 |
 | 
Lee Merrill
booted
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 723
| Posted 7/10/2004 1:15 PM (GMT -6) |   | Hi everyone,
quote:
Barry: Most say we mustn't judge doctrines by their fruit but only by the written Word. I disagree...how could a true and Holy doctrine be the root of confusion and disgrace?
Judge teachers by their fruit! But judge doctrines by their truth, by the Scriptures, I would say, and the fruit will be good, for sure. Acts 17:11! Let's be Bereans...
quote:
I have heard it preached, God wills the death and disaster that you all have expereinced...the dying infant, the suicide of your brother the pastor, the falling of the towers on 9-11. ... Give me the Loving God who knows all, yet has given freedom and responsibility to men too.
But then we can't rejoice in our suffering (Rom. 5:3), if some of it is not for a good purpose. And God owes some folks an apology, if their suffering was meaningless, and God set up the world that way so it could happen...
JOB 21:25 Another man dies in bitterness of soul, never having enjoyed anything good.
That's Job's disillusionment! That's not God's opinion...
PR 11:31 If the righteous receive their due on earth, how much more the ungodly and the sinner!
Everybody gets their due, nothing goes awry, and God does not have to apologize. Have you noticed that God never does this? Even when Jesus was told about the worshippers who died at the hands of Pilate, or when someone brought him his son, who had suffered for years from demonic affliction. That's not because he doesn't sympathize! "Jesus wept." But he has a good plan, the result will far exceed our expectations, "I am the resurrection..."
quote:
Has anyone read any Dave Hunt on the subject.
I haven't read much of Mr. Hunt. Nor much of Mr. Calvin, for that matter!
quote:
Sahid: If God makes me do something sinful in order to bring about some good, I am still stuck with sin and death, because God decided that I should get sin and death.
And the good result! Don't forget that part. Thus God is not guilty.
quote:
But still God is hoping, but not sure that we will be sinful. Or does He cause that too?
I believe God certainly knows when we will be sinful. We can't disappoint him, he knows all our stuff already. I think believers can choose, they have real freedom, and can even exercise that freedom in a bad way (Gal. 5:13). But that's like driving into a ditch, you're not free anymore, until you get pulled out and patched up.
quote:
In Jer. 3:7 God is surprised. Unless the verse is an example of a divine guilt trip, rather that an example of divine love.
JER 3:7 I thought that after she had done all this she would return to me but she did not, and her unfaithful sister Judah saw it.
Well, "thought" can be "said" here, and "but" can be "and," as in these translations:
"And I say, after her doing all these, Unto Me thou dost turn back, and she hath not turned back." (Young's)
"And I said, Thou shalt call me, My father; and shalt not turn away from following me. Surely as a woman treacherously departeth from her companion, so have ye dealt treacherously with me." (Darby)
"Said" and "and" are the usual meanings of these words here, "thought" and "but" are less-often-used meanings, especially "thought." Now if she does return in the future, and does not turn away forever, then what God said is true, and is not a mistake:
Jeremiah 31:18 I have surely heard Ephraim's moaning: "You disciplined me like an unruly calf, and I have been disciplined. Restore me, and I will return, because you are the Lord my God."
Blessings,
Lee
==================================================
"Even now we seem to have dim glimpses into regions
from which we receive no word to bring away" (George MacDonald) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Sahid
Megistered Rember
Date Joined Jun 2004
Total Posts : 2013
| Posted 7/10/2004 6:57 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
I believe God certainly knows when we will be sinful. We can't disappoint him, he knows all our stuff already. I think believers can choose, they have real freedom, and can even exercise that freedom in a bad way (Gal. 5:13). But that's like driving into a ditch, you're not free anymore, until you get pulled out and patched up.
So, God knows for sure that I will sin, but I still have the freedom not to sin? If God really does know that I will sin, then how is it possible for me not to sin? It seems to me that my only option would be sin. So I have the freedom to choose how I sin, but not whether I will sin. But the wages of all sin is death. So it ends up a choice between death and death. That's not freedom.
