So, if I am taught something by a minister, and taught something else(separately) by an older sibling, then, without any "teacher" personally present, I can compare what I was taught by each one (minister and older sibling) and reach my own conclusions. And this is part of "what I was taught"
:blink:
These aren't the only kinds of decisions we make, choosing between one thing or another or a set of options.
We find ourselves in the position of simply having one choice, one thing, that we know - all the time. We can accept that and leave it at that or decide to look for other options to that. There are times when the result wasn't known before that. That is literally going beyond, further, a step more, beyond what we were taught.
We also learn things for the "first time" through our own effort - all the time. It may be something known already but for us, it's the first time.
VPW actually taught this about the definition of an "apostle" when he defined it as "one who sheds 'new 'light' - it may have already been revealed prior but it's new to that generation"............
The "going beyond what you're taught" part is kind of a vicious circle, IMO. A chicken or the egg thing. To me the importance is to NOT take everyone else's word for everything and end up choosing between two things being given to me automatically because I often end up choosing between the lesser of two evils, whether I know it or not. And we know where that leads.
After taking PFAL, we thought that we knew that we knew that we knew. In reality, we knew far too little about a multitude of subjects and issues. That proved to be dangerous for many of us.
It is impossible for all learning to come through only teaching. Who taught Franklin about electricity before he discovered it and if it wasn't Franklin who discovered it who taught the person who taught Franklin? Nothing would advance. Because all information would stay at the same level as their mentor or teacher. Unless the person went beyond what he was taught to discover or learn something new through other external means.
Oldskool had it right when responding to me quoting VPW..... critical thinking
And this must be what VPW wanted, at least this is what has happened in the way international of present day.
I've seen people on face book, who are still caught up in the Veepster's mystique, pushing the same old "blue book" mumbo jumbo that used to captivate us, almost word for word, like it's some kind of profound wisdom or magic elixir they're compelled to share with the heathen masses...
A) He said that the Gospels didn't apply to us because one verse says that what was written aforetime
was for our learning. Therefore, the Gospels were for our learning.
This fails because Genesis-Malachi were written aforetime. The Gospels were written after Pentecost
and concurrently with the Epistles. So "written aforetime" doesn't apply to the Gospels,
making them as relevant to Christians as the Church Epistles.
vpw made a simple mistake that any Divinity School student should be able to avoid, let alone a
supposed graduate. (Some people keep calling him some sort of "Dr" but he should be above
elementary mistakes if he really was one.)
B) He said that the Gospels didn't apply to us because one verse says that what was written aforetime
was for our learning. Therefore, it's not for our doctrine, it's merely something we may learn from,
and it wasn't addressed to us.
This fails because vpw once again ignored an error in the KJV and based a doctrine on it.
The phrase "for our learning" contains the word "learning", which is translated (poorly) from
the Greek word "didaskalia." That's the same word consistently translated "doctrine" elsewhere
in the Epistles. So, that sentence should read that what was written aforetime was
"for our DOCTRINE."
So, that verse didn't address the Gospels at all, and if it did, it would make the opposite
point vpw claimed it made. The Bible is a united whole, so it's all profitable for the
Christian, for doctrine, reproof, correction, instruction in righteousness. ]
Exactly......the Scriptures are a united whole and BUILD truth upon truth. One cannot cherry-pick some and disregard others.
Twi violates biblical research in its most basic elements....following in the steps of wierwille, a false teacher. He led them astray. Even today, thousands still walk lockstep in false doctrine.
False teachers and cult leaders would have you to disregard the ten commandments....ie Exd 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery. And, wierwille indoctrinated his inner circle to project "spiritual adultery" to deflect from the lust of this sin.
A little background FYI for people who were never in The Way:
Wierwille taught that, once you gain some spiritual maturity (whatever the hell that is), you will begin to see that when the Bible talks about adultery, it is really talking about "spiritual adultery", not the usual physical kind, as defined by millions of people the world over for thousands of years. This is why the Trinity was conidered such a big issue in The Way. Wierwille asserted that belief in the Trinity was a form of idolatry and, thus, an example of spiritual adultery....And all you really need to do to gain this spiritual maturity is to keep reading the PFAL materials, renew your mind to The Word (as defined by VPW) and speak in tongues as much and as often as you can.
edit....and there are quite a few people, still riding that same old train, hoping for the day when it finally pulls into the station.
