Saturday, 7th March 2009
Fellow brother-in-Christ Jeff brought to my attention an article that was published in the Singapore edition of The Christian Post a few days ago.
It was written by Rev Monte Le Rice, who I understand from Stan was previously from Calvary Charismatic (now known as Victory Family Centre). It is reproduced in full below.
Deaer readers, please give your comments on the merits of his article. I will provide mine in due course.
Minister: 'Grace' Preachers Don't Really Understand Grace
Monday, Mar. 2, 2009 Posted: 6:50:20PM HKT
An itinerant preacher believes that 'grace' and prosperity preachers have an impoverished understanding of the finished work of Jesus Christ.
"Within this school of thought, Christians are encouraged to surmise that Christian freedom 'in Christ,' is a 'freedom' to achieve, acquire, and gain without guilt," said Monte Lee Rice, in his November essay titled Lose That You May Find.
"Yet for all this talk of calling believers to a life of grace ‘in Christ,’ resting in the finished work of Christ’s atonement, reigning with Christ and receiving His riches, the proponents of this movement have ironically failed to grasp the greater fullness of Christ’s atonement! Its weakness lies so ironically, in its impoverished doctrine of Christ’s atonement.”
He went on to discuss how ‘grace’ preachers proclaim Christ’s atonement as primarily directed towards the forgiveness of sins, thus granting believers a positional righteousness, or in other words a forensic view of the atonement. He added however that such a view fails to take into account the other benefits of Christ’s atonement.
This includes setting believers free from the works of the devil, restoring them to God’s likeness, by granting them the ‘right script’ to live their lives – in which Christ recapped the human life journey as the perfect human being, paving the way for them to live as He lived, through each phase of His own human life – providing His life as a paradigm for their own human life, thus God’s intended ‘script’ for living their own lives, which results in their being conformed to the likeness of Jesus Christ, and granting them a moral and life example for them to follow Him.
Emerging as a direct counter-response to what its proponents perceive as the guilt-driven, legalistic ‘do’s and don’t’ form of Protestant evangelical spirituality, and as a result of Protestant Evangelicalism’s failure to preach the full gospel, the success-themed ‘grace’ movement is a captive of arrogant modernity, where the quest and journey towards human actualisation takes center-stage, and “envisions the biblical experience of redemption according to a story-line that is radically counter to the Bible’s archetypical plot of Jesus’ self-emptying journey.”
Even so, he noted that people because they are created in God’s image still have an inherent need for the experience of redemption and so “our every-day talk is filled with redemptive metaphors” like ‘every dark cloud has a silver lining’, ‘it’s always darkest before dawn’ and ‘no pain, no gain’, phrases which suggest that suffering in life can often lead to growth or fulfillment. He suggested that this is why people like to watch and be entertained by movies, read stories, or listen to motivation speakers in one way or another speak to their innate desire to experience redemption.
"So recognising the human need for some kind of development experience of redemption, and yet wanting to avoid appropriating the Gospel teaching of ‘self-denial’ into our ‘Christian education,’ what we end up with is construing Christian development according to varied paradigms of pop psychology,” wrote the preacher.
"[T]he result of trying to conceptualise Christian development primarily according to human developmental theory, without the sometimes painful message of ‘self-denial,’ leads to a non-Christian conception of spiritual growth. The result is that we envision spiritual maturity as having a healthy self image, and a ‘freed-up’ life-style, evidenced by a substantial income and a guilt-free comfort with being ‘in-sync’ with the latest cultural trends, fashions, and bench-marks of material success. The truth is that so much of the premised teachings about ‘God’s grace,’ in the newer success-themed churches, largely reflect premises derived from pop psychology about human self-esteem and self-actualisation… Consequently, Evangelicalism now possess little if any kind of ‘counter-culture’ critique, since it has become so ‘thoroughly enmeshed in consumer-capitalist ideology and confuses success with the eschaton’ (e.g., Christian life journey).”
Lee Rice also discussed the smugness of members of success-themed churches, who see themselves as people who have arrived and see no need to engage or reflect on the spiritualities existing within other Christian traditions, either in the present day or down through history. They “choose rather to base their entire conception of Christian faith exclusively upon the teachings of their movement’s leaders or local senior pastor” and “Bible texts often serve no higher purpose than to anchor messages based more deeply upon pop psychology or modern leadership and motivational theories and platitudes.
