Remnant Theology 02

Posted on April 17, 2025 by ehurst

Ref: Heiser refers in one podcast to a document: Remnant Theology in Biblical Prophecy [PDF].

We learn that the term “remnant” has both positive and negative connotations in Hebrew depending on the context. The linked article marches through the history of biblical prophecy and how the term was used in various contexts. If nothing else, it’s a very good review of where various prophets fit into the stream of revelation.

Even better, there’s a good look at the Essenes and Qumran Community and their literature. It offers a reference to the Damascus Document (previously called the Zadokite Document) and you can find an outline of it here. The Library of Congress offers a translation of just one fragment here.

There are also various references to the books of the Apocrypha. If you don’t have a hard copy, they are easy to find online. The paper uses some obscure terms:

“lexeme” — a very basic root word in any language’s lexicon, a short word or stem that is part of other words

“topos” — a traditional theme or motif

It’s worth a read.

Posted in teaching | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Remnant Theology 02

Restoration Theology 01

Posted on April 16, 2025 by ehurst

Ref: Heiser’s 3rd Q&A podcast

In the podcast Heiser refers to Restoration Theology in a PDF extracted from the Logos software library that he posted on the website. It’s about 16 pages long, and it is by no means light reading. It requires that you focus and keep track of references in the Bible and in various Second Temple documents.

It is well worth your time if you can handle it. I spent an hour or so plowing through it and making mental notes of things I recognized.

In particular, it has been my contention that the ANE outlook includes an insistence on seeing the world on multiple levels at the same time. There are threads of consideration that must be held in tension in order to find your way through moral issues. If you can grasp that approach, then you should be able to follow this extract. It calls on the reader to understand how Second Temple Judaism was not all one school of thought.

The authors refer to a Deuteronomic school of thought that held Jews must repent in order to restore the nation to its former glory. They explain it rather well, if in a condensed form. You must pay attention as you read it. Then they point out how this is a core element in Pharisaism, and thus part of what Paul was thinking about when he wrote.

And it is quite obvious that Paul wrote on multiple levels. If you cannot keep track of his references, you’ll get lost. It’s downright silly and irresponsible to attempt to squeeze Paul’s writing into a single level of consideration. Especially foolish is viewing it on a literal level.

This extract concludes with opening up a fresh understanding of what Paul seems to be saying about how “all Israel will be saved” in the end. I recommend you read this thing. Keep in mind that there is a repeating block of text on the bottom of each page identifying the source, and it can at times appear to be part of the narrative.

Feel free to ask for clarification, in particular on how we can incorporate this material in our own teaching. Later on I’ll take a look at the second PDF posted on that page.

Posted in teaching | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Restoration Theology 01

Hermeneutics of Establishing Priorities

Posted on April 12, 2025 by ehurst

Ref: Heiser’s Bible Podcast on Acts 15 (transcript PDF).

Bible translations into English vary some, but we recognize in the Old Testament the term “Chosen” referring to the Nation of Israel. There is no useful distinction between “Chosen” and “Elect”. Yet, the term in the OT does not appear to point to the same thing in the NT. Heiser notes this often.

But I believe he misses the point. The name “Israel” itself does not refer strictly to Israel the People but Israel the Message (as I’ve said before). The Chosen were meant to personify God’s revelation. The first batch failed. God sent His Son to correct that error and become His living revelation of truth. Jesus is the message. He is the Chosen of God, the personification of Election.

In that sense, He is the New Israel, just as any king of a nation might be called by the nation’s name as a title. For example, wherever King David went, he was the pinnacle representative of Israel. Jesus is our king; He is Christianity. Whatever He decides and whatever He says is the word of the Kingdom. We are the New Israel because we are under His reign.

In Hebrew, this is not just vernacular usage. The whole orientation of the language is on the reality of the persons involved. It’s not merely that Jesus is called “the Word of God”; He is the Word in the sense of His role.

Thus, the biblical concept of Election is a matter of who plays the role of the messenger of the Message. Who reveals the Word on God’s behalf? That’s the Elect, the Chosen. In the OT, it didn’t actually apply to every human born of Jacob’s DNA. It was never the circumcision of the flesh, but of the heart. The label applied to them in some titular fashion, but what God was keeping His eye on anyone who had Jacob’s heart.

Thus, the difference between OT Chosen and NT Elect is only apparent if you misread the Hebrew text. That was the problem at the Jerusalem Council. In Acts 15, Peter says that circumcision of the heart among Gentiles meets the standard for calling them “Chosen” — fit as citizens of Jesus’ Kingdom (salvation). James, as the Moses of the Jerusalem church, rises to support this contention against the Pharisees among the church members.

Heiser makes much of how James quotes the Prophet Amos (ch. 9). It’s not an exact quote from any text we have today. It’s rather close to the Septuagint, which in turn is distinctly different from the Masoretic Text. Did James change the quote, or did Luke record it with some small error? We can’t know, but we suspect James was doing something common among the Apostles, a form of referencing the Old Testament in a way that is not precisely a quote, but pulls in a meaning that God intended, a meaning that was not always obvious to the Hebrew people.

Recall that Jesus had to explain how it was necessary for Him to suffer according to the Scriptures, but that this concept was intentionally masked. God didn’t want the rebel alliance in His courts to be aware of His full intention in sending His Son until the Son declared it. Otherwise, the crucifixion so necessary to address the Three Rebellions would not have happened. So, we find Jesus spending some of His forty days after the Resurrection explaining the obscure references in the Old Testament to His suffering. The disciples really needed a better lore to replace what they had.

The Apostles took this as a cue and applied the same kind of thinking to the whole of the OT in order to clarify God’s priorities (Paul’s “rightly dividing the Word”). In the case of this reference to Amos 9, we see the promise that God will restore the “tent/booth” (household) of David. It’s the whole image of dynasty and the cause for which he was the chief shepherd of the Chosen. Jesus as Messiah fulfilled that.

It would appear that Amos refers to a restoration of the full Twelve Tribes. The Masoretic Text refers to reasserting authority over Edom and any other previously conquered territory (“all the nations who are called by my name” refers to nations claimed in conquest on His behalf). The issue here is not the nations that David or any of his descendants conquered politically, but the nations Jesus would “conquer” with the gospel message. That’s what James is seeing here.

It so happens that the Septuagint says pretty much what James says in that the nations would seek the Lord. It reverses who seeks and who is being sought. Further, the name of Edom is changed to “mankind”. It’s a plausible mistranslation given a Hebrew text with no vowel points, because the Hebrew consonants for “Edom” and “mankind” (adam) are the same, and you would have to know by context which vowels go with it. But as noted already, you can get to the same place with either the Septuagint or Masoretic text if you pay attention to the extended concept of who is doing the conquering — Jesus. It won’t matter if it’s “Edom” as a symbol or “mankind” directly.

The Lord had promised from the beginning that His Chosen should be a witness to all nations, and that the Gentiles would someday join the Covenant. You’ll notice in Acts 15 that this recognition struck the Pharisees in the audience. They went along with it.

Finally, we come to the text of what James proposes to be the rules applied to Gentile Christians. I’ve often said it was abstracted from the Seven Noachide Laws, but I’ve always been guarded about it. We cannot be sure the Talmud records them accurately, but we do have one clear indicator: In Leviticus 17-18 we have a recurring phrase referring to the non-citizens living among the Israelis (“aliens/foreigners”). Regarding those alien residents in the nation, the same prohibitions are listed in the same order as they are in Acts 15.

Leviticus 17:8-9 — offerings to any other god
Leviticus 17:10-16 — blood must be drained from animals
Leviticus 18 — sexual impurity

One small point: James refers to animals that have been strangled. So far as we know, this is a figure of speech covering animals that were not properly slaughtered so that they bleed out a much as possible. Thus, we have the reference in Leviticus 17 to animals that died of some other cause that could include strangulation.

What we are getting at here is James does not make these a law for Gentile Christians, so much as a means to keeping peace between Gentiles and Jews when they are in the same congregation. You’ll notice Paul doesn’t make so much of the business of food in some contexts where Jews have no significant presence, especially in markets where meat not offered to idols would be hard to find. Only the business of sexual purity applies universally. Again, we see how the primary reference is not in the words of the text itself, but God’s priorities as clarified by the Holy Spirit through the text.

Posted in bible | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Confusion Propaganda

Posted on April 11, 2025 by ehurst

You read or hear all these alarming reports of how the economy is at risk, the markets are volatile, and all kinds of bad things are happening. Everyone wants to pose the question of what is in our country’s best interests. There is endless commentary on what the policies ought to be, in all flavors.