How are we supposed to learn from it if we aren't allowed to read it? How can we apply the lessons taught, so that we ourselves, having supposedly greater riches, don't ourselves fall in weakness through not understanding. By not knowing the lessons that are FOR OUR LEARNING.
The epistles are full of refs to OT incidents. How many regularly checked out the OT section(s) that were referred to, in order to gain a greater understanding?
EG Rom 10:9,10 - refers back to the blessings and cursings of Deut 27-31 - what they were supposed to do when they entered the promised land. Okay, how is this applicable to us in OUR promised land of the renewed mind? What kind of things are we to keep in mind? What to do, and what not to do? Where are the snares and traps that could distract us? Yet the blessings and cursings ... were so that people could learn to love God and hear his voice! Plenty there that we can learn from!
Reading the epistles is good.
Reading the epistles with depth of understanding - is better.
And engaging brain to work out apparent contradictions or odd incidents - is better yet. That's how we learn.
Exactly......the Scriptures are a united whole and BUILD truth upon truth. One cannot cherry-pick some and disregard others.
Twi violates biblical research in its most basic elements....following in the steps of wierwille, a false teacher. He led them astray. Even today, thousands still walk lockstep in false doctrine.
False teachers and cult leaders would have you to disregard the ten commandments....ie Exd 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery. And, wierwille indoctrinated his inner circle to project "spiritual adultery" to deflect from the lust of this sin.
"...the Scriptures are a united whole and BUILD truth upon truth..."
This is what it means to say the Scriptures have "integrity." At one level or another, they all hang together.
Wierwille preached that the interity of the Scripture is always at stake, but in his practice and teaching, he always violated that integrity.
II Timothy 3:16 says ALL scritpure is profitable for doctrine, ALL for reproof, ALL for correction, ALL for instruction in righteousness.
Wierwille sliced and diced the integrity of God's Word with his dispensationalist "rightly dividing the Word of truth."
"...the Scriptures are a united whole and BUILD truth upon truth..."
This is what it means to say the Scriptures have "integrity." At one level or another, they all hang together.
Wierwille preached that the interity of the Scripture is always at stake, but in his practice and teaching, he always violated that integrity.
II Timothy 3:16 says ALL scritpure is profitable for doctrine, ALL for reproof, ALL for correction, ALL for instruction in righteousness.
Wierwille sliced and diced the integrity of God's Word with his dispensationalist "rightly dividing the Word of truth."
Love,
Steve
Wierwille's lusts and sins of the flesh....(drunkenness, lazy, adultery, plagairism, striker, strife, etc.)....perverted his "rightly dividing the word of truth." He "cut the pie" to HIS advantage, to empower HIM.
Any "wierwille research" is HIGHLY suspect to error.
IMO.....one needs to throw it all in the trash. Wierwille's work is a patchwork of plagairism, perversions, platitudes, and prejudices.
IMO.....one needs to throw it all in the trash. Wierwille's work is a patchwork of plagairism, perversions, platitudes, and prejudices.
Many of the people who I talk too. Who have left TWI still hold onto his books. They tell me how great his books are. My wife if she is present usually asks (the one who was in the way) something alone the line about his checkered past of lying about his credentials. How can you trust anything he writes. Usually we just get something along the lines of shrugged shoulders.