Then there's salvation. But we have the same problem. If God knows ahead of time who will choose to accept grace and who won't, then each person has a destiny. It may feel like we're free, but God knows what we will do, and He isn't wrong. It is impossible to make the other choice, so that choice was never really a choice, just an apparent choice, a trick.
I'm not responsible for things I can't and never could control. The car in the ditch thing just begs the question. God knew for sure that I would drive the car into the ditch, and there is no chance of me proving God wrong.
This is enough for me, but there's more. God not only knew about it, He made it that way on purpose. Sure, salvation makes a hard life worth it in the end. But with a God who knows all the future, it's not that simple. Some people live miserable lives and die. No salvation, just pain. God knew about those people before He created. He could have intervened or created differently or even given them a chance to choose salvation. But God knew they would have no chance and created them anyway. You can't pass the buck to man, because God knew how man would behave and approved. God gives us the destiny of the car in the ditch and then He gives some of us the destiny of saying there forever. The fact is the people were never in control of the car. There was one path foreknown by God that it would follow, and there was one end to the story of its passengers. The passengers are not to blame, because they couldn't avoid the ditch in the first place and no one was coming to help them out. This doesn't jive with Jesus, who did everything He could, He even died, to show love.
It's kind of like watching home movies. At the time people were free; they could do just about anything. But afterward when you watch them there is no freedom; you know exactly what people will do. If God is watching (even participating) in the movie that is already "recorded", then we have no freedom. If it's all happening for the first time, we do have freedom. With "strict foreknowledge" there is no "happening for the first time". It was recorded in the mind of God first and then played out. Our acts are scripted; we just don't know it. We only think we have a choice.
Watch me fly. Freedom like wings and I will use them. Freedom like wings and I will spread them wide. - Stavesacre | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/10/2004 7:30 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Lee,
Malachi 1 was written to the descendants of Jacob and Esau (just like when God refers to the nation of Israel by the name of their ancestor Israel). Malachi was written hundreds of years after Jacob and Esau lived and died. The prophet Malachi was addressing the people of Jacob and the people of Esau--in Malachi's day. The rest of the chapter reveals precisely WHY God loved (the people of) Jacob and hated (the people of) Esau--the one group had largely stayed faithful, while the other had largely remained unfaithful and had increased in their wickedness.
So no, Paul's statement in Romans 9, "Jacob have I loved and Esau have I hated" cannot refer to the actual individuals Esau and Jacob, unless you are willing to say that Paul took Mal. 1:2&3 out of context (which I'm personally not willing to say).
The following is a link to a discussion we had here about a year and a half ago on Romans 9. In it, Dr. Boyd is kind enough to give us an extended commentary on the chapter.
http://www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1725
Below I have cut and pasted one of my posts from that thread:
The basic understanding of Romans 9 (and 9-11) that Doctor Boyd expounds is substantially the Arminian point of view. I find this view to be the most faithful to the context of Romans 9-11 as well as the entire book, the NT, and the Bible in general. Many Christian scholars (such as Arminius, Wesley, Adam Clarke) down through the centuries have come to the same basic conclusion about this passage as Doc has.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on Romans 9 is available online:
http://www.biblical-theology.com/calvinism/romans9.htm
It can hardly be argued that Paul is in these chapters *not* dealing with the fact that he is now extending his covenant mercy and love to all mankind and not only Jews. (9:1-6a, 24-30, 10:1-4, etc.)
10:12-13 powerfully expresses the theme of God's inclusion of all nations and not just Jews: For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all and is generous to all who call on him. 13 For, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”
And this Israel-in-general-rejected-the-Messiah-and-so-now-the-Gentiles-are-offered-salvation theme is further stated:
10:19 Again I ask, did Israel not understand? First Moses says,
“I will make you jealous of those who are not a nation;
with a foolish nation I will make you angry.”
20 Then Isaiah is so bold as to say,
“I have been found by those who did not seek me;
I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me.”
21 But of Israel he says, “All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people.”
Paul goes on to show that God has not rejected Israel unconditionally or irrevocably:
11:1 I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel?
11:32 For God has imprisoned *all* (both Jews and Gentiles) in disobedience so that he may be merciful to all. (all scriptures NRSV)
I find that "to the Jew first, and then the Gentile," is a basic underlying theme of the whole book of Romans, and Paul is in Romans 9 simply replying to a an hypothetical rhetorical Jewish rebuttal against the gospel message of salvation being offered to all mankind, regardless of ethnicity.
Hope this helps explain our understanding of Romans 9 more clearly, Lee.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Lee Merrill
booted
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 723
| Posted 7/13/2004 1:39 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi everyone,
quote:
Lee: I think believers can choose, they have real freedom, and can even exercise that freedom in a bad way (Gal. 5:13).
Sahid: So, God knows for sure that I will sin, but I still have the freedom not to sin? If God really does know that I will sin, then how is it possible for me not to sin?
How is knowing how believers will choose forcing them to do it, though?
Also, if God says in a prophecy, "a remnant will return" (Isa. 10:21), because you know that will happen, does that mean you caused it somehow? Just knowing about a certain future event doesn't make you the cause of it.
And why doesn't partial knowledge imply you are partially a cause? If you know that it pretty sure that Bob will order apple pie, then when he orders his apple pie like you thought he would, does that make you a partial cause?
quote:
Sahid: ... with a God who knows all the future, it's not that simple. Some people live miserable lives and die. No salvation, just pain. ... This doesn't jive with Jesus, who did everything He could, He even died, to show love.
I believe that God does have a purpose to save everyone (2 Pt. 3:9; Jn. 3:17), and Jesus came to save the lost, all the lost (Luke 19:10). And I believe that all God's purposes will be accomplished (Job 42:2; Pr. 16:4; Pr. 21:30). Thus I believe we may hope for salvation for everyone.
quote:
John: Paul's statement in Romans 9, "Jacob have I loved and Esau have I hated" cannot refer to the actual individuals Esau and Jacob...
But didn't God choose Jacob to inherit the promise made to Abraham, and not choose Esau? They were indeed involved in God's choice, as individuals.
quote:
Paul goes on to show that God has not rejected Israel unconditionally or irrevocably:
11:1 I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! I myself am an Israelite...
But that's individual election!
quote:
ReasonableDoubt: If we believe the OT is historical fact, it is true that God chose Jacob, and not Esau. He did not bless Esau.
I agree that Paul refers to God choosing groups, but there is also a further choice of individuals within this group, you can't stop with the choosing of the groups, and not note that Paul says "I was chosen," "you were chosen," referring to individuals, who came from the groups he mentions.
And I think ReasonableDoubt raised some more good questions...
quote:
RD: If you're saying that his text is only talking about nations, and not individuals, is it any more just for God to choose one nation and leave another?
You say that "God has mercy on who he will" really means "all those who choose to believe." I'm baffled how that can be gleaned from the text. It seems that Paul says that God's compassion comes not from man's desire or effort, but from mercy.
Blessings,
Lee
==================================================
"Even now we seem to have dim glimpses into regions
from which we receive no word to bring away" (George MacDonald) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Sahid
Megistered Rember
Date Joined Jun 2004
Total Posts : 2013
| Posted 7/14/2004 12:23 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
How is knowing how believers will choose forcing them to do it, though?
Also, if God says in a prophecy, "a remnant will return" (Isa. 10:21), because you know that will happen, does that mean you caused it somehow? Just knowing about a certain future event doesn't make you the cause of it.
And why doesn't partial knowledge imply you are partially a cause? If you know that it pretty sure that Bob will order apple pie, then when he orders his apple pie like you thought he would, does that make you a partial cause?
Knowledge does not amount to force. But for God it does. Because God adds another element to the equation. God made us. If I know with 100% certainty that my dog will kill if I set him free, then I am responsible for the death if I set him free. If God knows with 100% certainty that we will sin if He creates us, then He is responsible for the sin. That a dog doesn't have freewill has no bearing. Had the dog possesed freewill, both I and the dog would be mutually responsible.