And it is all wrong.

Our position has been consistent over the years. The prosperity and security of the American people can come from only one source: the Covenant of Christ. God promised to take care of those who embrace the feudal reign of His Son. Everyone else will just be chasing their tails. Trying to build a social and economic policy in pursuit of outcomes is wicked. If Americans are not covenant people, they cannot expect consistent prosperity and stability.

The focus should be on morals, not the products of moral goodness. America’s best interest is the Covenant. Nothing else matters. We have no need for anything God doesn’t promise.

Of course, the biggest problem then is a complete confusion on what the Covenant means and what it demands. The western religious perversion of biblical faith is a major element in the problem. We will keep talking about that from time, as we have for a very long time already.

Side note: The sock puppets are attacking again. I’m filtering out comments from people whose only goal is to tear down faith in Christ, but the dirty aim behind it is sucker us into parroting the same noise that gets people arrested for promoting violence. One recently used an AT&T mobile account based in Houston, TX. That’s consistent with previous incidents, always using AT&T mobile from some major metropolitan area.

Posted in sanity | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Confusion Propaganda

On Platonic Assumptions

Posted on April 9, 2025 by ehurst

We’ve been chasing this down since my ministry began decades ago: Western minds are trapped in a collection of assumptions that derived from a distinctly non-biblical worldview. A primary example is the presumption of human intellect to grasp the nature of reality. The biblical viewpoint is making no pretense to understand such things, and refusing to address some of the questions that come with striving to grasp the nature of reality.

In the Bible, a basic philosophical assumption is that the best we can do is come up with parables, functional references that cover some applications. The underlying question is not, “What is this?” Rather, the question is, “What can we do with this?” It may not seem like much expressed in English language, but there is a profound difference between those two.

A great many terms in the Bible are not meant to be taken as defining elements of reality. Rather, they are flexible concepts based on the fundamental question of what we should do. This, in turn, rests on the single greatest concern of any human: What will keep me in God’s favor? Nothing else matters. There is a distinct Hebrew habit of mind here that calls for a halt to exploration once that question is answered.

In more practical terms, the question works out to: What brings peace with my convictions? There is an unquestioned assumption that convictions are the only way you have any hope of knowing what God requires. Once you’ve examined the record (Scripture) and heard the testimony of others (when available), you turn to your convictions to filter out things you don’t need to worry about, and cling to what drives you through life.

So, for example, we read the word “soul” in our English translations of Scripture. Don’t try to nail down what it means beyond a functional definition. If you bring to the Scripture your western assumptions, influence heavily by Plato and Aristotle, you will associate that term in your mind with something that is eternal by its very nature. That’s a bad assumption. In the Bible, the word “soul” can be associated with animals, for example, and we know that Scripture says nothing about them going to Heaven or Hell. Whatever the word “soul” should mean, it has nothing to do with your eternal identity.

It would be far more useful to consider that the only thing making you eternal is not something about you, but that God remembers you. Whatever it is that makes you able to live again on the Day of Resurrection is not something inherent in yourself, but simply that you continue to exist as a person in the mind of God. He will want to see you again in some real form in Eternity.

Thus, the question is not what you are, nor what you’ve done, but who you are in God’s mind. Thus, you get this Old Testament cry from the saints for God to remember them. It’s why Jesus talked about His disciples as His brethren before His Father. If God remembers His own Son, then anyone Jesus remembers is included. It’s not a question of “making an impression” in that sense, but of making your company pleasant for Him. Rest assured, He is in our world searching for people who will turn to Him.

Thus, Plato’s emphasis on the assessment of real things as inherently evil and ideals as inherently good is all wrong. In the Bible, the difference between the real and the eternal is whether it’s trustworthy. You cannot trust the real; it is inherently deceptive. But it’s not therefore evil. There is good and evil in both this realm and in the Spirit Realm. Satan did evil in Eternity.

And as we’ve noted in previous posts here, even the concept of “good” and “evil” in the West are loaded with evaluations that make no sense in the Bible. The Hebrew concept is whether a thing is useful or not. More to the point, it’s whether a thing is useful to God. Does it serve His priorities?

