Login Register

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic Page 4 of 6   [ 105 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 1:25 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 6200
Religion: Christian
beng wrote:
I can show you how to get to X, but whether you are going to get there is a different matter.


That is a true statement.
That is not, in any way, what the canon states.

_________________
But our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ, Philippians 3:20


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 1:44 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 6200
Religion: Christian
beng wrote:
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
beng wrote:


The canon only anathemize certainty about preserving to the end.


I honestly dont even know how to respond to that.


That is, you can't know whether you will die in the state of grace or die in unrepented mortal sin.


I know exactly what you meant.

I am just overwhelmed at how casually and succinctly you erase "only" the core purpose of God's communication with man.

The fact that there is a canon stating that the most basic human need is inconceivable,
... is inconceivable.

_________________
But our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ, Philippians 3:20


Last edited by EtcumSpiri22-0 on Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:13 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:03 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 10:25 am
Posts: 5072
Location: Fort Smith, AR
Religion: Christian & Missionary Alliance
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
I know exactly what you meant.
I am just overwhelmed by the fact that you are so easily able to erase the core purpose of God's communication with man.

The fact that there is a canon stating that the most basic human need is inconceivable,
... is inconceivable.

I wonder what it is that privileges the moment of death as the moment that determines one's eternal destiny. It's pretty absurd from a divine, timeless perspective. I think it's equally absurd from our perspective. God saves persons, and persons subsist through time. The whole idea of being in and out of a state of grace and the only moment that "counts" is the one that you be in at the moment of death, well why that one? Why not four seconds before your death? Why not a random point for any given person? In fact, why must any point be privileged at all?

Of course, one answer is that there is no necessity, that God could have made any point the privileged point He so desired, and that He chose to make death the privileged point. You then make an argument for fittingness from there. But since I don't think God made that the privileged point, I don't think that any argument for fittingness works precisely because the first premise is flawed. In fact, I tend to think (given the atemporality of God) that it is unfitting for one particular point to be privileged.

Anyway, to your point, it just seems silly to me that the NT goes to such lengths to meet that "most basic human need"--the need for assurance--to tell us that we might "know that we have eternal life" for us to then turn around and say, "Yeah, but you can't REALLY know after all because you don't know what state you are going to be in at some privileged point down the way." I don't do that to my kids. I don't think God does that to us. But then to go further and claim that if a person says that they do have that assurance, that they do believe that they are saved, that that very claim to knowledge removes you from the state of grace such that, if you die with this claimed knowledge, you miss out on the privileged point . . . that's worse than absurd. That's abusive. By all means, tell people you think they are mistaken in their claim to assurance. But to tell people that their very claim to assurance is damnable is, to me, damnable in and of itself.

_________________
Indeed, the Lord Jesus, when He prayed to the Father, "that all may be one. . . as we are one" (John 17:21-22) opened up vistas closed to human reason, for He implied a certain likeness between the union of the divine Persons, and the unity of God's sons in truth and charity. This likeness reveals that man, who is the only creature on earth which God willed for itself, cannot fully find himself except through a sincere gift of himself. ~ Pope Paul VI, Gaudium et Spes 24.3


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:12 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13610
Location: Inverted Cross domain
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
beng wrote:
I can show you how to get to X, but whether you are going to get there is a different matter.


That is a true statement.
That is not, in any way, what the canon states.


Then what do yo think the canon means? Is it not that people can't know whether their going to be saved in heaven (and where "heaven" is a destination)?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:17 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13610
Location: Inverted Cross domain
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
beng wrote:
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
beng wrote:


The canon only anathemize certainty about preserving to the end.


I honestly dont even know how to respond to that.


That is, you can't know whether you will die in the state of grace or die in unrepented mortal sin.


I know exactly what you meant.

I am just overwhelmed at how casually and succinctly you erase "only" the core purpose of God's communication with man.

The fact that there is a canon stating that the most basic human need is inconceivable,
... is inconceivable.


You know what I meant, but I don't know what you mean.

Are you saying that the only core purpose of God's communication with man [b]is about the certainty of salvation?/[b]


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:27 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 6200
Religion: Christian
beng wrote:
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
beng wrote:
I can show you how to get to X, but whether you are going to get there is a different matter.


That is a true statement.
That is not, in any way, what the canon states.


Then what do yo think the canon means?


The canon doesn't say anything at all about the question of getting there.