The remnant returning in that verse is about God restoring a remnant. It doesn't say they will choose not to sin.
BTW, I have a lot of respect for your position despite my disagreement. There are too many people in every current of thought who accept things without actually considering them. You seem to have thought through your beliefs a lot more than I have.
Watch me fly. Freedom like wings and I will use them. Freedom like wings and I will spread them wide. - Stavesacre | | Back to Top | | |
|
Lee Merrill
booted
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 723
| Posted 7/14/2004 3:11 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Sahid,
quote:
Lee: How is knowing how believers will choose forcing them to do it, though?
Sahid: Knowledge does not amount to force. But for God it does. Because God adds another element to the equation. God made us. If I know with 100% certainty that my dog will kill if I set him free, then I am responsible for the death if I set him free. If God knows with 100% certainty that we will sin if He creates us, then He is responsible for the sin. That a dog doesn't have freewill has no bearing. Had the dog possessed freewill, both I and the dog would be mutually responsible.
I don't understand what you are saying, though. If the dog has no free will, you are responsible, if there is free will, then you are again at least partly responsible?
What I am trying to say is that merely knowing what will happen, even with human choices, does not therefore make you the cause of that event, and that this applies to God, too, that merely because God knows about an event, that does not thereby make him the cause of it, even if we have free will.
quote:
Lee: if God says in a prophecy, "a remnant will return" (Isa. 10:21), because you know that will happen, does that mean you caused it somehow? Just knowing about a certain future event doesn't make you the cause of it.
The remnant returning in that verse is about God restoring a remnant. It doesn't say they will choose not to sin.
I agree! It just says they will return. But that involves a human decision! And we know about it in advance, but we are not therefore causing that decision.
I'm doing thinking on the fly, though! Like with this post, I didn't have a ready-made answer. We'll see if I stay airborne...
Blessings,
Lee
==================================================
"Even now we seem to have dim glimpses into regions
from which we receive no word to bring away" (George MacDonald) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Sahid
Megistered Rember
Date Joined Jun 2004
Total Posts : 2013
| Posted 7/14/2004 9:18 PM (GMT -6) | | Analogies bite! They never work. I'm going to persist in my folly though and try another. Maybe it'll be better.
Let's say I'm a parent. I live in my perfect libertarian world, so I get to pick where send my kid to school. There are only two schools in my town: Genius High and Dunce High. (I'll be kind and make Genius the better school)(I'm thinking this is too complicated already) So I decide to send my kid to Genius High, but just before I sign the last form, God sends me a vision. In the vision He shows me exactly what will happen if I send my kid there. He also shows me what will happen if I send him to Dunce High. At Genius, he will get discouraged and become a very bad man, say a terrorist. If I send him to Dunce, he will learn to love the less fortunate and become the next Billy Graham or something.
Now I have the choice of where to send him. To the first school which leads to sin. Or the second school that leads to righteousness. It is my contention that sending my kid to Genius High is not only wrong and mean, it is sinful. It's not just foreknowledge that makes it sin. It's foreknowledge with power. Now you may say my kid still has freewill, but I disagree. He has predeterminedwill. Free implies a choice. My kid may think he can make moral choices when I send him to school, but he can't. His "choices" are set. For him to actually have a choice is to prove God wrong. For if there is a choice, there is more than one posibility. The only way my kid has a choice is if I choose I third option which has unknown consequences.
Watch me fly. Freedom like wings and I will use them. Freedom like wings and I will spread them wide. - Stavesacre | | Back to Top | | |
|
Lee Merrill
booted
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 723
| Posted 7/16/2004 4:49 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Sahid,
quote:
If believers are free to choose, does God know their future choices?
Yes, and yet I don't think knowing a choice causes it.
quote:
And if unbelievers are not free, wasn't their salvation involuntary?
Yes.
quote:
This makes Joel 2:32 (quoted in Acts 2:21 and Rom. 10:13) mean, "Whoever has been saved, will be saved." It becomes meaningless.
That's a good point! I do use a similar argument in Acts 13:8, so I get to toast on my own griddle.
I think Joel 2:32 is from man's perspective, like this verse:
JER 26:3 Perhaps they will listen...
But when we hear from God's perspective, he says they certainly won't listen (Jer. 7:27). So "whoever wishes may come" (Rev. 22:17), but also we read that "no one can come unless the Father draws him" (Jn. 6:44). So I take "whoever wishes" from man's perspective, and "nobody can come unless..." from God's perspective, telling us that God has to be involved for a person to wish to come. So it's not a tautology, I think...
quote:
Finally, restricting freedom to believers, still leaves God responsible for the sin of unbelievers. You've still got God being unholy, and we know He's not.
God is responsible for the outcome, though, and his purpose is good, and the outcome will be good, too. Thus he is responsible, yes, but not guilty:
JAS 5:11 You ... have seen what the Lord finally brought about.
Blessings,
Lee
==================================================
"Even now we seem to have dim glimpses into regions
from which we receive no word to bring away" (George MacDonald) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Sahid
Megistered Rember
Date Joined Jun 2004
Total Posts : 2013
| Posted 7/17/2004 12:33 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
I think Joel 2:32 is from man's perspective, like this verse:
JER 26:3 Perhaps they will listen...
First, in both these verses God is talking. Still, he could be speaking from our point of view, unless our point of view is wrong. But according to your view aren't we wrong when we (or maybe just non-believers) think we can choose? I'm assuming that there is a correct point of view, an objective reality. Now, if we keep my assumption (which is another topic altogether), God saying, "Perhaps they will listen" is inconsistent with "They will not listen" (Jer. 7:27). They can't both be true in the same reality. Maybe we can get around this by saying Jeremiah was speaking to two different audiences. Some people had died and others had grown up in between. The ch. 26 speech is given at the beginning of the reign of a new king. So maybe this works. It's all very confusing.
I'm just saying that even if God is speaking from our point of view, He is still not going to lie. He wouldn't say perhaps without their being a chance. When regular old mortals are giving important news we don't want them saying "perhaps" when the future is settled. If my attorney or doctor says "perhaps" when he actually knows what is going to happen, it's lying. How much more important is God's working to save an entire nation? Why call Jeremiah, if he had no hope of success? quote:
So "whoever wishes may come" (Rev. 22:17), but also we read that "no one can come unless the Father draws him" (Jn. 6:44). So I take "whoever wishes" from man's perspective, and "nobody can come unless..." from God's perspective, telling us that God has to be involved for a person to wish to come. So it's not a tautology, I think...
I think this story applies. My dad regularly urged me to accept Jesus up until I finally did. He didn't use reason or emotion. He just kept reminding me that there was a decision I could make. There is a sense in which my dad "drew" me, but it was still true that I chose to (or wished to) come. I think God does something similar. He's calling and leading us back to Him, but He's not forcing. I don't think this pushes the scripture into something it didn't intend. It seems the natural, first glance meaning to me. But that's really just my opinion I guess. More importantly it removes a lot of contradictions. Words like "choose", "free", and "wish" lose their meaning without alternatives. quote:
God is responsible for the outcome, though, and his purpose is good, and the outcome will be good, too. Thus he is responsible, yes, but not guilty:
JAS 5:11 You ... have seen what the Lord finally brought about.
I know this steers things off the subject, but you've got to resolve contradictions here too. Matt. 13:30, 22:14, Luke 16:26, and plenty others. It's fatalism that bugs me. It's frustrating to keep hearing Christians encourage and admonish other to do the right thing when the future is already determined (at least for non-believers). Why repent if life is given without regard to our will?
Watch me fly. Freedom like wings and I will use them. Freedom like wings and I will spread them wide. - Stavesacre | | Back to Top | | |
|
Lee Merrill
booted
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 723
| Posted 7/17/2004 9:32 AM (GMT -6) | | Hi Sahid,
quote:
Lee: I think Joel 2:32 is from man's perspective, like this verse:
JER 26:3 Perhaps they will listen...
Sahid: ... according to your view aren't we wrong when we (or maybe just non-believers) think we can choose?
That's a good question! Is our perspective wrong, when we think there's a possibility, and God knows the future? I don't think it's wrong like believing 1+1=3, that's how it seems to us, so God speaks to us in that way sometimes, like when he says "the sun rose." Similarly with non-believers choosing, if their choices are really caused, then it still is not lying to view only the part of the chain that concerns them, and again speak from their perspective. Like when we say "I had an accident," lots of stuff led up to that, that we don't mention, and it may not have even been our fault.
quote:
God saying, "Perhaps they will listen" is inconsistent with "They will not listen" (Jer. 7:27). They can't both be true in the same reality. Maybe we can get around this by saying Jeremiah was speaking to two different audiences.
I do think both verses are addressed to Jeremiah, actually, so I would need to say something different. This is another good point! Now cut that out!  My thinking cap may have to be applied so firmly that I get a pointy head. Speaking of points.
How about this? If I told you "I rolled some dice," you still don't know the outcome, so for you, any result is still a possibility. But if I tell you "it came up a 2 and a 5," then you now know the result, which was certain before I told you. So in that sense, I told you both, and both were true.
quote:
He wouldn't say perhaps without their being a chance. When regular old mortals are giving important news we don't want them saying "perhaps" when the future is settled. If my attorney or doctor says "perhaps" when he actually knows what is going to happen, it's lying. How much more important is God's working to save an entire nation? Why call Jeremiah, if he had no hope of success?
I can take another approach! What if there is hope for unrepentant people who die under judgment? That's another topic! But what if there is hope for them? Then "perhaps" and "they won't" can both be true, they won't listen now, but they will listen later.
Isaiah 45:17 But Israel will be saved by the Lord with an everlasting salvation; you will never be put to shame or disgraced, to ages everlasting.
quote:
Lee: So "whoever wishes may come" (Rev. 22:17), but also we read that "no one can come unless the Father draws him" (Jn. 6:44).
Sahid: He's calling and leading us back to Him, but He's not forcing. ... Words like "choose", "free", and "wish" lose their meaning without alternatives.
I don't think they are meaningless if they describe our perspective, though. And especially if God sets us free, when we surrender to him, and then we really do choose freely, within his will. Future choices, as well as present ones, may be in view here.
quote:
Lee: God is responsible for the outcome, though, and his purpose is good, and the outcome will be good, too. Thus he is responsible, yes, but not guilty:
JAS 5:11 You ... have seen what the Lord finally brought about.
Sahid: I know this steers things off the subject, but you've got to resolve contradictions here too. Matt. 13:30, 22:14, Luke 16:26, and plenty others. It's fatalism that bugs me. It's frustrating to keep hearing Christians encourage and admonish other to do the right thing when the future is already determined (at least for non-believers). Why repent if life is given without regard to our will?
Matthew 13:30 Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, "First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn."
Matthew 22:14 "For many are called, but few are chosen."
Luke 16:26 'And besides all this, between us and you there is a great chasm fixed, in order that those who wish to come over from here to you may not be able, and that none may cross over from there to us.'
I hope that all may repent, after judgment, even, thus a good outcome even for them. Is there hope for chaff, for smoke, even? See Hos. 13:3-4. May everyone be chosen eventually? Maybe this is "few at a time," as in Rom. 11:25-32. And the barrier in hell is not forever, for hell is cast into the lake of fire, and it seems there is an invitation for those outside the New Jerusalem to come in, thus no barrier forever, re Rev. 22:14-15.
I think admonishments to Christians are appropriate, for we can choose, and choose badly (Gal. 5:13). But I believe the command to repent is God's word sent to cause repentance, which will accomplish its purpose (Isa. 55:11). Your last question assumes free will in repentance! And objects to having no free will in the matter, but it can't be both ways...
You made my work for my supper! Willing to share what I have on the table, though, hope you might find some of this palatable, too...
Blessings,
Lee
==================================================
"Even now we seem to have dim glimpses into regions
from which we receive no word to bring away" (George MacDonald) | | Back to Top | | |
| 63 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 4:55 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|