I’m not saying I agree with everything stated, but I believe this chapter of a webbook is worth your time. It may help you address the fundamental differences between western and Hebrew thinking.

Posted in teaching | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Covenant Blessings

Posted on April 7, 2025 by ehurst

So, just what are these covenant blessings?

It’s not so hard; take a look at Deuteronomy 28. As you read, think of it in symbolic terms. Get the big picture. This is grandfathered into the Covenant of Christ. Keep in mind that the Covenant of Christ applies only to those who consciously live under the that covenant. It is not a political entity, though it could be in theory. No one’s ever gonna implement that, but my point here is that God promises some measure of material and social stability. The exception should be obvious: when He warns you that suffering is required. It won’t come as a surprise; part of the Covenant is that God promises to let you know so you can prepare.

My message to you is that, while we will suffer some, those of us truly devoted to the Covenant will come through this tribulation just fine.

Posted in teaching | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Covenant Blessings

The Law of Kings

Posted on April 5, 2025 by ehurst

We are pretty sure David studied the Torah on a regular basis. It’s hard to imagine he would not have kept the law, in particular the passage in Deuteronomy 17:14-20.

When you come to the land the LORD your God is giving you and take it over and live in it and then say, “I will select a king like all the nations surrounding me,” you must select without fail a king whom the LORD your God chooses. From among your fellow citizens you must appoint a king — you may not designate a foreigner who is not one of your fellow Israelites. Moreover, he must not accumulate horses for himself or allow the people to return to Egypt to do so, for the LORD has said you must never again return that way. Furthermore, he must not marry many wives lest his affections turn aside, and he must not accumulate much silver and gold. When he sits on his royal throne he must make a copy of this law on a scroll given to him by the Levitical priests. It must be with him constantly and he must read it as long as he lives, so that he may learn to revere the LORD his God and observe all the words of this law and these statutes and carry them out. Then he will not exalt himself above his fellow citizens or turn from the commandments to the right or left, and he and his descendants will enjoy many years ruling over his kingdom in Israel.

We could be sure David carried out this command, by copying this section of the Torah in his own hand to read daily. Near as we can tell, this command did not refer to the whole Torah, as that would have taken a couple of years and a lot of scrolls for a non-scribe, but copying this passage is not so far fetched. It’s fairly simple with four rules: No stable of horses (chariots), no tolerance for any talk of returning to Egypt, no harem, and avoid accumulating silver and gold. To keep it fresh, read it daily (procedural matter, not a rule).

It takes knowing the broader context to figure out where to draw actual limits on three of those rules. The issue with horses is actually tied to returning to Egypt, since up through the Conquest, the only place to get horses was Egypt. The real issue wasn’t the king having a chariot, but of having commerce with Egypt so soon after the Exodus. It would be a trap.

There is actually no numerical cap on how many wives any Israeli man could marry, so that wasn’t the real issue. The business of not accumulating wives had to do primarily with marrying foreign wives to form political alliances. This passage is not too far from where Moses also reminds the people not to marry outside the Covenant (Deuteronomy 7:3-4). Thus, the real problem was the risk of a foreign wife remaining pagan and tempting the king to idolatry.

The issue of precious metals is not about material wealth in itself, but the way silver and gold as a means of exchange provide the temptation for receiving bribes, internal or external. Kings would be expected to have their own agricultural enterprises, animal husbandry in particular. But when people exchange these things, it’s quite open and obvious to everyone. Gold and silver could be exchanged in secret. It’s the business of petty bribes that destroys justice. The prohibition is that the king should avoid seeking to build a private treasury; a royal treasury to fund government business was necessary.

Notice something: Solomon broke all of these rules. He began doing business with Egypt, started importing horses and chariots, and collected such a large harem that we can scarcely believe it today. And for sure, we are told his wives did sucker him into idolatry — 1 Kings 11.

Posted in bible | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The Law of Kings

Placed in His Company

Posted on April 5, 2025 by ehurst

Three things that are so critical that they warrant special attention.

1. We’ve taught this for years: There is nothing any human can do to change their eternal destiny. If you pay attention to the Old Testament narrative, you’ll notice there is precious little comment about eternal matters. That’s because they understood things correctly, that humans have no business trying to talk about eternal things outside the narrow parabolic content that God revealed.