It just seems like not just people have "too little knowledge" it is as if leaving the group they want to hold on to just "too little knowledge"
for a little while there after leaving, i kept some sacred books and sylabi (?)lol
as time went on, i realized what a brainwashed azz i was
i kinda wish i had kept my files instead of leaving them behind in my divorce
i had excellent letters from vpig and craig to show you how insane they really were/are
oh well
Wierwille taught that, once you gain some spiritual maturity (whatever the hell that is), you will begin to see that when the Bible talks about adultery, it is really talking about "spiritual adultery", not the usual physical kind, as defined by millions of people the world over for thousands of years. This is why the Trinity was conidered such a big issue in The Way. Wierwille asserted that belief in the Trinity was a form of idolatry and, thus, an example of spiritual adultery....And all you really need to do to gain this spiritual maturity is to keep reading the PFAL materials, renew your mind to The Word (as defined by VPW) and speak in tongues as much and as often as you can.
damn i'd rather believe in the trinity any day then become spiritually mature in vpig's book
the gals, the guys, vpig, etc., told me being spiritually mature was to please the man of god sexually and of course keep it in my locked box
I'm coming late to this discussion but I love this topic, so I can't resist tossing in a comment or two.
I kind of agree with WW about the tendency of educated people to have their own doctrinal blind spots. This is borne out in two books I have, both written by members of the medical & scientific communities. Both authors speak in different terms about the tendency of the scientific community to blindly adhere to theories that support a secular worldview and to doggedly resist, ridicule, or otherwise undermine those that might seem to support a Creationist worldview. Evidence be damned.
I think most of know by now that Einstein theorized the Big Bang, but wouldn't espouse it because he was afraid it would give credence to religion.
On the other hand, I agree that many Evangelicals have become reactionaries, driven by "the culture war" to distrust and disparage anyone perceived as liberal, moderate, or secular.
There seems to be a calcification of discourse that has rendered people incapable of openly and honestly discussing science, politics or religion. So instead of listening humbly to one another and learning, we distrust those who disagree and ignore the holes in our own worldview so that we can reinforce what we believe. It's quite sad really. Like some kind of global cancer.
And FWIW, I agree with Waysider. I see Jesus' statement to the rich man as a contradiction of the doctrine of salvation by grace. And it's not just this passage. If you read the context of every reference to salvation or eternal life in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) you will see that Jesus often spoke of eternal life or entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven as the reward for those who kept the law.
(Mtt 19:16, Mtt 10:22, 24:13 - 22, Mark 10:26, 13:13, Luke 13:23 - 30).
It's not until you reach John that you see Jesus presenting salvation almost exclusively as the reward of faith without works. This dichotomy continues through the rest of the NT and even shows up in second chapter of Romans, a treatise that is accepted as the doctrinal foundation of the doctrine of salvation by faith. Romans 2:6 - 10 tell us plainly that God will render to every man according to his deeds. That's another word for works. Yet Romans 6:23 says eternal life is a gift of God.
There are two completely different doctrines about salvation living side by side throughout the NT. I'm sure Geisha would say that it's not really a contradiction at all if you just pray humbly about it. Perhaps I'm not humble or prayerful enough because, in eight years of reading, praying, and studying, I've not been able to reconcile these.
But that's way off topic. Just couldn't resist dropping my two cents' worth.
I'm coming late to this discussion but I love this topic, so I can't resist tossing in a comment or two.
And FWIW, I agree with Waysider. I see Jesus' statement to the rich man as a contradiction of the doctrine of salvation by grace. And it's not just this passage. If you read the context of every reference to salvation or eternal life in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) you will see that Jesus often spoke of eternal life or entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven as the reward for those who kept the law.
(Mtt 19:16, Mtt 10:22, 24:13 - 22, Mark 10:26, 13:13, Luke 13:23 - 30).
It's not until you reach John that you see Jesus presenting salvation almost exclusively as the reward of faith without works. This dichotomy continues through the rest of the NT and even shows up in second chapter of Romans, a treatise that is accepted as the doctrinal foundation of the doctrine of salvation by faith. Romans 2:6 - 10 tell us plainly that God will render to every man according to his deeds. That's another word for works. Yet Romans 6:23 says eternal life is a gift of God.
There are two completely different doctrines about salvation living side by side throughout the NT. I'm sure Geisha would say that it's not really a contradiction at all if you just pray humbly about it. Perhaps I'm not humble or prayerful enough because, in eight years of reading, praying, and studying, I've not been able to reconcile these.
But that's way off topic. Just couldn't resist dropping my two cents' worth.
This would give creedance to the idea that the members at Nicea cut, rearranged, eliminated parts of or whole texts which would be the reason for all the confusion. That is why the Bible as we have it today, cannot be the final say---in anything. It has obvious holes that cannot be reconciled within itself.
Or perhaps there were two (or more) schools of thought in the first century. Something along the lines of how we ended up with a two party political system here..
Or perhaps there were two (or more) schools of thought in the first century. Something along the lines of how we ended up with a two party political system here..
A most excellent premise, my furry friend. Of course, you have to get past the innerrancy problem and question whether Paul's words hold water before you can give any serious consideration to such theories.
But, remember, Eve pondered life's questions in a similar manner and got her little heiny spanked for it, ya know? Or, at least that's what Mr. Wierwille taught in PLAF (The Wonder Class). :P
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
12
9
32
13
Popular Days
Oct 28
15
Nov 7
14
Nov 1
13
Oct 27
13
Top Posters In This Topic
WordWolf 12 posts
johniam 9 posts
waysider 32 posts
Naten00 13 posts
Popular Days
Oct 28 2011
15 posts
Nov 7 2011
14 posts
Nov 1 2011
13 posts
Oct 27 2011
13 posts
Popular Posts
waysider
And therein lies the crux of the issue. In The Way, we were told we were being given the necessary tools to do independent research (cough), yet if one were to venture outside the prescribed doctrine
WordWolf
I prefer to say that "the Theory of Evolution" HAS NOT MADE ITS CASE. If it is true and correct, I have not been presented with sufficient evidence to support the major points that are claimed. Adhe
waysider
As would I, as well.....ALL is much too far-reaching a word to use. My point was simply this: We often hear the argument being presented that this country was based on Christian principles. That is n
OldSkool
I really can't say it any better than that so I will simply quote what WordWolf said on the subject.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
Psalm 119:99
"I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation."
Wierwille was also contradicting the Bible, of which he was supposed to be such a master!
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
So, if I am taught something by a minister, and taught something else(separately) by an older sibling, then, without any "teacher" personally present, I can compare what I was taught by each one (minister and older sibling) and reach my own conclusions. And this is part of "what I was taught"
:blink:
These aren't the only kinds of decisions we make, choosing between one thing or another or a set of options.
We find ourselves in the position of simply having one choice, one thing, that we know - all the time. We can accept that and leave it at that or decide to look for other options to that. There are times when the result wasn't known before that. That is literally going beyond, further, a step more, beyond what we were taught.
We also learn things for the "first time" through our own effort - all the time. It may be something known already but for us, it's the first time.
VPW actually taught this about the definition of an "apostle" when he defined it as "one who sheds 'new 'light' - it may have already been revealed prior but it's new to that generation"............
The "going beyond what you're taught" part is kind of a vicious circle, IMO. A chicken or the egg thing. To me the importance is to NOT take everyone else's word for everything and end up choosing between two things being given to me automatically because I often end up choosing between the lesser of two evils, whether I know it or not. And we know where that leads.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
After taking PFAL, we thought that we knew that we knew that we knew. In reality, we knew far too little about a multitude of subjects and issues. That proved to be dangerous for many of us.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
I
What did you find fascinating about the article?
Edited by Broken ArrowLink to comment
Share on other sites
Naten00
It is impossible for all learning to come through only teaching. Who taught Franklin about electricity before he discovered it and if it wasn't Franklin who discovered it who taught the person who taught Franklin? Nothing would advance. Because all information would stay at the same level as their mentor or teacher. Unless the person went beyond what he was taught to discover or learn something new through other external means.
Oldskool had it right when responding to me quoting VPW..... critical thinking
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
And this must be what VPW wanted, at least this is what has happened in the way international of present day.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I've seen people on face book, who are still caught up in the Veepster's mystique, pushing the same old "blue book" mumbo jumbo that used to captivate us, almost word for word, like it's some kind of profound wisdom or magic elixir they're compelled to share with the heathen masses...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Exactly......the Scriptures are a united whole and BUILD truth upon truth. One cannot cherry-pick some and disregard others.
Twi violates biblical research in its most basic elements....following in the steps of wierwille, a false teacher. He led them astray. Even today, thousands still walk lockstep in false doctrine.
False teachers and cult leaders would have you to disregard the ten commandments....ie Exd 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery. And, wierwille indoctrinated his inner circle to project "spiritual adultery" to deflect from the lust of this sin.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
A little background FYI for people who were never in The Way:
Wierwille taught that, once you gain some spiritual maturity (whatever the hell that is), you will begin to see that when the Bible talks about adultery, it is really talking about "spiritual adultery", not the usual physical kind, as defined by millions of people the world over for thousands of years.
This is why the Trinity was conidered such a big issue in The Way. Wierwille asserted that belief in the Trinity was a form of idolatry and, thus, an example of spiritual adultery....And all you really need to do to gain this spiritual maturity is to keep reading the PFAL materials, renew your mind to The Word (as defined by VPW) and speak in tongues as much and as often as you can.
edit....and there are quite a few people, still riding that same old train, hoping for the day when it finally pulls into the station.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
"For our learning"...
What does this mean?
FOR US TO LEARN FROM!!!
How are we supposed to learn from it if we aren't allowed to read it? How can we apply the lessons taught, so that we ourselves, having supposedly greater riches, don't ourselves fall in weakness through not understanding. By not knowing the lessons that are FOR OUR LEARNING.
The epistles are full of refs to OT incidents. How many regularly checked out the OT section(s) that were referred to, in order to gain a greater understanding?
EG Rom 10:9,10 - refers back to the blessings and cursings of Deut 27-31 - what they were supposed to do when they entered the promised land. Okay, how is this applicable to us in OUR promised land of the renewed mind? What kind of things are we to keep in mind? What to do, and what not to do? Where are the snares and traps that could distract us? Yet the blessings and cursings ... were so that people could learn to love God and hear his voice! Plenty there that we can learn from!
Reading the epistles is good.
Reading the epistles with depth of understanding - is better.
And engaging brain to work out apparent contradictions or odd incidents - is better yet. That's how we learn.
Unless we are parrots.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
The thing is,
vpw WANTED parrots.
twi WANTS parrots.
The cadre wants people to repeat what they're told, and hand over their money.
Even years after leaving twi, people were endorsing stupid things because someone
higher-up said they were so, and when asked, they just repeated what the other person
said- which didn't answer the question the FIRST time.
I was strongly considering carrying packets of crackers, and handing them to people
whenever they just parroted whatever leadership said without understanding it.
If you know me, you KNOW I was preparing to do it, and to send some in the mail.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
the green book, brown/orange, blue book, etc., were so disjointed. i think "the magic of thinking big" made more sense as far as coherence
even pfal book -- it wasn't like reading a book
i actually thought this when i was 19 lol
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I talked to my local "leadershi t" about that once. He told me it's because "it has to build". (Whatever that means.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
"...the Scriptures are a united whole and BUILD truth upon truth..."
This is what it means to say the Scriptures have "integrity." At one level or another, they all hang together.
Wierwille preached that the interity of the Scripture is always at stake, but in his practice and teaching, he always violated that integrity.
II Timothy 3:16 says ALL scritpure is profitable for doctrine, ALL for reproof, ALL for correction, ALL for instruction in righteousness.
Wierwille sliced and diced the integrity of God's Word with his dispensationalist "rightly dividing the Word of truth."
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Wierwille's lusts and sins of the flesh....(drunkenness, lazy, adultery, plagairism, striker, strife, etc.)....perverted his "rightly dividing the word of truth." He "cut the pie" to HIS advantage, to empower HIM.
Any "wierwille research" is HIGHLY suspect to error.
IMO.....one needs to throw it all in the trash. Wierwille's work is a patchwork of plagairism, perversions, platitudes, and prejudices.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Naten00
Many of the people who I talk too. Who have left TWI still hold onto his books. They tell me how great his books are. My wife if she is present usually asks (the one who was in the way) something alone the line about his checkered past of lying about his credentials. How can you trust anything he writes. Usually we just get something along the lines of shrugged shoulders.
It just seems like not just people have "too little knowledge" it is as if leaving the group they want to hold on to just "too little knowledge"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
for a little while there after leaving, i kept some sacred books and sylabi (?)lol
as time went on, i realized what a brainwashed azz i was
i kinda wish i had kept my files instead of leaving them behind in my divorce
i had excellent letters from vpig and craig to show you how insane they really were/are
oh well
damn i'd rather believe in the trinity any day then become spiritually mature in vpig's book
the gals, the guys, vpig, etc., told me being spiritually mature was to please the man of god sexually and of course keep it in my locked box
ugh
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jbarrax
I'm coming late to this discussion but I love this topic, so I can't resist tossing in a comment or two.
I kind of agree with WW about the tendency of educated people to have their own doctrinal blind spots. This is borne out in two books I have, both written by members of the medical & scientific communities. Both authors speak in different terms about the tendency of the scientific community to blindly adhere to theories that support a secular worldview and to doggedly resist, ridicule, or otherwise undermine those that might seem to support a Creationist worldview. Evidence be damned.
I think most of know by now that Einstein theorized the Big Bang, but wouldn't espouse it because he was afraid it would give credence to religion.
On the other hand, I agree that many Evangelicals have become reactionaries, driven by "the culture war" to distrust and disparage anyone perceived as liberal, moderate, or secular.
There seems to be a calcification of discourse that has rendered people incapable of openly and honestly discussing science, politics or religion. So instead of listening humbly to one another and learning, we distrust those who disagree and ignore the holes in our own worldview so that we can reinforce what we believe. It's quite sad really. Like some kind of global cancer.
Anyway, the books I cited are Darwin's Black Box by Michael Behe and The Body Electric by Dr. Robert O Becker and Gary Selden
And FWIW, I agree with Waysider. I see Jesus' statement to the rich man as a contradiction of the doctrine of salvation by grace. And it's not just this passage. If you read the context of every reference to salvation or eternal life in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) you will see that Jesus often spoke of eternal life or entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven as the reward for those who kept the law.
(Mtt 19:16, Mtt 10:22, 24:13 - 22, Mark 10:26, 13:13, Luke 13:23 - 30).
It's not until you reach John that you see Jesus presenting salvation almost exclusively as the reward of faith without works. This dichotomy continues through the rest of the NT and even shows up in second chapter of Romans, a treatise that is accepted as the doctrinal foundation of the doctrine of salvation by faith. Romans 2:6 - 10 tell us plainly that God will render to every man according to his deeds. That's another word for works. Yet Romans 6:23 says eternal life is a gift of God.
There are two completely different doctrines about salvation living side by side throughout the NT. I'm sure Geisha would say that it's not really a contradiction at all if you just pray humbly about it. Perhaps I'm not humble or prayerful enough because, in eight years of reading, praying, and studying, I've not been able to reconcile these.
But that's way off topic. Just couldn't resist dropping my two cents' worth.
Edited by JbarraxLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rejoice
This would give creedance to the idea that the members at Nicea cut, rearranged, eliminated parts of or whole texts which would be the reason for all the confusion. That is why the Bible as we have it today, cannot be the final say---in anything. It has obvious holes that cannot be reconciled within itself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Or perhaps there were two (or more) schools of thought in the first century. Something along the lines of how we ended up with a two party political system here..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
A most excellent premise, my furry friend. Of course, you have to get past the innerrancy problem and question whether Paul's words hold water before you can give any serious consideration to such theories.
But, remember, Eve pondered life's questions in a similar manner and got her little heiny spanked for it, ya know? Or, at least that's what Mr. Wierwille taught in PLAF (The Wonder Class). :P
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I think some of the other groups had a legitimate argument.
"you worship the bible, don't you.."
the way is such an immature religion..
rosie still wears training pants..
one and a half seconds look into the light and a person loses the inerrancy *problem*. another half a second, and one would be dead, or dissolved..
well, that's what it seemed like.
Maybe it is just postponed for a moment..
Edited by HamLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
How does one do this..
it all has to burn, in one's own mind..
then what is left..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.