"There is as well, a mindset amongst so many believers, particularly amongst those highly influenced by the more success-themed teachings, that the things they possess are signs of God’s favour towards them. Coupled with this is their conviction that their consumerist life-style is in some way, their ‘Christian right.’ These believe that ‘in Christ,’ they are free to purchase the most non-essential or trivial items- at whatever the cost, without any whim of conscience. But let it be unreservedly said that their consumer-driven life-style is a blight to the counter-cultural witness of the Church, particularly during this time of economic crisis.”
At the end of his paper the preacher highlighted four broad ways in which ‘grace’ churches could find their call and centre within the greater body of Christ. Firstly, they must acknowledge both the dark and light sides of material wealth. Secondly, they will have to shift their mindset away from the world’s rags to riches idea of redemption and back towards the biblical paradigm plot of riches to rags foremost modeled for them in the life of the Lord Jesus Christ. Thirdly, they need to embrace the full gospel of God’s grace, which is only possible by embracing all the major purposes of Christ’s atonement. Finally, they have to embrace the fear of the Lord.
21 comments:
Wow ... this Rev, I believe talks to giraffes, that feeds on leaves on really thorny trees ... certainly not lambs (it's true, I not joking, learnt that from Animal Planet) ...
it might well be an "intellectual" piece of work but I do not see how I can feed on it or be edified by it. Even Jesus' parables, I dare say, are not so "cheem"! It's strange I can understand the parables in the bible but I don't seems to be able to understand this "intellectual" piece of work?
Shalom,
William
Read this?
http://www.catholic.org/clife/lent/story.php?id=32476
We have to ask ourselves whether what we hear gives life or just some information.
Does it impart faith or edify you as Liu says?
Is it the Good News message?
What Monte Rice fail to understand is the core of the Gospel which is the the power of God unto salvation.Rom 1:16-17
For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith.It is the righteousness of faith which is by Grace.
2 Cor 11:3 But I fear,lest somehow,as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness,so your minds nay be corrupted from the simplicity that is Christ.
So called theologians and preachers have complicated the simplicity of the Gospel Good News that is Christ centred and based on Christ finished work and make it a man centred Gospel base on man's performance.
The bottom line is he doesn't understand what Pastor Prince is preaching because he doesn't use spiritual discernment but uses his intellect to understand & critique....and his conclusion is the message is foolishness.
Well, if he can't understand the simplicity of the gospel and cannot refute what Pastor Prince teaches with scriptures, the only conclusion I can draw from this piece of work he has written is that it is a theological gymnastics displayed to impress others of his intellectual prowess.
It does reveal to me that the body of Christ here should not jump to the conclusion that some Christian brother from other perspective is attacking JP. The above comments from Liu, Jeffery is not fair.
"Jeff: 2 Cor 11:3 But I fear,lest somehow,as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness,so your minds nay be corrupted from the simplicity that is Christ.
So called theologians and preachers have complicated the simplicity of the Gospel Good News that is Christ centred and based on Christ finished work and make it a man centred Gospel base on man's performance."
The quotation is improperly quoted and used. The context here is where Apstle Paul is defending his right as Apostle against the other "super apostles". He is afraid that other super apostles will come and corrupt the gospel of Jesus Christ. Read 2 Cor 11:1-4."
Therefore, from the proper exegesis of the text to the proper hermeneutics, you are saying that the so-called theogians and preachers have complicated the simplicity of Gospel. I know Gordon Fee, I. Howard Marshall, THomas Oden, and many other great theologians, including the most famous theologian, Karl Barth, explained the gospel in much deeper reflection in their writings where the so-called pastors preach in their respective mega-church.
Some of them also die for their belief in second world war, during the Nazi times, communist countries. They are godly man.
May I know which so-called theologians that you know of corrupt the simple gospel of Jesus Christ. Just name one that the community of faith will discern on what you comment make sense. I just need one.
Gordon Wong from TTC, Simon Chan, (Ph.D., Cambridge)Earnest Lau Professor of Systematic Theology at TTC in Singapore, love God and Jesus Christ in their whole life and their work is recognised across the denomination. They have some good words on JP. However, Gordon Wong in his review does have his reservation on JP's book, Destined to Reign, and it is a genuine concern. Read his review before fire out some comments. See http://www.blogpastor.net/2008/09/11/review-of-joseph-princes-destined-to-reign/
I know Pastor Monte myself and noted that his comments are fair to some areas. Different pastors from different denomination hold on some limited view on atonement. JP had some view on atonement but somewhere lacking as compared to what the early church fathers can see, all of them reflected on atonement through the centuries and noted that more than 10 different layers of what it is meant by the finished work of Lord Jesus Christ and what his atonement work meant to us as a community of faith.
Before anyone comment, please read is article is entirely quoted and only certain aspects are highlighted. Read his full article in http://monteleerice.wordpress.com/
before you comment.
SO far, all good theologian I met know what is the simple gospel of Jesus Christ. Though they may have published several scholarly articles, complex theological work, it is meant for research. When they come to the simple fact of what is the gospel of Jesus Christ. They had a very answer to you.
However, they had spent their entire delicated to theology and write lots of work on it and reflect upon it. Using the metaphor in Revelation where Apostle John was asked to take the book and eat it.
Likewise, we should eat the book and digest and meditate on it and reflect on it.
Have any of you read any single of their work before you comment. Have you read Gordon Fee, Simon Chan, Gordon WOng before you have said your comments. If not, read it and understand it before you comment.
I have read JP's book. With Gordon Wong's review, I have good things to say about JP and at the same time have some reservation. Gordon Wong had summed it up in his review article. Read it and see what is the concern.
10 different layers of finished work?
If that was so, maybe John should have recorded chapter 19 as follows:
When Pilate flogged Jesus, He said "it is 10% finished".
When the crown of thorns were placed on His head, He said "it is 20% finished".
When the nails went through his hands, He said "it is 30% finished"...
???
I don't know about you, but my Bible tells me He said "it is finished" at the final hour, and the veil was torn in two completely, not 10% or 20% or 30% or even 99%.
That's the simplicity of the gospel which was given to Zaccheus and the thief on the cross. It is man that complicates.
Here is one excellent paper on atonement by Late Lehman Strauss, his article is a good overview of what is meant by atonement, and how we as community of faith will see it.
http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=999
As I said, read and digest before comment. Once I heard that JP is a gracious person and he will read it and digest and ask good question. Come on, show me that you can practice what JP preach and practice himself.
This is only some sampler of simple theological article. I have more to offer. I am not here to argue and I am here to share. If you are not happy, start to tear me down (from what I have read so far in various blogs where NCC like to abuse other bloggers who do not agree with them) and not gracious as JP that I know, then I am disappointed with whoever pride as NCC and bath in the message of grace and yet fail to udnerstand what is grace from JP. I feel sad for JP.
I did not check my spelling yet and I have mistyped, made mistakes on my grammatical structure, apology for that.
Hi Desmond,
I think you are the one jumping to conclusions.I was not referring to anyone of those that you mentioned.
You asked me to name one.I was commenting on Monte Rice articles if you are not aware.
He said we are to modeled after Jesus."From riches to rags."Does he know what he is talking about?
Birds have nests and foxes have holes but the Son of Man have no where to lay His head.Try modelling after that!
Monte said that the law was given bcoz of God's grace.The chidren of Israel grumbled and murmurred in the wilderness but God still graciously provided for them supernaturally until the Law was given.
What happened after the Law was given? The Israelites dropped dead like flies.God's grace? No!
Rom 4:15 The Law brings about wrath
Do you know what is the purpose of the Law?
Read Gal 3:19-25
Hey, we the common people don't understand such scholarly theological work better stay on our side of the line and let the Holy Spirit teach us. For them, they have their methods and principles to interpret the bible...so how to agree??
Bro Desmond
To ask others to read carefully one must read carefully what others wrote.
I, Liu, criticised (if you want me to be blunt) that, as far as ALL these great theologians are concerned (maybe including you), I for one would fail to be fed.
I did not write that he attacked JP, I wrote that I do not know how to eat from his hands.
To be frank, you need not bring out all these great theologians to back your "arguements", to somehow class yourself among these greats, for all you have written, most of us simple folks, you have to pardon our ignorant, that we know none of them! You can call me shallow, unlearnt, which I sometimes wish I hadn't been so "smart" and "intelligent" so that I can understand grace better!
Once I followed a group of shepherds, and for 10 years, I was confused, loss, directionless and malnourished ... then I decided I might be better off not following these shepherds .... until I found one shepherd and his team, who fed me from their hands, and I saw the Great Shepherd Who guided them ... I have grown, nourished, and understood we are to be healthy, prosperous and divinely protected for a purpose ... not poor, sickly and die prematurely like the world.
Shalom Shalom
William
Dear Jeff, I did not jump to conclusion. The impression I had (maybe I have misread) is that you may read the article in CHristianpost.com.sg and that is only Nathanael Ng's misquotation of Pastor Monte's article. The quotation he made is not the issue at all. The quotation is just a fraction of the full article.
Unless we read the whole article, we will realise that he is talking other matter that is related to the community of faith at large.
Many others from across the community of faith understand the article, some agree, and some disagree.
In the article, there are heavy reference to scripture.
I believe that a secondary 4 student can easily understand that article. I believe that you guys, I believe, a mature Christian should be able to read.
Let me share with you. If grace and law are against each other, then God should not be given law to the Jews. That will present God as wrath.
Where is grace in the following:
Without grace, there will not be heaven and earth (because God will not start to create heaven and earth). Then, there will not be any account of Genesis. WIthout Genesis, the rest of OT and NT will not exist.
Without account of Exodus, there is no demonstration of what God had done to the Jews.
Without the law, there will not a distinction of Jew as God's chosen people from the rest. If this is not grace, then what is it.
You have quoted half the Romans 4:15. It should be: For the l,aw brings wrath, BUT where there is no law there is no transgression. It does not mean that law is no longer irrelevant. This verse is part of rhetoric argument put forth to explain the thesis of Abraham justified by faith and also promise realised through faith. Read the whole context from Romans 4 to 8. It span on so many theological issues that Apostle Paul had on mind.
Anyway, both camp on either side had some points. However, I will not be extreme to my counterpart in BP that law is extremely important without regarding grace. Or the other way round.
Bible, to me, is more precious to me and I am thrown out of my family due to my acceptance of Christ. Since Bible is so dear to me, I will not abuse it, rather, I follow the step of the early church father to learn from the richness of our bible for my daily walk with Him.
Praise, Power, Honor, and Glory be to God. Amen. For Him, who had restored my brokenness despite attacks from my mother, and siblings to myself, wife, and two children due to our faith in Him.
Geri the little lamb decides she will just watch all the adults talk adult stuff and hang out with the kids.
I like the way my 7 year old, Kae, tries to explain what faith is.
"Mummy, I think Faith is a gift from God that helps us understand His love and mercy."
On another occassion he shared this (at age 4+),
"People look for God because they want to be healed."
That was his answer when he was asked why people seek God. My friend was interviewing him for a cousin's project. We had interviewed quite a few adults who launched into all sorts of theology and philosophy. And this child, by that one sentence, summarised it all.
That is a child's faith and understanding of who Jesus is and what His grace entails.
I am content to bask in a difficult concept made simple by the innocent yet wise minds of the children.
At the end of the day, our walk with Christ is a personal one. Just as these "great men" of the faith had a walk with Jesus, so do each of us. Let's not focus on who says what, but on what He says. =)
Kae just came back from his ECA in school, so I asked him what is grace. This is his reply -
"Grace is a gift that Jesus gave us so that we will have eternal life if we believe in Him. The Law is holy but it leads to death because the Law makes people feel sad and guilty. When you feel sad and guilty you can't look at God in His eyes. So we need grace because grace helps people to forgive others and also themselves because Jesus died on the Cross for ALL of our sins - past, present and future."
I concur thus that adults complicate things. =pp
Hi Desmond,
Sorry bro,but again you jump to the wromg conclusion.I did not get it from christianpost.
i think what he says is true to a great degree. many charismatic preachers tend to fudge over the truth of the gospel, and dilute it to suit pop-cultural trends. it's very easy these days to pop into a charismatic church where the packaging and presentation of things is wonderful, but in which you hear only 1, 2 verses during a sermon that they do not even centrally relate to.
on both sides of the spectrum (charismatic and evangelical), there are problems. and in the criticisms they level at each other, we tend to miss out on the spirituality that each side does possess.
i think what's important is to understand that we're all growing in Christ as we draw near to Him. and we'd begin to more fully understand the gospel as He reveals more and more of it to us.
different churches might have their different beliefs, some more critial than others. but that doesn't detract from the fact that as long as our first desire is for a loving relationship with God, we can love and fellowship with one another. between brothers and sisters, who are we to judge?
Hi Jared
Sorry for being blunt, I think you are being kinda "diplomatic" ... like some officials in the emperor's court, and when the emperor ask for their opinion on a debatable issue, they would say on one hand it's good BUT on the other it's bad, BUT the emperor is wise and should make the right decision on the issue.
You mentioned that churches use 1 or 2 verses but talks a lot of crap, but I don't think it's true at NCC. Come and listen for yourself, cos more often than not, it's a whole passage, whole chapter, or a few parables ... and JP runs out of time feeding the flocks! Come & hear brethen.
Shalom Shalom,
William
Dear William:
Pertaining to your comment that NCC does not take 1 or 2 verses an then talk a lot of crap. I just went to service with my sister in law and witnessed just that.
Not one or two verses but 5 different verses where JP used them to explain his "anointed" message. But not before we heard how good he is by giving $563k to the 1 north project--wow he is so good. Then his team spread disinformation that the owners of Rock Productions will not receive any fees or renumerations. There is a saying that "I think he protest to much" If he had nothing to hide then he would not need to explain to everyone. Why does he have fear? He should have faith, right? Yet he uses time to feed his flock by showing that HE, JP is very gracious.
The beginning was a commercial for JP. "Testamoneys" were about how JP book saved their lives first not the Bible
Then because one man gave to JP project at 1 north he was blessed 4.1 monthly bonus. What is this saying to the Flock you should give because that is how you get more. Not that it is good give to those who really need it. Give and expect nothing even as Jesus gave his life for us and we so many times do act the way we should.
JP runs out of time because he is full of himself.
He used Ex 28 40-43 and 39-43 to say that we are all priest equal in God eyes but not equal in rewards. That is why He has so much and others do not. God favors JP more. So prideful?
Grace is the answer to all rewards but this is unmerited favor from God and can not be judged that I will get more because I believe hard enough. God's Gift is just that. Even Paul suffered was it because he lacked faith?
NCC is very concerned about the LAW when it pertains to 1 North because they are spewing forth calling it a "Venue, Venue, New Venue". If it quacks and waddles like a duck it it is a Duck. But because 1 North is more a business then anything else the fear of the LAW is appears in all their eyes. Where is JP's faith? Why tell everyone that we should call it our New Venue. Fear? or Faith? In Politics it is called "spin"
JP said that a man who works for his blessings will negates Gods work.
JP compared himself to Jesus on Sunday when he said "even as soldiers gambles for Jesus clothes at the cross prophecy was fulfilled. So even as critics come after JP they are fulfilling God's will. I heard the crowd give a sound of agreement. He is very full of Himself just like the Kings of Israel proclaiming all in the name of the Lord but God removed even them in His time. JP is not a King but he has annointed himself as the "ONE"
Is JP ready to give his life for the Lord? Why is he worried about 1 north if the Church is the people? 69 million reasons I suppose. And much more in the future.
Back to the amount JP gave, If he gave 563K then based upon tithing practices he may have made a minimum of $5 million? A Lawyer friend has told me that He and his wife own property all over so I doubt he just made $5 million. Do you really think JP would do this if he was not making money? Investment lah of course.
What happens when JP is not there? JP is the reason why people come not Jesus. One person ahead of me in line complained about another church here in town saying the F word through out his comments. As well one person waited in line holding a space for 10 others. While those of us who waited the entire time these so-called christians had no regard cutting in line ahead of those diligent enough to come early. They were not the only one. We were about 30 people back when we started and we were 90 ppl back by the time of service. Where is the gracious church? They should be praying for others not condemning. Even as JP said a person who drives a car with the stereo on loud for all to hear is to be pitied. I pity a Pastor who has flaunt his wealth, Nice hair, nice suit and all his blessings as one who is in need. JP has much to lose but for me I have Christ and that is all I need. Even if I die today, Jesus is all I ever needed, not riches or health because I have eternity with my Lord and Savior.
That is the message of Christ not the "Santa Claus" saviour that JP preaches.
Dear Phillip,
You said,"Where is the gracious church? They should be praying for others not condemning."
I suggest you follow your own advice as well because the tone and spirit of your comments is condemning - condemning JP and NCC.
You said,"Then his team spread disinformation that the owners of Rock Productions will not receive any fees or renumerations."
You are the one spreading disinformation by firstly calling it disinformation, and secondly by using the term "the owners of Rock Productions."
Let me set the record straight for you and others who may be misled by your disinformation:
"In actual fact, all of Rock’s shares belong to NCC and are held in trust by Pastor Prince, Pastor Joshua and Matthew Kang (jointly holding 102,999,999 shares), and Jeannie Yeo-Yap (holding 1 share). Proper Declarations of Trust have been drawn up by our lawyer.
Because the shares are held in trust for the church, none of the shareholders receive any dividends. Neither do the directors of Rock receive any director’s fees, salaries or bonuses. Mr Sum Yee Loong, Director of Taxes, Deloitte & Touche, has even written to the church verifying the nature of the shareholdings and confirming that the directors are not paid remuneration or director’s fees."
(source:http://www.newcreation.org.sg/aboutus/media_coverage/media-responses.htm#m4)
You said,"NCC is very concerned about the LAW when it pertains to 1 North because they are spewing forth calling it a "Venue, Venue, New Venue". If it quacks and waddles like a duck it it is a Duck."
The reason why we want to call it the New Venue is because One-North is not a church building, it is a commercial building and NCC will be using the auditorium only for its church services, much like the present arrangement we have now at Suntec City. Therefore it is more accurate to call it the "new venue" rather than "new church".
You said,"Give and expect nothing even as Jesus gave his life for us and we so many times do act the way we should."
Did Jesus really give and expect nothing? NO! Jesus, the only Son of God, gave His life expecting that God will receive many more sons and daughters through Him.
Jesus himself taught that when you sow, expect a harvest - 30 fold, 60 fold and a 100 fold! (Luke 8:5-8)
How do you explain Mark 10:29-30?
"I tell you the truth," Jesus replied, "no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life.
You said,"Jesus is all I ever needed, not riches or health because I have eternity with my Lord and Savior."
May I suggest that you put your money where your mouth is:
Mark 10:21 - Looking at the man, Jesus felt genuine love for him. “There is still one thing you haven’t done,” he told him. “Go and sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
Dear Phillip, all of us Christians, whether attending NCC or otherwise, have human failings. Let you and I be the gracious ones, forgiving the ungraciousness of others, not condemning them but praying for them that they may eventually truly understand and live out the grace of God.
I will be praying for you too.
- NCC is very smart to call it a venue rather than a church building BUT a venue is misleading since the church owns a large share of the building in question.
- The question is not about receiving directors fees but ownership. So, the NCC church is essentially indirectly owned by the 4 shareholders mentioned.
Got no problems with NCC, as long as they are open and public, even if they do pay Pst Prince, ??? million?, a year, he deserved it. Its standard pay of a CEO which he actually is.
Dear gentlelamb,
You are mistaken to say that NCC church is essentially indirectly owned by the 4 shareholders mentioned.
Please read CAREFULLY!!!
The shares of NCC's commercial arm, Rock Productions are HELD IN TRUST for NCC by the 4 shareholders. NCC itself is not registered under the Companies Act; the 4 shareholders do NOT own NCC directly or indirectly.
With regards to the new venue, NCC owns the civic and cultural zone while CapitaLand owns the retail and entertainment zone. How can NCC call it a church building when it is a commercial building in which CapitaLand also has a stake?
Dear Stanley,
Obviously, the Rock Production is a front, with the funds of the church going through it for the various projects. Do note that the venue will be owned legally by Rock Production and not NCC.
I am sure that there is a percentage stake for each party for the venue. This is very radical for a church to be involved in a building not solely for support its missions/ christian outreach.
I am not saying it is wrong, but as a person involved in this industry, they are very smart and very radical in managing the affairs and using money wisely. There are a lot of risk for them as the directors of Rock Production and they have a lot of faith. Imagine if the project failed or the funds are not forthcoming!
Post a Comment