If you understand the thesis of the Unseen Realm (Eternity), then you realize our place in the scheme of things. Jesus died on the Cross to open the Covenant to all the Elect from all nations. The point was not getting more people into Eternity, but to open up the promises of God for this life to all the folks already predestined for Heaven.

God’s Elect are going to Heaven; that is eternal truth. The Devil and his allies never could have done anything to change that. The Elect were always God’s Chosen. What the Devil could do was convince the Chosen to abandon their divine inheritance in this world. His aim is to provoke us to so disobey that God would look like a fool for not giving the Elect the same sentence as God gave Satan.

That concept is a basic assumption of the teachings of Christ and His disciples. Stop teaching about going to Heaven as if it were an option humans could choose. Instead, talk about doing what’s right in this life so as to glorify Christ. The emphasis is the Covenant and harvesting its blessings. Don’t talk about going to Heaven; talk about manifesting Heaven in this world.

Sure, those who are not Elect can and will be moved to join in a community where the sacrificial love of Christ is manifested. We welcome them for the simple reason we have no means of identifying them. That is, we cannot identify them except by the means of raising the standard of love-as-law so high that only the power of the Holy Spirit can get us there. Sooner or later, the Damned will precipitate out of that atmosphere. The issue is raising the standard for ourselves so that they can’t keep up.

Meanwhile, they will be blessed as much as they are going to be blessed just by hanging out with us. Don’t let them drag the standards down. Assume they are Elect folks who don’t understand yet, and keep working with everyone until they rise or drop out. The gateway to church membership is feudal submission to Christ and His Covenant in this life.

2. If you can grasp that, then you understand the place that human reason has in the scheme of things. When reason serves faith, it’s not a bad tool. When reason tries to trump faith — it always does, sooner or later — then it is bound in chains for discipline. It is not allowed the freedom to decide certain things our Lord reserves for Himself.

Thus, let reason strive to work out the implications of the Law of Christ. Put it work engineering and implementing the moral framework revealed from Heaven. We do everything we can to reduce human suffering, but we never allow reason to direct the definitions of “suffering” and “what we can do about it”. Compassion must be an expression of God’s priorities. His priorities are quite different from those of this world.

3. Of all the stuff I’ve read lately, there are few articles that match this one for coming close to divine priorities and slicing out the nonsense with the Sword of Truth: Why Did the FDA Hide Vaccine Injuries? I’d say it’s worth your time to read this article, with the caveat that RFK Jr. is no angel, nor are any of Trump’s other appointees.

Notice that I’m not saying this article is gospel. I am saying that, out of the cacophony of propaganda demanding the public’s attention, this article comes to the closest to pointing out the lies on a human level. The writer lays out a good frame of reference for explaining why we should distrust the medical industry versus medical service. While the former has taken over the latter for the most part, the latter is not the problem.

Empathy can be faked, and the motivations of the medical industry are the same as any other: profits not people. They use their profits to purchase government policy that forces the public at large to act in ways that increase industry profits. It has nothing to do with human health but corporate financial health. There are a whole bunch of losers in power over our medical decisions who don’t give a damn about us.

Your flesh belongs to Christ. It becomes a matter of faith to reject yet another attempt by the Devil to distract us from pursuing holiness. We expect servants of the Devil to keep on serving him, as this is the Devil’s realm. We are an invasive presence. Jesus Himself set the example: We make no attempt to seize from the Devil his control over human affairs; God has granted that to him. But we also do not allow Satan to seize control over our human lives, for God has granted us to Christ. Christ’s authority trumps the Devil’s on the individual level. If that means we are crucified with Him, we rejoice that we are found worthy of being placed in His company.

Posted in sanity | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Placed in His Company

Assuming Saved

Posted on April 1, 2025 by ehurst

No joke: In the Bible, the term “salvation” doesn’t mean what most western Christians imagine it means.

It’s a Hebrew concept of being rescued, redeemed, pulled out of a bad situation. It meant that with most pagans, including those who spoke Greek. The western concept is derived from the Roman idea of justification before a magistrate. Note that this is not what the Apostles meant by “justification” either. They were referring to a common image based on a very personal form of feudal justice.

To be “saved” is not an impersonal judicial arrangement. It is not a status. It means being pulled into God’s personal favor. The concept arises from a world where your “government” was someone who was related to you by blood or covenant. The concept of government in the biblical world excluded strangers.

