Romans 14 settles the whole debate
- Thread starter Daniel Marsh
- Start date
- Status
LoveGodsWord
Well-Known Member
- Jun 5, 2017
- 22,242
- 6,634
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
Yes indeed, just as I thought I did not think you would. You do not need to answer those posts and scripture that disagree with you. Maybe you can pray about it. Only God's Word is true and we should BELIEVE and FOLLOW him who loves us.
Upvote
0
I've already done so and settled this issue years ago. Thanks all the same.
I understand why you won't answer the question.
Upvote
0
LoveGodsWord
Well-Known Member
- Jun 5, 2017
- 22,242
- 6,634
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
I see now I understand why you do not answer the posts and scripture that disagree with you. You are free to believe as you wish my friend. It is between you and God as we all need to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling as the scriptures say. Only God's Word is true. It will be our judge on judgement day. (John 12:47-48)
Upvote
0
LoveGodsWord
Well-Known Member
- Jun 5, 2017
- 22,242
- 6,634
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
The question was answered indeed as it has no reference to God's 4th Commandment
The implications of the question was with the premise that Romans 14 is in reference to God's 4th Commandment. We went through each scriptures in Chapter CONTEXT and within scripture CONTEXT to show that God's 4th Commandment is NOT the subject matter being spoken of.
This makes the question a mute argument because what the question is referring to does not support the questions premise. This is what has been shown through the scriptures in Posts # 201; Post # 216; Post # 234; Post # 248; Post # 256; Post # 272 and Post # 273 which you have not addressed accept to simply say you do not agree.
If one simply says they do not agree without adressing the post or the scriptures in the post does not make the post or the scriptures disappear.
If the premise of the question is not valid then either is the question. This is what the linked posts above show.
Where is God's 4th Commandments spoken of in Romans 14? This thread tries and make an argument out of one scripture that is not saying what many imply it does.
I am still waiting for you to pray about it and answer the posts and scriptures linked above. If you build your house on sand great will be the fall thereof. If you disagree please answer the posts above and the scriptures in them with the God's Word.
May God bless you as you seek him through His Word
Upvote
0
They've been answered and I guess you don't like the answer. Oh well. I don't need your busy work.
Upvote
0
You're only trying to pick a fight and confuse others because you can't confuse me. The law has no place in the life of the Christian.
4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
5 Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:
6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
From 1 Timothy 1
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
LoveGodsWord
Well-Known Member
- Jun 5, 2017
- 22,242
- 6,634
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
Hello Friend, I am not here to pick a fight with anyone. I am only sharing God's Word with you and asked if you disagree with what I have posted then by all means adress the post and the scriptures I have provided which you have not done except to say that you do not agree. This is why I said to you it is ok you do not have to if you do not wish to. Maybe you can pary about it and we should agree to disagree and remain friend
You cant answer something that has not been answered. We may have to agree to disagree. There is nothing hidden that will not be revealed come judgement day.
May God help you as you seek him through His Word.
Upvote
0
Where did Sheep dog say it was. He asked you a question. Maybe it's the implications of the question you don't want to deal with. Denial won't change facts.
No you talked about everything except the question.
I didn't see an argument. I did see a question. You're trying to get us involved with non applicable busy work.
Based on the posts of this thread I see and understand a simple "I disagree statement."
No they don't.
Who said anything about the sabbath? I read it's only you. So indeed you do understand the verse and question. Now it seems to me you refuse to say you esteem the sabbath. Amazing.
This is read that you're praying for conversion.
Upvote
0
LoveGodsWord
Well-Known Member
- Jun 5, 2017
- 22,242
- 6,634
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
Maybe you did not see this so please by all means if you disagree please answer the posts and scriptures provided here and tell me how it does not adress the question that has a false premise? Simply saying you do not agree while not adressing the posts and the scriptures provided is only putting your words above Gods Word. Only God's Word is true and we should BELIEVE and FOLLOW him who loves us.
The question was answered indeed as it has no reference to God's 4th Commandment
The implications of the question was with the premise that Romans 14 is in reference to God's 4th Commandment. We went through each scriptures in Chapter CONTEXT and within scripture CONTEXT to show that God's 4th Commandment is NOT the subject matter being spoken of.
This makes the question a mute argument because what the question is referring to does not support the questions premise. This is what has been shown through the scriptures in Posts # 201; Post # 216; Post # 234; Post # 248; Post # 256; Post # 272 and Post # 273 which you have not addressed accept to simply say you do not agree.
If one simply says they do not agree without adressing the post or the scriptures in the post does not make the post or the scriptures disappear.
If the premise of the question is not valid then either is the question. This is what the linked posts above show.
Where is God's 4th Commandments spoken of in Romans 14? This thread tries and make an argument out of one scripture that is not saying what many imply it does.
I am still waiting for you to pray about it and answer the posts and scriptures linked above. If you build your house on sand great will be the fall thereof. If you disagree please answer the posts above and the scriptures in them with the God's Word.
May God bless you as you seek him through His Word
Upvote
0
The appropriate verses have at least been referenced for you. You reference Heb 8:10-12 to avoid verse 9. It's really a partial quote from Jeremiah 31:31-33 you wish to avoid because of verse 32.Hello Friend, I am not here to pick a fight with anyone. I am only sharing God's Word with you and asked if you disagree with what I have posted then by all means adress the post and the scriptures I have provided which you have not done except to say that you do not agree. This is why I said to you it is ok you do not have to if you do not wish to. Maybe you can pary about it and we should agree to disagree and remain friend
Yes and you can't hide the truth from the well versed mature Christian.
Upvote
0
LoveGodsWord
Well-Known Member
- Jun 5, 2017
- 22,242
- 6,634
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
These scriptures only support what I have been sharing. Thanks for sharing them though. God's LAW written in the heart to LOVE through FAITH is the fulfilling of God's LAW in those who BELIEVE and FOLLOW him who loves us and is why Jesus says; If you LOVE me KEEP my Commandments
.......
God's 4th commandment is one of the ten (Exodus 20:8-11) If we knowingly break it when God asks us not to we stand guilty before God of committing sin (James 2:8-12). If we do not seek him in repentance and forgiveness we are in danger of the Judgement (Hebrews 10:26-27)
In times of ignorance God winks at but now calls all men everywhere to REPENT for the KINGDOM of HEAVEN is at HAND (Acts 17:30-31)
Sunday worship is a tradition and teaching of man that has led many to break the commandments of God. Jesus says that if we follow the traditions of man that break the commandments of God we are not following God (Matthew 15:3-9)
Who should we follow the teachings and traditions of men or the Word of God? Who should we believe the Words of men or the Word of God?
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
This below doesn't support you pov as I said.
9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
This is quoted from Jeremiah 31: 32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:
This is the middle third of a sentence. The covenant they broke is the one Moses talks about in Deuteronomy 4:13.
No matter how many times you quote and imply John 14:15 is talking about the ten commandments, doesn't make it so. John 15:10 leaves no escape from that fact.
You make and acknowledge lots of trouble for your own soul referencing Hebrew 10:26-27.
And what does God wink at? Sin? hardly. What you've done here is divorce truth from its context to support a false doctrine. The context is icons (or idols) representing things and ideas. Not only did the pagans do this, but God gave Moses direct orders and plans for Jewish icons. Yes I've studied the Tabernacle and its symbols. I don't need to use icons in my worship of God and His Son Jesus. Those things have only been an interesting study for me. They had and still have nothing to do with my worship of God.
How many times must this be dealt with? Since you're not in compliance with the 4th, you also keep the traditions of man (er wo-man). The Scripture also teaches against this.
Upvote
0
LoveGodsWord
Well-Known Member
- Jun 5, 2017
- 22,242
- 6,634
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
Well that is not true how does it not suport what I have been sharing with you? What is the Old Covenant? If you do no understand what the Old Covenant is how can you understand what the New Covenant is?
John 14
15, If ye love me, keep my commandments.
and....
John 15
10, If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.
Yep seems like perfect harmony to me.
Nope only to those that continue in SIN. Sin will keep all who KNOWINGLY practice it out of God's Kingdom.
To him that knows to do good and does it not to him it is sin. When someone does not know that something is sin you are not accountable to SIN untill you know it is SIN (James 4:17; Acts 17:30)
Not at all I have provided God's Word in context scripture by scripture in the posts I have provided that you have not responded to or adressed.
Only God's Word is true and we should BELIEVE and FOLLOW it.
Upvote
0
What you've been sharing with me is false doctrine based on partial quotes out of context. What exactly in 50 words or less don't I understand about the OT? I'm only interested in what involves my salvation.
Agreed. What I disagree with is those commandments being the ones given to Israel aren't what is being talked about in either verse.
I see. Then you must be saying I'm continuing in sin. Why? I'm not under the law given only to Israel. I'm in Jesus under grace. The proper verses have already been posted to support this.
That isn't true. If it were there wouldn't be any need for repentance. God doesn't wink at any sin. Since I'm not obligated to the law the 7th day sabbath has no claim on me. My rest is in Jesus (Matthew 11:28-30). That is something the 7th day sabbath the Jews kept doesn't offer.
Addressing surely must mean agree with you. Your theology has been thoroughly addressed.
Hey I agree with that. How bout them cookies.
Upvote
0
Joelthe vicious
Active Member
- Jan 4, 2018
- 264
- 17
- 73
- Country
- South Africa
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
8.1.
Romans 14:5
8.1.1.
Freedom of Discipleship
Dr W.D. Jonker’s caption for the section Romans 14:1 to 15:13 reads, “Love and the Weak Brother”.
The Old Afrikaans Bible (1933) summarises the message of Romans 14, “Forbearance with the weak in faith”.
The NAB’s heading is, “Do not condemn your brother”.
But the Authorised Version, - even it, comes with, “Limits of Christian Liberty”!
E.C. Hoskyns’ “impression” of Karl Barth, “Die Krisis des freien Lebensversuchs” (Der Römerbrief). Reverend Robert A. Lotzer calls the “problem of division” in the Church at Rome, “the Crisis of human freedom and detachment”.
In this “krisis” of Christian freedom Romans 14 speaks about, the danger exists to lord it over one’s neighbour and not to allow one’s neighbour the freedom one, as a Christian, claims for oneself.
In the fourteenth and fifteenth chapters Paul’s concern is not only about the individual freedom of forgiven man, but also not only about mutual congregational respect and compassion. Paul’s view and understanding of the congregational acceptance and support of one another reflects his broader concept wherein God adopts and justifies the weak – wherein God takes ownership and the only Holy Lord justifies all, sinners, unconditionally. If God so love us, how should not we love one another? If God does not condemn the weak, how could we? If we (who, when saved were sinners and although saved are sinners still) are righteous in the sight of God because justified in Jesus the Lord, how could we judge one another? How could we judge one another on “minor issues” or “grudgingly” (14:1)? “Therefore thou art inexcusable, o man, whosoever thou art that judgest. For wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself. For thou that judgest doest the same things … things worthy of death”, 2:1 and 1:32! “Judging” and “despising” one another – Christians doing so – betray pride and jealousy, sins, “worthy of death”. Then to judge one another on things like “food” and the “regard” for “days”, things not ‘worthy of death’ (14:1, “adiaphora”: “trivialities” / “indifferent things”), is unimaginable!
Commentators, in fact, the Church, today, no different than the Church at Rome, focus on “foods” and factions for no purpose but to judge people who “regard” and “esteem” “days”, and to despise people who do not even “regard” or “esteem” “days”, but keep the Sabbath! But Paul draws the attention inescapably to the essential sin that so to speak is worthy of his plainest condemnation – no other sin than is condemned by the “greatest” Freedom Charter, the Law to “love thy neighbour as thyself”. (Chapter 13)
“Paul’s exhortation ends – and its ending concludes the whole Pauline ‘conversation’ – with a warning to all who find themselves in entire agreement with what has been said and are persuaded that their own opinions have been fully confirmed. Once again these busy hands are held back; once again the energy of partisans is damped down, and their oratory interrupted. … Once again it is the fact of the existence of our fellow men – the ethical problem – by which we are brought face to face with the great disturbance”. (Barth, Romans)
Paul discusses “food and drink” and the Christian “regard” of “days” and discovers “the great disturbance”! The “food and drink” and “regard” of “days” is nothing wrong with or, rather, was nothing wrong with. Even the different opinions on these things should be accepted and be tolerated in good Christian spirit because of the moment in history. Fellow Christians then allowed one another no free “regard”. They “judged” and “despised” each other’s deeds, motives and sincerity, missing the Freedom of being servant of Christ, passing by the fact of His having come and died and having been raised … “for us”, not even seeing it! Fellow Christians today act no different.
The Church’s was a controversial spirit. Distrust of fellow Church members’ sincerity and genuineness of confession and faith lay beneath the spirit of judgement that ruled in the Congregation at Rome. ‘You are not a (good) Christian if you don’t eat the meat of our traditional feast-meals’, the one party challenged. ‘You are not a (good) Christian if you do’, the other party retorted. “You quibble and fight amongst yourselves”, says Paul. “You judge and despise”, which is not Christ’s way. Paul in Christian spirit reminds the Church, “He is grateful to God who while regarding the day regards it to the Lord’s honour, and while eating eats to the Lord’s honour”, 14:6. You may not despise! … you may not judge! … God receives and accepts the weak. Who are you who judge the Master’s servant? The servant stands with his Master! Yea, the weak brother shall be kept upright because God makes him stand! …We are the Lord’s. Christ died and rose again in order to be Lord of his own, dead or alive (weak or strong). Why then do you judge your brother and humiliate him? We shall all stand before the judgement seat of Christ as it is written, As I live says the Lord, every knee shall bow to Me and every tongue shall confess (Me) God (verses 10-11). Each of us will give account, of himself, to God (not on behalf of anyone else and not to the strong in the Church, 14:12)! Stop condemning one another and rather take a stand that no one shall be the cause of his brother’s offence! (13)
Paul accepts the state of affairs that the Church differentiates and “regards” some days above others. He has no word to say against the practice. The fact that Paul could live with it shows of what nature the “estimation / regard” of certain days was. It was “Lawful”, it was in accordance with the principle of love that is – the very principle the Church violated by judging one another. The “estimation / regard” of certain days was the usual and happened according to the custom of Christian Faith, but Christian Faith was weak and human, deplorable and violent, brother despising and judging brother.
“The problem of division” even, was only symptomatic of the real problem of pride and want of love. Paul’s uncompromising condemnation cannot be overlooked. But Paul’s is not a condemnation of the regarding of days or the regard for days or of the eating of certain foods; his is the condemnation of Christians’ judging and despising one another. There is no justification for this great sin. This sin was “beggarly” because it reveals the Church’s basic want of love - the breaking of God’s Law.
Believers were divided over “food and drink”, no doubt. But they were not thus divided over “days” and the “esteem” of days though. “Esteem of days” wasn’t their sin or as much as a symptom of their real sickness, the sin of self-“esteem”. Nevertheless, “food and drink” were symptomatic of their sickness. “Food and drink”, was made the excuse for division, while the cause of division, haughtiness – was the real sin.
Every faction at Rome “regarded” whatever they “regarded” and “esteemed” “unto the Lord (Jesus’ honour)”. Or that was what Paul supposed every faction would! But did they? No! They at Rome “regarded” and “esteemed” “days” unto lord Self as they ate and drank or abstained meticulously unto lord Self!
Paul’s tolerance of the observance of “days” astonishes not. He accepts a fact, the fact of the Christian Church’s “regard” and “esteem” for “days”. He shows no antipathy towards the practice. But he waits no moment to denounce in simplest language the actual malady. “Who art thou?” “Days” are not intended for self-“esteem” and “food” for a “stumbling block”. They are meant unto charity and humble faith. The problem lay with man – with the Church – with the heart. Nothing was wrong with the whole Church’s “regard” for and “esteem” of “days” had the brethren at Rome only “regarded” and “esteemed” one another!
http://www.biblestudents.co.za/books/Book 4, 4.Rom.pdf
pp2-5
Romans 14:5
8.1.1.
Freedom of Discipleship
Dr W.D. Jonker’s caption for the section Romans 14:1 to 15:13 reads, “Love and the Weak Brother”.
The Old Afrikaans Bible (1933) summarises the message of Romans 14, “Forbearance with the weak in faith”.
The NAB’s heading is, “Do not condemn your brother”.
But the Authorised Version, - even it, comes with, “Limits of Christian Liberty”!
E.C. Hoskyns’ “impression” of Karl Barth, “Die Krisis des freien Lebensversuchs” (Der Römerbrief). Reverend Robert A. Lotzer calls the “problem of division” in the Church at Rome, “the Crisis of human freedom and detachment”.
In this “krisis” of Christian freedom Romans 14 speaks about, the danger exists to lord it over one’s neighbour and not to allow one’s neighbour the freedom one, as a Christian, claims for oneself.
In the fourteenth and fifteenth chapters Paul’s concern is not only about the individual freedom of forgiven man, but also not only about mutual congregational respect and compassion. Paul’s view and understanding of the congregational acceptance and support of one another reflects his broader concept wherein God adopts and justifies the weak – wherein God takes ownership and the only Holy Lord justifies all, sinners, unconditionally. If God so love us, how should not we love one another? If God does not condemn the weak, how could we? If we (who, when saved were sinners and although saved are sinners still) are righteous in the sight of God because justified in Jesus the Lord, how could we judge one another? How could we judge one another on “minor issues” or “grudgingly” (14:1)? “Therefore thou art inexcusable, o man, whosoever thou art that judgest. For wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself. For thou that judgest doest the same things … things worthy of death”, 2:1 and 1:32! “Judging” and “despising” one another – Christians doing so – betray pride and jealousy, sins, “worthy of death”. Then to judge one another on things like “food” and the “regard” for “days”, things not ‘worthy of death’ (14:1, “adiaphora”: “trivialities” / “indifferent things”), is unimaginable!
Commentators, in fact, the Church, today, no different than the Church at Rome, focus on “foods” and factions for no purpose but to judge people who “regard” and “esteem” “days”, and to despise people who do not even “regard” or “esteem” “days”, but keep the Sabbath! But Paul draws the attention inescapably to the essential sin that so to speak is worthy of his plainest condemnation – no other sin than is condemned by the “greatest” Freedom Charter, the Law to “love thy neighbour as thyself”. (Chapter 13)
“Paul’s exhortation ends – and its ending concludes the whole Pauline ‘conversation’ – with a warning to all who find themselves in entire agreement with what has been said and are persuaded that their own opinions have been fully confirmed. Once again these busy hands are held back; once again the energy of partisans is damped down, and their oratory interrupted. … Once again it is the fact of the existence of our fellow men – the ethical problem – by which we are brought face to face with the great disturbance”. (Barth, Romans)
Paul discusses “food and drink” and the Christian “regard” of “days” and discovers “the great disturbance”! The “food and drink” and “regard” of “days” is nothing wrong with or, rather, was nothing wrong with. Even the different opinions on these things should be accepted and be tolerated in good Christian spirit because of the moment in history. Fellow Christians then allowed one another no free “regard”. They “judged” and “despised” each other’s deeds, motives and sincerity, missing the Freedom of being servant of Christ, passing by the fact of His having come and died and having been raised … “for us”, not even seeing it! Fellow Christians today act no different.
The Church’s was a controversial spirit. Distrust of fellow Church members’ sincerity and genuineness of confession and faith lay beneath the spirit of judgement that ruled in the Congregation at Rome. ‘You are not a (good) Christian if you don’t eat the meat of our traditional feast-meals’, the one party challenged. ‘You are not a (good) Christian if you do’, the other party retorted. “You quibble and fight amongst yourselves”, says Paul. “You judge and despise”, which is not Christ’s way. Paul in Christian spirit reminds the Church, “He is grateful to God who while regarding the day regards it to the Lord’s honour, and while eating eats to the Lord’s honour”, 14:6. You may not despise! … you may not judge! … God receives and accepts the weak. Who are you who judge the Master’s servant? The servant stands with his Master! Yea, the weak brother shall be kept upright because God makes him stand! …We are the Lord’s. Christ died and rose again in order to be Lord of his own, dead or alive (weak or strong). Why then do you judge your brother and humiliate him? We shall all stand before the judgement seat of Christ as it is written, As I live says the Lord, every knee shall bow to Me and every tongue shall confess (Me) God (verses 10-11). Each of us will give account, of himself, to God (not on behalf of anyone else and not to the strong in the Church, 14:12)! Stop condemning one another and rather take a stand that no one shall be the cause of his brother’s offence! (13)
Paul accepts the state of affairs that the Church differentiates and “regards” some days above others. He has no word to say against the practice. The fact that Paul could live with it shows of what nature the “estimation / regard” of certain days was. It was “Lawful”, it was in accordance with the principle of love that is – the very principle the Church violated by judging one another. The “estimation / regard” of certain days was the usual and happened according to the custom of Christian Faith, but Christian Faith was weak and human, deplorable and violent, brother despising and judging brother.
“The problem of division” even, was only symptomatic of the real problem of pride and want of love. Paul’s uncompromising condemnation cannot be overlooked. But Paul’s is not a condemnation of the regarding of days or the regard for days or of the eating of certain foods; his is the condemnation of Christians’ judging and despising one another. There is no justification for this great sin. This sin was “beggarly” because it reveals the Church’s basic want of love - the breaking of God’s Law.
Believers were divided over “food and drink”, no doubt. But they were not thus divided over “days” and the “esteem” of days though. “Esteem of days” wasn’t their sin or as much as a symptom of their real sickness, the sin of self-“esteem”. Nevertheless, “food and drink” were symptomatic of their sickness. “Food and drink”, was made the excuse for division, while the cause of division, haughtiness – was the real sin.
Every faction at Rome “regarded” whatever they “regarded” and “esteemed” “unto the Lord (Jesus’ honour)”. Or that was what Paul supposed every faction would! But did they? No! They at Rome “regarded” and “esteemed” “days” unto lord Self as they ate and drank or abstained meticulously unto lord Self!
Paul’s tolerance of the observance of “days” astonishes not. He accepts a fact, the fact of the Christian Church’s “regard” and “esteem” for “days”. He shows no antipathy towards the practice. But he waits no moment to denounce in simplest language the actual malady. “Who art thou?” “Days” are not intended for self-“esteem” and “food” for a “stumbling block”. They are meant unto charity and humble faith. The problem lay with man – with the Church – with the heart. Nothing was wrong with the whole Church’s “regard” for and “esteem” of “days” had the brethren at Rome only “regarded” and “esteemed” one another!
http://www.biblestudents.co.za/books/Book 4, 4.Rom.pdf
pp2-5
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Jun 28, 2015
- 9,750
- 2,615
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
