A very interesting detail about this that is not really widely know I discovered by researching Baker & Hostetler legal actions over time.
I discovered a lawsuit filed by them against the insurance company for the liability insurance they carried on the BOD. They were trying to collect back insurance money from the insurers over the lawsuit settlement.
So whatever the payout was, which is surmised to be a multi million dollar lawsuit, was paid out straight out of your ABS. I’m not sure if they successfully collected it back from the insurance company or not the settlement of that suit was not public.
Good questions. The answer to the second one is no. The first one I have to think on a bit. I'll start with Romans 10:8-13 and get back to you.
8 On the contrary, what does it say? The message is near to you, in your mouth and in your heart (that is, the message of trust that we are proclaiming),
9 because if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from among the dead, you will be saved.
10 For with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made, resulting in salvation.
11 For the Scripture says, Whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.
12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord is Lord of all, enriching all who call on him;
13 for everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.
Checking Bible Hub just now, I'm seeing that each of the "will be saved" above is in the "future indicative passive."
This really seems like something for the "Doctrine" thread. Should we go there?
I like that you included the much forgotten context, even if just v8.
How about focusing on the other question rather than back into scribe mode on this?
If God would not discard the young child for possibly doing 2 out of the 3 steps of the above, or not being mature enough to comprehend the above detail, how did we get here for everyone else?
The new birth is a personal matter. As is a personal relationship with Christ. God looks on the heart, not the rote activity of an individual.
A very interesting detail about this that is not really widely know I discovered by researching Baker & Hostetler legal actions over time.
I discovered a lawsuit filed by them against the insurance company for the liability insurance they carried on the BOD. They were trying to collect back insurance money from the insurers over the lawsuit settlement.
So whatever the payout was, which is surmised to be a multi million dollar lawsuit, was paid out straight out of your ABS. I’m not sure if they successfully collected it back from the insurance company or not the settlement of that suit was not public.
So what I am getting at and how it ties in to the absent Christ is I am starting to see a pattern in the heavy fundie mindset (fundamentalism) that basically PFAL version of the new birth is to go thru a Rom 19:9,10 checklist and then forget about Jesus.
I like that you included the much forgotten context, even if just v8.
How about focusing on the other question rather than back into scribe mode on this?
If God would not discard the young child for possibly doing 2 out of the 3 steps of the above, or not being mature enough to comprehend the above detail, how did we get here for everyone else?
The new birth is a personal matter. As is a personal relationship with Christ. God looks on the heart, not the rote activity of an individual.
Chockfull, what does "back into scribe mode on this" mean?
Also, to help me with answering your question from your previous post, I need to ask you about "The new birth is a personal matter." sentence above. How do you personally know if you have the new birth? What did you personally do to get it?
Chockfull, what does "back into scribe mode on this" mean?
Also, to help me with answering your question from your previous post, I need to ask you about "The new birth is a personal matter." sentence above. How do you personally know if you have the new birth? What did you personally do to get it?
The Greek word for scribe is “grammeteis”
Meaning grammatical expert. They were the ones in the day wandering around correcting Jesus on various things like healing a man on the sabbath.
I think some of my later posts after this get what I mean by personal experience.
I personally used to carry around 3x5 cards of word studies. A lot of them surrounding the various adjectives and adverbs around the Holy Spirit field. I used to agonize over making every last detail of every scripture fit.
A harmony of the gospels where each book was written many decades after the events occurred is going to have discrepancies. They were written by men. To try and enforce a foolish consistency among them is hogwash. To use that to exploit people to pull them away from their Christian support groups and home churches to follow a pied piper is more wrong. It is lust and power personified.
There is great learning in scripture study, prayer, discussion of scripture topics.
My views on extreme fundamentalism are kind of echoed by Ralph Waldo Emerson a famous writer.
”A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds”
Does God interact with you at all? Does He answer prayer? Or is He just up there as a rule enforcer and lo shanta interpreter? Who gives an approving smile when you SIT enough during a day?
Meaning grammatical expert. They were the ones in the day wandering around correcting Jesus on various things like healing a man on the sabbath.
I think some of my later posts after this get what I mean by personal experience.
So when you said earlier, "How about focusing on the other question rather than back into scribe mode on this?" are you saying I was acting like a "grammatical expert?" who you then said were the Jews wandering around correcting Jesus on various things? John 5:15,16 talks about these specific Jews (who were also probably among the Jews who later on were screaming for Jesus be crucified).
John 5:15 The man went away, and told the Jews that it was Jesus who made him whole.
16 And for this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because he was doing these things on the Sabbath.
I personally used to carry around 3x5 cards of word studies. A lot of them surrounding the various adjectives and adverbs around the Holy Spirit field. I used to agonize over making every last detail of every scripture fit.
A harmony of the gospels where each book was written many decades after the events occurred is going to have discrepancies. They were written by men. To try and enforce a foolish consistency among them is hogwash. To use that to exploit people to pull them away from their Christian support groups and home churches to follow a pied piper is more wrong. It is lust and power personified.
There is great learning in scripture study, prayer, discussion of scripture topics.
My views on extreme fundamentalism are kind of echoed by Ralph Waldo Emerson a famous writer.
”A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds”
I was very much like you Chockfull in my "need" to have the scriptures fit together (like a hand in a glove) as we were taught was of utmost importance in the cult TWI. As was often STRESSED, I very much wanted to study to show myself approved unto God, a workman that wouldn't have to be ashamed. I'm learning to loosen up on all this since being on GSC.
I agree there is great value in scripture study and that this needs to be done along with prayer and discussion of scripture topics. The religious groups I've found on the internet almost always have a section detailing their "beliefs" which I think are the topics from which they won't on. However, from my experience with The Vineyard church (which is the only church I've spent time with after TWI), I found that most would openly discuss scripture topics without coming down on you and saying things like "you are very prideful because you don't believe in what our church teaches" as do those in extreme fundamentalism. I would agree they have "little minds" since I used to be one.
Does God interact with you at all? Does He answer prayer? Or is He just up there as a rule enforcer and lo shanta interpreter? Who gives an approving smile when you SIT enough during a day?
I think if you've read what I've written since I started posting on page 37 in this thread, you would know my answer to these questions.
So when you said earlier, "How about focusing on the other question rather than back into scribe mode on this?" are you saying I was acting like a "grammatical expert?" who you then said were the Jews wandering around correcting Jesus on various things? John 5:15,16 talks about these specific Jews (who were also probably among the Jews who later on were screaming for Jesus be crucified).
John 5:15 The man went away, and told the Jews that it was Jesus who made him whole.
16 And for this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because he was doing these things on the Sabbath.
Just asking.
I think you are hyper personalizing a conversation. I was just answering the question you asked.
Are you saying you are not and have never been like that ?
Just asking.
Is the only thing you are gaining from this conversation a series of hyper personalized perceived “accusations” or slights?
If so does not this obsessive type of mindset lead you to a conclusion in and of itself?
Yes this like many others are posed as rhetorical questions. So I think I am going to stop answering the answers to rhetorical questions sorry.
I was very much like you Chockfull in my "need" to have the scriptures fit together (like a hand in a glove) as we were taught was of utmost importance in the cult TWI. As was often STRESSED, I very much wanted to study to show myself approved unto God, a workman that wouldn't have to be ashamed. I'm learning to loosen up on all this since being on GSC.
I agree there is great value in scripture study and that this needs to be done along with prayer and discussion of scripture topics. The religious groups I've found on the internet almost always have a section detailing their "beliefs" which I think are the topics from which they won't on. However, from my experience with The Vineyard church (which is the only church I've spent time with after TWI), I found that most would openly discuss scripture topics without coming down on you and saying things like "you are very prideful because you don't believe in what our church teaches" as do those in extreme fundamentalism. I would agree they have "little minds" since I used to be one.
I’m not familiar personally with that group but it’s great to expand horizons. I’ve attended a number of different denominations as well as local community churches, participated in and led small groups post twi.
When paging through the King James Version, in the Old Testament, you may notice that sometimes the word "LORD" is in all caps, and rarely the word "GOD" is in all caps. That's not a stylistic decision. In those cases, the Hebrew word there was "YHWH." For the high-faluting, that's the Tetragrammaton (the 4 letters.) For observant Jews, it's a common practice to refuse to write it or say it aloud out of respect for God Almighty. So, that "YHWH", depending on translation, has also been rendered "Yahweh", and "Jehovah." (Depending on the letters in your language and the vowels you choose to fill in the word.) In Hebrew as well as Latin, there's no letter "J", so the Romans wrote "Iulius Caesar" for Julius Caesar, and so on. If there's a truly definitive answer on pronunciation, I neither know it nor consider it important. "YHWH" was how it was written originally, and "Yahweh" is as close an approximation to pronouncing it as I can get, so I'm fine with that.
While you can find other gods mentioned in the Old Testament, and other "lords", they were called other things, "baal" or "adon", but NOT "YHWH." In the Bible, that word is only used to refer to God Almighty.
Right. The letter J emerged for the first time in the early 16th century. The letter J wasn't known in the 1st century.
I don't remember PFAL covering the letter J or the Tetragrammaton or "Yahweh." When I brought up this topic one day in fellowship, the twig leader, a former CORPS, said he had no idea what I was talking about. He insinuated that I was a mere ignorant, immature babe in the Word and that I should focus on absorbing the indoctrination. Questions should not be asked, not even at the end - at least, this is how I was made to feel.
What about El or Elohim? LORD God is used for the first time in Genesis 2:4. All prior verses only use El or Elohim. I've always wondered about this. What are your thoughts, WW?
I think you are hyper personalizing a conversation. I was just answering the question you asked.
Are you saying you are not and have never been like that ?
Just asking.
Is the only thing you are gaining from this conversation a series of hyper personalized perceived “accusations” or slights?
If so does not this obsessive type of mindset lead you to a conclusion in and of itself?
Yes this like many others are posed as rhetorical questions. So I think I am going to stop answering the answers to rhetorical questions sorry.
Chockfull, I don't know how we've come to this point? I feel bad about it. I'm going through all of our posts to each other from the last two pages to understand why you would ask me, "Is the only thing you are gaining from this conversation a series of hyper personalized perceived “accusations” or slights?" to which my immediate reply is no.
I don't remember PFAL covering the letter J or the Tetragrammaton or "Yahweh." When I brought up this topic one day in fellowship, the twig leader, a former CORPS, said he had no idea what I was talking about. He insinuated that I was a mere ignorant, immature babe in the Word and that I should focus on absorbing the indoctrination. Questions should not be asked, not even at the end - at least, this is how I was made to feel.
Wow...havent come across Tetragrammaton since my occult days. That's used heavily by occultists, traces back to Jewish Mystiscism.
How ironic that you knew what you were talkning about, asked a legitimate a$$ question, and Bam!....but mr former corps guy treats you like you are the one who doesn't know what hes talking about...typical.
How ironic that you knew what you were talkning about, asked a legitimate a$$ question, and Bam!....but mr former corps guy treats you like you are the one who doesn't know what hes talking about...typical.
It was after a fellowship where he held forth on the names of God. I mentioned "Yahweh." With forced, blank smugness, he said something like, "I don't know what that is." Implying, "you're stupid. I'm not. Keep your mouth shut. Absorb, retain, release."
In the moment, I was mildly embarrassed, because I just didn't know enough about it to discuss. More than anything, I was frustrated with his willful ignorance and unwillingness to go beyond what he had been taught.
It was after a fellowship where he held forth on the names of God. I mentioned "Yahweh." With forced, blank smugness, he said something like, "I don't know what that is." Implying, "you're stupid. I'm not. Keep your mouth shut. Absorb, retain, release."
In the moment, I was mildly embarrassed, because I just didn't know enough about it to discuss. More than anything, I was frustrated with his willful ignorance and unwillingness to go beyond what he had been taught.
To be clear, it wasn't your perception, that's a common attitude amongst the corps - whether active or not. That's how they treat you when you go in-residence. You could show up with a freaking doctorate under your belt and they would still treat you like an idiot. Then you graduate into the club where you can then treat everyone else like you used to be treated when you were in-rez. There's just a lot of smug types in TWI, fake intellectuals, junk science types who are completely clueless....
I think you are hyper personalizing a conversation. I was just answering the question you asked.
Are you saying you are not and have never been like that ?
Just asking.
Is the only thing you are gaining from this conversation a series of hyper personalized perceived “accusations” or slights?
If so does not this obsessive type of mindset lead you to a conclusion in and of itself?
Yes this like many others are posed as rhetorical questions. So I think I am going to stop answering the answers to rhetorical questions sorry.
I think I found my mistake. When I had asked what “scribe mode” meant, your answer was “grammatical experts” and added that these were the ones who wandered around correcting Jesus on various things like healing a man on the Sabbath.So then going back to your statement to me, “How about focusing on the other question rather than back into scribe mode on this,” I thought you were saying that I had been in a scribe mode which meant I was being like those correcting-grammatical experts. When I asked if this was what you were saying, I included John 5:15,16 because it had to do with your example of Jesus healing a man on the Sabbath. This is where I let my emotions take me over the top.
Looking back, it would have been better to have simply asked if you were implying that I was in the grammatical-expert mode and if so, why.After going through everyone’s postings for the past 3 pages in search of the ones that were between the two of us, I saw how I probably did go into the scribe mode when I quoted Rom 10:8-13 in response to your questions.
I also realize that I had detoured from what you wanted to discuss: whether confessing Rom 10:9,10 entailed a rote formulaic approach to the new birth as well as how you thought that PFAL’s version of the new birth was to go through a Rom 10:9,10 checklist thereby forgetting about or replacing Jesus. My apologies on both matters. I do feel that this is an important topic, so I will begin to respond to it in my next posting to you.
I think I found my mistake. When I had asked what “scribe mode” meant, your answer was “grammatical experts” and added that these were the ones who wandered around correcting Jesus on various things like healing a man on the Sabbath.So then going back to your statement to me, “How about focusing on the other question rather than back into scribe mode on this,” I thought you were saying that I had been in a scribe mode which meant I was being like those correcting-grammatical experts. When I asked if this was what you were saying, I included John 5:15,16 because it had to do with your example of Jesus healing a man on the Sabbath. This is where I let my emotions take me over the top.
Looking back, it would have been better to have simply asked if you were implying that I was in the grammatical-expert mode and if so, why.After going through everyone’s postings for the past 3 pages in search of the ones that were between the two of us, I saw how I probably did go into the scribe mode when I quoted Rom 10:8-13 in response to your questions.
I also realize that I had detoured from what you wanted to discuss: whether confessing Rom 10:9,10 entailed a rote formulaic approach to the new birth as well as how you thought that PFAL’s version of the new birth was to go through a Rom 10:9,10 checklist thereby forgetting about or replacing Jesus. My apologies on both matters. I do feel that this is an important topic, so I will begin to respond to it in my next posting to you.
so, everybody - get it straight - if I say Charity is a poster child - I don't mean she epitomizes a specified quality or cause...I mean she's new at posting on Grease Spot.
so, everybody - get it straight - if I say Charity is a poster child - I don't mean she epitomizes a specified quality or cause...I mean she's new at posting on Grease Spot.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
427
271
423
257
Popular Days
Feb 14
142
Oct 13
105
Jan 18
101
Oct 8
88
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 427 posts
T-Bone 271 posts
OldSkool 423 posts
Nathan_Jr 257 posts
Popular Days
Feb 14 2023
142 posts
Oct 13 2022
105 posts
Jan 18 2023
101 posts
Oct 8 2022
88 posts
Popular Posts
OldSkool
First off, Biblically speaking, Christ has never been absent...that doctrine does not come close to occuring anywhere in the Bible. Yet the way international teaches the word of God takes the place of
Bolshevik
Mike's apparent anger toward Christ and emphasis on obedience . . . that's Wayworld . . . that's the annihilation of the individual
waysider
Soooo...He used ONE verse from the Amplified Bible, HALF a chapter from the New English Bible and required PFAL '77 students to get some version from the 1800's that has a name so unremarkable you can
Posted Images
Charity
Interesting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
I like that you included the much forgotten context, even if just v8.
How about focusing on the other question rather than back into scribe mode on this?
If God would not discard the young child for possibly doing 2 out of the 3 steps of the above, or not being mature enough to comprehend the above detail, how did we get here for everyone else?
The new birth is a personal matter. As is a personal relationship with Christ. God looks on the heart, not the rote activity of an individual.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
I didn't know that, thanks for posting!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
So what I am getting at and how it ties in to the absent Christ is I am starting to see a pattern in the heavy fundie mindset (fundamentalism) that basically PFAL version of the new birth is to go thru a Rom 19:9,10 checklist and then forget about Jesus.
Replacing Him?
“the Word takes the place of the absent Christ”
Horse manure. 1000000 times over.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
How about
”scripture study, prayer and Christian community augment the present Christ”?
Its logical and makes more sense than horse manure lifelines from VP.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Chockfull, what does "back into scribe mode on this" mean?
Also, to help me with answering your question from your previous post, I need to ask you about "The new birth is a personal matter." sentence above. How do you personally know if you have the new birth? What did you personally do to get it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Christ describes his relationship with the church in terms of a marriage.
To those that have been or are married how does this work for you?
”The word of the spouse takes the place of the absent spouse”?
Sounds like the perfect recipe for harmony in the home no?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
The Greek word for scribe is “grammeteis”
Meaning grammatical expert. They were the ones in the day wandering around correcting Jesus on various things like healing a man on the sabbath.
I think some of my later posts after this get what I mean by personal experience.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
I personally used to carry around 3x5 cards of word studies. A lot of them surrounding the various adjectives and adverbs around the Holy Spirit field. I used to agonize over making every last detail of every scripture fit.
A harmony of the gospels where each book was written many decades after the events occurred is going to have discrepancies. They were written by men. To try and enforce a foolish consistency among them is hogwash. To use that to exploit people to pull them away from their Christian support groups and home churches to follow a pied piper is more wrong. It is lust and power personified.
There is great learning in scripture study, prayer, discussion of scripture topics.
My views on extreme fundamentalism are kind of echoed by Ralph Waldo Emerson a famous writer.
”A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds”
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Does God interact with you at all? Does He answer prayer? Or is He just up there as a rule enforcer and lo shanta interpreter? Who gives an approving smile when you SIT enough during a day?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
So when you said earlier, "How about focusing on the other question rather than back into scribe mode on this?" are you saying I was acting like a "grammatical expert?" who you then said were the Jews wandering around correcting Jesus on various things? John 5:15,16 talks about these specific Jews (who were also probably among the Jews who later on were screaming for Jesus be crucified).
John 5:15 The man went away, and told the Jews that it was Jesus who made him whole.
16 And for this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because he was doing these things on the Sabbath.
Just asking.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
I was very much like you Chockfull in my "need" to have the scriptures fit together (like a hand in a glove) as we were taught was of utmost importance in the cult TWI. As was often STRESSED, I very much wanted to study to show myself approved unto God, a workman that wouldn't have to be ashamed. I'm learning to loosen up on all this since being on GSC.
I agree there is great value in scripture study and that this needs to be done along with prayer and discussion of scripture topics. The religious groups I've found on the internet almost always have a section detailing their "beliefs" which I think are the topics from which they won't on. However, from my experience with The Vineyard church (which is the only church I've spent time with after TWI), I found that most would openly discuss scripture topics without coming down on you and saying things like "you are very prideful because you don't believe in what our church teaches" as do those in extreme fundamentalism. I would agree they have "little minds" since I used to be one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
I think if you've read what I've written since I started posting on page 37 in this thread, you would know my answer to these questions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
I think you are hyper personalizing a conversation. I was just answering the question you asked.
Are you saying you are not and have never been like that ?
Just asking.
Is the only thing you are gaining from this conversation a series of hyper personalized perceived “accusations” or slights?
If so does not this obsessive type of mindset lead you to a conclusion in and of itself?
Yes this like many others are posed as rhetorical questions. So I think I am going to stop answering the answers to rhetorical questions sorry.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
I’m not familiar personally with that group but it’s great to expand horizons. I’ve attended a number of different denominations as well as local community churches, participated in and led small groups post twi.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Right. The letter J emerged for the first time in the early 16th century. The letter J wasn't known in the 1st century.
I don't remember PFAL covering the letter J or the Tetragrammaton or "Yahweh." When I brought up this topic one day in fellowship, the twig leader, a former CORPS, said he had no idea what I was talking about. He insinuated that I was a mere ignorant, immature babe in the Word and that I should focus on absorbing the indoctrination. Questions should not be asked, not even at the end - at least, this is how I was made to feel.
What about El or Elohim? LORD God is used for the first time in Genesis 2:4. All prior verses only use El or Elohim. I've always wondered about this. What are your thoughts, WW?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Chockfull, I don't know how we've come to this point? I feel bad about it. I'm going through all of our posts to each other from the last two pages to understand why you would ask me, "Is the only thing you are gaining from this conversation a series of hyper personalized perceived “accusations” or slights?" to which my immediate reply is no.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Wow...havent come across Tetragrammaton since my occult days. That's used heavily by occultists, traces back to Jewish Mystiscism.
https://occult-world.com/tetragrammaton/
How ironic that you knew what you were talkning about, asked a legitimate a$$ question, and Bam!....but mr former corps guy treats you like you are the one who doesn't know what hes talking about...typical.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
It was after a fellowship where he held forth on the names of God. I mentioned "Yahweh." With forced, blank smugness, he said something like, "I don't know what that is." Implying, "you're stupid. I'm not. Keep your mouth shut. Absorb, retain, release."
In the moment, I was mildly embarrassed, because I just didn't know enough about it to discuss. More than anything, I was frustrated with his willful ignorance and unwillingness to go beyond what he had been taught.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
To be clear, it wasn't your perception, that's a common attitude amongst the corps - whether active or not. That's how they treat you when you go in-residence. You could show up with a freaking doctorate under your belt and they would still treat you like an idiot. Then you graduate into the club where you can then treat everyone else like you used to be treated when you were in-rez. There's just a lot of smug types in TWI, fake intellectuals, junk science types who are completely clueless....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
I think I found my mistake. When I had asked what “scribe mode” meant, your answer was “grammatical experts” and added that these were the ones who wandered around correcting Jesus on various things like healing a man on the Sabbath. So then going back to your statement to me, “How about focusing on the other question rather than back into scribe mode on this,” I thought you were saying that I had been in a scribe mode which meant I was being like those correcting-grammatical experts. When I asked if this was what you were saying, I included John 5:15,16 because it had to do with your example of Jesus healing a man on the Sabbath. This is where I let my emotions take me over the top.
Looking back, it would have been better to have simply asked if you were implying that I was in the grammatical-expert mode and if so, why. After going through everyone’s postings for the past 3 pages in search of the ones that were between the two of us, I saw how I probably did go into the scribe mode when I quoted Rom 10:8-13 in response to your questions.
I also realize that I had detoured from what you wanted to discuss: whether confessing Rom 10:9,10 entailed a rote formulaic approach to the new birth as well as how you thought that PFAL’s version of the new birth was to go through a Rom 10:9,10 checklist thereby forgetting about or replacing Jesus. My apologies on both matters. I do feel that this is an important topic, so I will begin to respond to it in my next posting to you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Oh, your doing fine. One of my favorites is quoting the wrong person and then scrambling to fix it later....seems im pretty good at that one....lol
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
so, everybody - get it straight - if I say Charity is a poster child - I don't mean she epitomizes a specified quality or cause...I mean she's new at posting on Grease Spot.
Edited by T-Bonetypos
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Hi T-Bone, is this something I should know about?
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.