The canon states:

Quote:
VI, canon 16: If any one saith, that he will for certain, of an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance unto the end,-unless he have learned this by special revelation; let him be anathema

_________________
But our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ, Philippians 3:20


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:35 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13610
Location: Inverted Cross domain
theJack wrote:
I wonder what it is that privileges the moment of death as the moment that determines one's eternal destiny.It's pretty absurd from a divine, timeless perspective. I think it's equally absurd from our perspective. God saves persons, and persons subsist through time. The whole idea of being in and out of a state of grace and the only moment that "counts" is the one that you be in at the moment of death, well why that one? Why not four seconds before your death? Why not a random point for any given person? In fact, why must any point be privileged at all?


That the time of death is the time that mattered has precedence (Ez 8:19-29, 33:7-19).

If you want to know what might be God's reason fopr it, I'm going to browse Romano Amerio's book and try to scan it for you. He has good answer.

Quote:
Anyway, to your point, it just seems silly to me that the NT goes to such lengths to meet that "most basic human need"--the need for assurance--to tell us that we might "know that we have eternal life" for us to then turn around and say, "Yeah, but you can't REALLY know after all because you don't know what state you are going to be in at some privileged point down the way." I don't do that to my kids. I don't think God does that to us. But then to go further and claim that if a person says that they do have that assurance, that they do believe that they are saved, that that very claim to knowledge removes you from the state of grace such that, if you die with this claimed knowledge, you miss out on the privileged point . . . that's worse than absurd. That's abusive. By all means, tell people you think they are mistaken in their claim to assurance. But to tell people that their very claim to assurance is damnable is, to me, damnable in and of itself.


This is an emotional problem, not an intelectual one. So there's no intelectual answer.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:41 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13610
Location: Inverted Cross domain
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
beng wrote:
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
beng wrote:
I can show you how to get to X, but whether you are going to get there is a different matter.


That is a true statement.
That is not, in any way, what the canon states.


Then what do yo think the canon means?


The canon doesn't say anything at all about the question of getting there.

The canon states:

Quote:
VI, canon 16: If any one saith, that he will for certain, of an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance unto the end,-unless he have learned this by special revelation; let him be anathema


The great gift of perseverance is the gift where you die in the state of grace. If you die in the state of grace, you are going to heaven.

There is a different dogmatic statement about the fact that if you die in the state of grace (which you can't know without special revelation as stated by the canon you quoted) you will absolutely get to heaven.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:41 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 6200
Religion: Christian
theJack wrote:
... the NT goes to such lengths to meet that "most basic human need"--the need for assurance--to tell us that we might "know that we have eternal life" for us to then turn around and say, "Yeah, but you can't REALLY know after all


Exactly.
And not just the NT. It's the theme of the entire Scripture beginning with Genesis.

_________________
But our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ, Philippians 3:20


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:55 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 6200
Religion: Christian
beng wrote:
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
beng wrote:
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
beng wrote:
I can show you how to get to X, but whether you are going to get there is a different matter.


That is a true statement.
That is not, in any way, what the canon states.


Then what do yo think the canon means?


The canon doesn't say anything at all about the question of getting there.

The canon states:

Quote:
VI, canon 16: If any one saith, that he will for certain, of an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance unto the end,-unless he have learned this by special revelation; let him be anathema


The great gift of perseverance is the gift where you die in the state of grace. If you die in the state of grace, you are going to heaven.

There is a different dogmatic statement about the fact that if you die in the state of grace (which you can't know without special revelation as stated by the canon you quoted) you will absolutely get to heaven.


Again,
I know exactly what you meant.

I am just overwhelmed at how casually and succinctly you erase "only" the core purpose of God's communication with man.

The fact that there is a canon stating that the most basic human need is anathema,
... is inconceivable.

_________________
But our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ, Philippians 3:20


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 3:55 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13610
Location: Inverted Cross domain
It seems to me that both you and TheJack have some baggage. To be honest, maybe you are bothered with scrupulousity the way Luther did.

For me, I don't really think that the "core" Christian message is the absolute certainty of salvation. I mean, knowing that you are saved would be nice, but not knowing it (as in having absolute certainty) is not the end of the world.

Majority of religious people doesn't believe in absolute certainty (some muslim do, but they are in the minority). They are pretty much fine. Not to mention all those Christian pre-reformation who never believed in absolute certainty.

So I don't think not knowing with absolute certainty about one's salvation (but, at least, having only moral certainty) is inconceivable. Maybe your baggage makes it inconceivable to you, but most people don't think that way.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:46 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 3:37 pm
Posts: 6143
Location: Bergen, Norway
Religion: High Church Lutheran
Church Affiliations: Church of Norway
Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote:
Why is "God" not in all caps? You're confusing me.
Try writing a post with God in all upper or lower case. When you post it on this board I'm pretty sure it will turn out 'God.'

_________________
Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο

“Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt.” — Paul Tillich

http://katolikken.wordpress.com/
English texts: http://katolikken.wordpress.com/tag/english-texts-2/

http://www.facebook.com/kjetilkringlebotten

http://twitter.com/katolikken

http://thecatholic.wordpress.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:58 am 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 81322
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
You're right. So I can't blame theJack. At least not justly.

_________________
Nos autem in nomine Domini Dei nostri

Need something to read?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 11:19 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 6200
Religion: Christian
beng wrote:
It seems to me that both you and TheJack have some baggage. To be honest, maybe you are bothered with scrupulousity the way Luther did.

For me, I don't really think that the "core" Christian message is the absolute certainty of salvation. I mean, knowing that you are saved would be nice, but not knowing it (as in having absolute certainty) is not the end of the world.

Majority of religious people doesn't believe in absolute certainty (some muslim do, but they are in the minority). They are pretty much fine. Not to mention all those Christian pre-reformation who never believed in absolute certainty.

So I don't think not knowing with absolute certainty about one's salvation (but, at least, having only moral certainty) is inconceivable. Maybe your baggage makes it inconceivable to you, but most people don't think that way.


I cant speak for theJack but no, I am not obsessive compulsive. ;)
You are making a guess about me and assigning a word with negative connotation to my person. Then you are comparing that assumption to the "majority of religious people". You are shifting the topic to a long distance psycological diagnosis and using social pressure to support the speculation.

In the spirit of speculation that you have opened up...
I do see a possible similarity between your invocation of the Catholic flavor of Godwin's law
in comparing me to Luther and the response that the average Catholic might experience if, in fact, they exercise the option to; "have learned this by special revelation".

_________________
But our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ, Philippians 3:20


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 1:38 pm 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 6200
Religion: Christian
beng wrote:
To be honest, maybe you are bothered with scrupulousity


Well, in my concern that it seems to be embedded in the following, I would agree.

Quote:
VI, canon 16: If any one saith, that he will for certain, of an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance unto the end,-unless he have learned this by special revelation; let him be anathema

_________________
But our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ, Philippians 3:20


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 4:18 pm 
Offline
Adept
Adept
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 10:25 am
Posts: 5072
Location: Fort Smith, AR
Religion: Christian & Missionary Alliance
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
I cant speak for theJack but no, I am not obsessive compulsive. ;)

I'm obsessive about having a (relatively) clean house, but unfortunately, neither my wife nor children are. Thus, I live with a constant tick. Omeprazole is my friend. 8-)

_________________
Indeed, the Lord Jesus, when He prayed to the Father, "that all may be one. . . as we are one" (John 17:21-22) opened up vistas closed to human reason, for He implied a certain likeness between the union of the divine Persons, and the unity of God's sons in truth and charity. This likeness reveals that man, who is the only creature on earth which God willed for itself, cannot fully find himself except through a sincere gift of himself. ~ Pope Paul VI, Gaudium et Spes 24.3


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:44 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13610
Location: Inverted Cross domain
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:

I cant speak for theJack but no, I am not obsessive compulsive. ;)
You are making a guess about me and assigning a word with negative connotation to my person.


And doctors make diagnosis to his patient and sometime it's bad. Can't really blame the doctor for that.

Or maybe you could blame it if you want only good diagnostic. But he wouldn't be a good doctor then.

Quote:
Then you are comparing that assumption to the "majority of religious people". You are shifting the topic to a long distance psycological diagnosis and using social pressure to support the speculation.


Because you say that it's inconceivable. I'm saying that it's not and open you up to the idea that it's really not.

Quote:
In the spirit of speculation that you have opened up...
I do see a possible similarity between your invocation of the Catholic flavor of Godwin's law
in comparing me to Luther and the response that the average Catholic might experience if, in fact, they exercise the option to; "have learned this by special revelation".


Is that the new triggered word now?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:46 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13610
Location: Inverted Cross domain
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
beng wrote:
To be honest, maybe you are bothered with scrupulousity


Well, in my concern that it seems to be embedded in the following, I would agree.

Quote:
VI, canon 16: If any one saith, that he will for certain, of an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance unto the end,-unless he have learned this by special revelation; let him be anathema


If you agree, then my initial diagnostic (which the triggered word) is not that off the mark as you make it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:01 am 
Offline
Master
Master

Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 8:33 am
Posts: 3848
Religion: Catholic
theJack wrote:
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
I know exactly what you meant.
I am just overwhelmed by the fact that you are so easily able to erase the core purpose of God's communication with man.

The fact that there is a canon stating that the most basic human need is inconceivable,
... is inconceivable.

I wonder what it is that privileges the moment of death as the moment that determines one's eternal destiny. It's pretty absurd from a divine, timeless perspective. I think it's equally absurd from our perspective. God saves persons, and persons subsist through time. The whole idea of being in and out of a state of grace and the only moment that "counts" is the one that you be in at the moment of death, well why that one? Why not four seconds before your death? Why not a random point for any given person? In fact, why must any point be privileged at all?

Of course, one answer is that there is no necessity, that God could have made any point the privileged point He so desired, and that He chose to make death the privileged point. You then make an argument for fittingness from there. But since I don't think God made that the privileged point, I don't think that any argument for fittingness works precisely because the first premise is flawed. In fact, I tend to think (given the atemporality of God) that it is unfitting for one particular point to be privileged.

Anyway, to your point, it just seems silly to me that the NT goes to such lengths to meet that "most basic human need"--the need for assurance--to tell us that we might "know that we have eternal life" for us to then turn around and say, "Yeah, but you can't REALLY know after all because you don't know what state you are going to be in at some privileged point down the way." I don't do that to my kids. I don't think God does that to us. But then to go further and claim that if a person says that they do have that assurance, that they do believe that they are saved, that that very claim to knowledge removes you from the state of grace such that, if you die with this claimed knowledge, you miss out on the privileged point . . . that's worse than absurd. That's abusive. By all means, tell people you think they are mistaken in their claim to assurance. But to tell people that their very claim to assurance is damnable is, to me, damnable in and of itself.


I understand your point, but must disagree somewhat.

In my mind, I have no absolutle certainty. Zero. And I’m just fine with it. In fact, it motivates me to pray and ask for the grace to improve and grow more holy; to become more Christlike.

In fact, my lack of assureance, I think anyway, provides an conduit for me to have hope. And it seems to me that having hope is greater than assurance, for is assureance even a virtue? If its not, then wouldn’t it be better to gain a virtue?

So from that perspective, assurance could be quite damnable because it presumes something and removes all need for hope.

_________________
"So mercifully blessed to be free from the ravages of intelligence." - Taken from Time Bandits


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Free Will and Pelagianism: Will Non-Catholics Go to Hea
PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 9:04 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:52 pm
Posts: 6200
Religion: Christian
Peetem wrote:
theJack wrote:
EtcumSpiri22-0 wrote:
I know exactly what you meant.
I am just overwhelmed by the fact that you are so easily able to erase the core purpose of God's communication with man.

The fact that there is a canon stating that the most basic human need is inconceivable,
... is inconceivable.

I wonder what it is that privileges the moment of death as the moment that determines one's eternal destiny. It's pretty absurd from a divine, timeless perspective. I think it's equally absurd from our perspective. God saves persons, and persons subsist through time. The whole idea of being in and out of a state of grace and the only moment that "counts" is the one that you be in at the moment of death, well why that one? Why not four seconds before your death? Why not a random point for any given person? In fact, why must any point be privileged at all?

Of course, one answer is that there is no necessity, that God could have made any point the privileged point He so desired, and that He chose to make death the privileged point. You then make an argument for fittingness from there. But since I don't think God made that the privileged point, I don't think that any argument for fittingness works precisely because the first premise is flawed. In fact, I tend to think (given the atemporality of God) that it is unfitting for one particular point to be privileged.

Anyway, to your point, it just seems silly to me that the NT goes to such lengths to meet that "most basic human need"--the need for assurance--to tell us that we might "know that we have eternal life" for us to then turn around and say, "Yeah, but you can't REALLY know after all because you don't know what state you are going to be in at some privileged point down the way." I don't do that to my kids. I don't think God does that to us. But then to go further and claim that if a person says that they do have that assurance, that they do believe that they are saved, that that very claim to knowledge removes you from the state of grace such that, if you die with this claimed knowledge, you miss out on the privileged point . . . that's worse than absurd. That's abusive. By all means, tell people you think they are mistaken in their claim to assurance. But to tell people that their very claim to assurance is damnable is, to me, damnable in and of itself.


I understand your point, but must disagree somewhat.

In my mind, I have no absolutle certainty. Zero. And I’m just fine with it. In fact, it motivates me to pray and ask for the grace to improve and grow more holy; to become more Christlike.

In fact, my lack of assureance, I think anyway, provides an conduit for me to have hope. And it seems to me that having hope is greater than assurance, for is assureance even a virtue? If its not, then wouldn’t it be better to gain a virtue?

So from that perspective, assurance could be quite damnable because it presumes something and removes all need for hope.


I understand your logic.

I dont understand why faith in the promise of Jesus is anathema.
Doubt is a canon.

_________________
But our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ, Philippians 3:20


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 4 of 6   [ 105 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


Jump to: