback: The #2 Most Harmful Religious Belief—the Inerrant Bible | Jesus Without Baggage

  13. Pingback: 4 Huge Ways Believing the Bible Inerrant is Tremendously Harmful | Jesus Without Baggage

  14. Pingback: How Legalism Stunts Our Spiritual Growth | Jesus Without Baggage

  15. Pingback: How Should We Respond to Those who Teach Harmful Beliefs?–With Love! | Jesus Without Baggage

  16. Pingback: Do You Still Feel Guilt and Fear because You Fall Short of what God Demands? | Jesus Without Baggage

  17. Pingback: The 10 Most Viewed Posts on Jesus Without Baggage in 2015 (through June) | Jesus Without Baggage

  18. Hi Tim, I do regard the Bible as being God’s Word but because I believe it is inspired by Him and not because of any teaching on inherency. I think there are those whom God inspires today and I think there were long periods in history when there was no Word from God. I also, know that it is many books, written over a long period time, by several men. Most specifically, Hebrew men and Jesus was also, a practicing Jew. I view the entire Bible including, the NT as a Hebrew work. That is the culture and perspective it was written from and it is more easily understood when studied from that perspective. Jesus is the Jewish Messiah, the promised King of the earthly Kingdom to come. Jesus is woven throughout the entire Old Testament. He is the central theme of the Bible. Mere men have been inspired through the ages to write the Word of God, Jesus, the radical One, lived it!

    When the Catholic Church paganized the teachings of scripture is when these confusing teachings began. Hell is the theological word I have the most bones to pick about because it was even imposed on the text to obscure what the Hebrew writers express as the fate of nonbelievers. I believe the purpose was to confuse and suppress the truth because like the Pharisees of Jesus’ day, they enjoyed the power religion gave them over others. They put themselves between others and God, in an attempt to be gods. Most fundamental teachers would never associate themselves with the Catholic church but they still view the Bible through that old Catholic, paganized lens.

    So again, I agree and disagree but mostly, I agree to disagree in peace.:0) One thing that amazes me about the Bible is how consistent it is given it was written by human beings who can’t agree on anything, over such a long period of time. No matter what people say about the Bible, what I do know is that it isn’t like any other book. I’ve been reading, studying, and teaching it for 37 years and I still can’t put it down.:0)

    Like

    • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

      Pam, I think you are correct that doctrines (such as hell) are often used to maintain power over people, but I think those who teach it also believe it themselves; so they heap religious baggage on themselves as well as others. I wish they knew, as you expressed it, that in reading the Bible we must consider ‘the culture and perspective it was written from.’

      By the way, I always try to disagree in peace. It is the best practice and allows me to embrace my spiritual relationship with people who do not always agree with me. What! Am I the final fount of all knowledge? I don’t think so.

      Liked by 1 person

  19. Pingback: The 10 Most Viewed Posts on Jesus Without Baggage in 2015 | Jesus Without Baggage

  20. Violet says:

    Hiya,

    This site helps a lot. I am terrified of Yahweh and I don’t agree with a lot of things in the Bible. (ie: eternal conscious pain in hell, genocide, animal sacrifice, homophobia) like, even thinking of those things makes me feel ill.

    Thanks for this site. 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

    • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

      Thanks Violet, I am glad you find the site helpful. I hope you continue to do so and comment further as you feel inclined. I assume you have read some of my post on the four subjects you mention. I haven’t said a lot about animal sacrifice, though I do discuss it in the post the goes up on Monday.

      If you wish, you can find more about what I and others have written on hell, angry God (genocide), and homophobia. Just go to any page and find books and resources on the menu bar at the top. Hover over it and you will see a list of topics including those three you mentioned.

      I look forward to any other comments you might have.

      Like

  21. After I read the second part of this sentence, I stopped.

    “Though we live almost two thousand years since his original readers, we benefit from his thoughts and insights; but were Paul to visit us today I am sure he would be horrified to find that some believers consider his words equal to the voice of God.”

    WOW! I felt the Spirit…I am reminded of the one time Paul was ripping off his clothes because people thought he was a god. I was too a legalist & can relate 100% with everything you are writing. I’ve never read anything like this. So appreciate your posts on legalism. Thank you for sharing.

    Liked by 1 person

    • jesuswithoutbaggage says:

      Thanks Trust, I am glad you found the post helpful. I really do think Paul would be shocked and embarrassed to hear how think his words are equal to the voice of God.

      I hope you continue to visit and also add to the discussion as you are inclined.

      Like

  22. Miro Sinovcic says:

    What a strange religion, keep telling us we have to kill all non believers, in the name of some man siting up in the sky.
    And stupid humans are doing killing for more than two thousand years.
    This God, is not the person I would like to follow.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Pingback: The Alleged Biblical Basis for Christian Patriarchy | Jesus Without Baggage

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s