Granted, invaders could seize the reins of government, but everyone expected that, at the earliest opportunity, the oppressed would throw off the foreign invaders. Even the invaders expected it to come sooner or later. And until it did happen, they would never condescend to get involved in the daily affairs of a subject people. They would exert their control through the organic leadership of the people.

So, you must ditch entirely the image of impersonal law and justice. Being saved means you have made peace with the feudal master, and that feudal master is your relative.

As a theological concept, it refers to standing in God’s favor in this world. It refers to all the promises of covenant life in the here and now. It could imply an eternal destiny, but that’s rarely the first thing you should think of when you read it in the Bible. Thus, it’s more a concept of living in covenant relation with the Lord as a fallen human.

This should remind you that the Calvinist-Arminian debate is nonsense. The Lord offers redemption to people who are not Elect (“all may come”) through the covenant community and what passes for a Christian law code. You aren’t supposed to ask the question of whether this or that person is Elect. You cannot know; it remains a part of the Eternal Realm with all the other ineffable truths. We can talk about how Divine Election works in some contexts, but when it comes to church people doing what they do in Christ, Election is hardly an applicable concept.

All we can say is that, if you can hang in there, you look like the Elect.

What matters is a demonstrated sensitivity to what it means to love each other as Christ loves us. That’s our law code. It is meant to be defined in the context of your daily life, so it will look different in different groups. Do you think Election was a factor in the parable of the Good Samaritan? Nope. What Jesus was saying is that, if someone walks in the Covenant, you must assume they are your brother/sister.

Now, concerning the reference Jesus makes in Matthew 24:23-24, the point He is making is this: We know the Elect have His Spirit. We know that no one else does. People without the Holy Spirit can be fooled more easily by something with spiritual implications. Thus, the issue of false Messiahs is that they would strive to look like the real thing, trying hard to sucker in even the Elect.

Keep in mind the setup here. Satan’s primary mission is to keep us away from the Covenant and its blessings. He profits from stealing our divine inheritance on this earth. He could not possibly gain from keeping us out of Heaven, and is unable to do that in the first place (the Elect are elected by God). He may not even know who the Elect are, so he targets everyone who appears to be walking in the Covenant. A major effort would be to raise up false Christs to mislead.

What Jesus is saying in that passage is that our Enemy is using everything he’s got because he knows only what he can see. It would be really sad if the Elect were pulled off course, because then everyone else will be, too.

Posted in teaching | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Assuming Saved

Training Ride 02

Posted on March 31, 2025 by ehurst

You may recall some photos I took one day in the Wheeler District, a new bike-friendly neighborhood built atop the defunct Downtown Airpark of yore. It’s also the site of the big ferris wheel the city bought from Santa Monica Pier. Added to the multi-colored housing fronts is some new construction that is already four stories high, and quite massive in ground space off to the left. I took this from across a nearby field for the sake of perspective.

The upper dam on the OK River Recreation Area is being refurbished. Four gates have been removed, I assume because they were too far gone and needed major work. The other two have workmen scraping and cleaning them on the side you can’t see. It’s lots of grinder whine and patch welding work. Naturally, I would expect the same kind of maintenance on the two dams below this eventually, but before the competition rowing season this summer.

Right now the redbud trees are in full blossom here. I couldn’t ignore the striking color. It didn’t hurt that there were a couple of Canada Geese in the shot. They live here most of the year under strong protections, and the population is growing fast, so that we can expect the bike trail to be decorated with ever more of their fertilizer.

The above shots were taken Saturday, March 29. It was the last training ride of the season on the BMX knobbies. I had used them all winter for obvious reasons, and apparently my system for tire maintenance is working — no flats all winter long. The knobbies are softer and easier to take care of, but they also offer noticeable roll resistance — a good training effect. It’s time now to start running the smoother treads so I can make longer distances with less effort. For now, I’ve elected to put the original tires back on because they have sufficient tread still (before and after shot here). They run at higher pressures, which makes them a little more finicky to maintain, and more catastrophic when they start to leak. Hopefully the new thorn straps and the injection of slime in the tubes will reduce the likelihood of pin holes. If this set up works well enough, it will make it a lot easier to ride cross country on Oklahoma roads.

Posted in cycling, photography | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment