What was God's eternal purpose in Christ's atonment?

Andrew · Jul 29, 2003

Hey, no problem. I really admire your ability to say sorry. It takes a lot of humility to do that. I started another thread and posted my reasons there why I disagree with Ltd Atonement. You can check it out there.

Reformationist · Jul 29, 2003

Andrew said:
Excuse me, but preaching and teaching that Christ did not die for all men but only some is the "heresy, vile and disgusting", not the other way round.

Andrew, do you believe that Christ offered atonement for and secured the salvation of all people? If you do, you are an universalist. If not then why argue against the position?

Christ died for all, plain and simple, not just a special group, which I'm sure the hyper Calvinists somehow include themselves in by virture of their own doctrine!

Who, on this MB, is a "hyper-Calvinist?"

Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

So Christ told His disciples to preach the Word to all people. What does that have to do with whether or not all people are naturally inclined to receive and embrace the Gospel? No one in this thread is arguing against the evangelization of the world. The issue at hand is that only those whom the Father calls will come, and they will come. You seem to be assuming that God requiring something of us means that we have the moral ability to do what He requires. You seem to be confusing natural ability and moral ability. You see, we all, both elect and reprobate, have the natural ability to seek Christ. What none of us have is the moral ability to submit to God. That's what we lost in the Fall. What restores that is the grace of God in His sovereign act of regeneration. He does not regenerate all people. He only regenerates His elect, at their appointed time. God does not restrain certain people from becoming His disciple. He does not need to do that. We are, by nature, children of wrath and have enmity against God. That is our natural, fallen disposition toward God. We don't want to seek Him, so, we don't. God is passive with regard to changing the inclinations of those He has not chosen to redeem. He does not work fresh evil into their hearts. He does not create in them a new desire to rebel. That is their natural disposition. In our fallen state we desire to rebel. It is God's regenerative grace that changes that. He is active in the hearts of His elect. He gives them a new heart. Why does He have to "take out our heart of stone and give us a heart of flesh" if our natural disposition is to seek Him? It's not. He must change us so that we desire to be His child and desire to seek Him. When He gives us that new inclination then that is exactly what we seek, and we do so freely.

Col 1:23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

Again with this passage you seem to be assuming that because God commanded the Word to be preached to all people that He desires the salvation of all people.

The 2 verses wld not make sense if Christ did not shed his blood for the sins of all men.

Andrew, these two verses make sense because Christ is able to accomplish the salvation of those for whom He died. We don't know who God's elect are so we are tasked with spreading the Word of God to all people. We are not tasked with saving people. We are not tasked with knowing whether our witness will be effective in all to whom we share the Gospel. That is God's doing. People don't believe because we "persuade" them. They believe because God has given them a new heart. If He does not give them a new heart you might as well be preaching to a corpse because you'll get the same amount of belief.

God bless

SoldierofChrist · Jul 29, 2003

Amen, Ref.

Reformationist · Jul 29, 2003

Drotar said:
Now what motivates us- the fact that we know that the word of the Lord WILL NOT return void,a nd that whatever God ordains WILL come to pass. Not maybe. Not hopefully. Will. We know that our God is UNSTOPPABLE at accomplishing whatever He so wills.

Nicely said Mr. Cosmo Kramer!! :bow:

Reformationist · Jul 29, 2003

Drotar said:
(BTW, in this I differ with Sproul. This is also why I had to edit my last paper on sin and salvation- instead of believing that regeneration is a reversing of our old nature, I think that more accurately it is a creating of a second, new nature, and the slow fatality of the old. I think that by calling regeneration a reversing of our old nature, it places too little emphasis on the fact that that old nature is still present. In fact, some may unintentionally forget to add into their theology that the old nature wasn't technically reversed because then it wouldn't be present.

Drotar, I'm confused. When did Sproul say that "our old nature was reversed?" Everything I've ever read by him shows clearly that he believes we are given a new nature that is not in bondage to sin and that this new nature contends against our "still present" old nature.

I say it was "fatally wounded" and dying but not dead, thus requiring our perseverance and cooperative effort of sanctification to putting to death the old desires of the flesh.)

I'm not sure what you're alluding to here but the statement in the Gospel that we were "dead in your trespasses and sins" isn't an implication that our nature was destroyed in the Fall nor am I aware that Sproul or any other orthodox reformed theologian would contend otherwise. Rather, as you say, our nature became morally bound to sinfulness and only desires the things of the flesh and this is shown as a form or type of death.

Theological note from my Bible on sanctification (General Editor: R. C. Sproul):

According to the Westminster Shorter Catechism, sanctification is "the work of God's free grace, whereby we are renewed in the whole man after the image of God, and are enabled more and more to die unto sin, and live unto righteousness."

It is a continuing change worked by God in us, freeing us from sinful habits and forming in us Christlike affections, dispositions, and virtues. It does not mean that sin is instantly eradicated, but it is also more than a counteraction, in which sin is merely restrained or repressed without being progressively destroyed.

Regeneration is birth; sanctification is growth. In regeneration, God implants desires that were not there before; desire for God, for holiness, and for glorifying God's name in the world; desire to pray and worship; desire to love and bring benefit to others. . . Believers find within themselves contrary urgings. The Spirit sustains ther regenerate desires and purposes, but their fallen instincts (the "flesh") obstruct their path and drag them back. The conflict of these two is sharp. . . Yet by watching and praying against temptation, and cultivating opposite virtues, they may through the Spirit's help "put to death" particular bad habits.

As you can see, this clearly shows Sproul's stance on the issue and his belief that we maintain an old nature, which has been conquered, but not eradicated, through Christ's efficacious work, and a new nature, which struggles constantly against the old nature and is able, by the power of the Spirit, to be victorious. I think the thrust of Sproul's insight on this issue is that our souls are "quickened from life to death" and that God's sovereign work of regeneration "changes the disposition of our souls, inclining our hearts to God."

We still have a fallen nature to contend with but now our natural inclination is toward God rather than fleeing from Him in rebellion.

This might just be the product of my overactive ability to misunderstand what other people are saying because as far as I know we share the same beliefs on most things.

God bless,
Don

Maximus · Jul 29, 2003

I voted that God's purpose was to make salvation actual for all people. Before you all jump to conclusions, let me say that I am not a Universalist.

But, since the OP was asking about God's purpose, that is my answer. God wants everyone saved (1 Tim. 2:3-6). That was His purpose in becoming a man and dying for the sins of the world (John 3:16). He did not do that just to make salvation possible.

Jesus' life, His death on the Cross, His descent into hell, and His resurrection, actually secured the salvation of all of mankind in the objective sense. It is finished. Salvation, in this sense, is completely by grace, not by anything any ordinary fallen human can do, including having faith.

Yet we know that not all people will be saved.

Why?

Because God has chosen to apply the grace secured by His Son through faith (Eph. 2:8-10): the kind of faith that manifests itself in works of righteousness (James 2) and no other kind.

Since God desires all people to be saved (1 Tim. 2:3-6), and it is apparent that not all people will be saved (Matt. 25:31-46), what can it be that is thwarting God's desire?

Must be the free will of man, who can choose (Joshua 24:15) to accept or reject God's gracious gift of salvation in Jesus Christ.

Reformationist · Jul 29, 2003

Maximus said:
I voted that God's purpose was to make salvation actual for all people. Before you all jump to conclusions, let me say that I am not a Universalist.

Okay. Holding back on my jumping...

But, since the OP was asking about God's purpose, that is my answer. God wants everyone saved (1 Tim. 2:3-6). That was His purpose in becoming a man and dying for the sins of the world (John 3:16).

Uggh...still...trying...to...hold...back...on...jumping...to...the...conclusion...that...you...hold...a...universalist...view. Gasp...grunt...this is not so easy...

He did not do that just to make salvation possible.

I agree completely that God did not send His Son to accomplish the "possibility" of salvation.

Jesus' life, His death on the Cross, His descent into hell, and His resurrection, actually secured the salvation of all of mankind in the objective sense. It is finished. Salvation, in this sense, is completely by grace, not by anything any ordinary fallen human can do, including having faith.

Okay, so "in the objective sense" all people are saved? What does "in the objective sense" mean?

Yet we know that not all people will be saved.

Why?

Because God has chosen to apply the grace secured by His Son through faith (Eph. 2:8-10): the kind of faith that manifests itself in works of righteousness (James 2) and no other kind.

So Christ sought to, and did, accomplish the salvation of all people, "in the objective sense," but God only applied that salvation to some people? For what purpose? You make it sound as if the Godhead is not of one purpose. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit have the exact same purpose. They each have their own roles to fill but they aren't working against each other.

Additionally, you make completely contradictory statements. First, you say that "Jesus' life, His death on the Cross, His descent into hell, and His resurrection, actually secured the salvation of all of mankind in the objective sense." Then you say that only some of what Christ secured is actually applied. What about the salvation that Christ secured that God doesn't apply? Does that just float off into never never land?

Since God desires all people to be saved (1 Tim. 2:3-6), and it is apparent that not all people will be saved (Matt. 25:31-46), what can it be that is thwarting God's desire?

Must be the free will of man, who can choose (Joshua 24:15) to accept or reject God's gracious gift of salvation in Jesus Christ.

So God, the Sovereign Creator of all things created, to include man and his "free will," thwarts the sovereign desire of God? Uh...yeah. Sure. How can a created being thwart the Will of his Creator? No where does the Bible make such a claim. As for Joshua 24:15, HELLO!!!!!

Look at these statements that lead up to this oft misused verse:

Joshua 24:1-15
Then Joshua gathered all the tribes of Israel to Shechem and called for the elders of Israel, for their heads, for their judges, and for their officers; and they presented themselves before God. And Joshua said to all the people, "Thus says the LORD God of Israel: "Your fathers, including Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, dwelt on the other side of the River in old times; and they served other gods. Then I took your father Abraham from the other side of the River, led him throughout all the land of Canaan, and multiplied his descendants and gave him Isaac. To Isaac I gave Jacob and Esau. To Esau I gave the mountains of Seir to possess, but Jacob and his children went down to Egypt. Also I sent Moses and Aaron, and I plagued Egypt, according to what I did among them. Afterward I brought you out. "Then I brought your fathers out of Egypt, and you came to the sea; and the Egyptians pursued your fathers with chariots and horsemen to the Red Sea. So they cried out to the LORD; and He put darkness between you and the Egyptians, brought the sea upon them, and covered them. And your eyes saw what I did in Egypt. Then you dwelt in the wilderness a long time. And I brought you into the land of the Amorites, who dwelt on the other side of the Jordan, and they fought with you. But I gave them into your hand, that you might possess their land, and I destroyed them from before you. Then Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab, arose to make war against Israel, and sent and called Balaam the son of Beor to curse you. But I would not listen to Balaam; therefore he continued to bless you. So I delivered you out of his hand. Then you went over the Jordan and came to Jericho. And the men of Jericho fought against you--also the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Girga*****s, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. But I delivered them into your hand. I sent the hornet before you which drove them out from before you, also the two kings of the Amorites, but not with your sword or with your bow. I have given you a land for which you did not labor, and cities which you did not build, and you dwell in them; you eat of the vineyards and olive groves which you did not plant.'
"Now therefore, fear the LORD, serve Him in sincerity and in truth, and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the River and in Egypt. Serve the LORD! And if it seems evil to you to serve the LORD, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD."

HELLO!!! The author is speaking to THE JEWS. Context, context, context.

God bless

Jerry_M · Jul 30, 2003

Andrew said:
Excuse me, but preaching and teaching that Christ did not die for all men but only some is the "heresy, vile and disgusting", not the other way round.

Christ died for all, plain and simple, not just a special group, which I'm sure the hyper Calvinists somehow include themselves in by virture of their own doctrine!

Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

Col 1:23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

The 2 verses wld not make sense if Christ did not shed his blood for the sins of all men.

Do you understand Col 1:23 to mean that every person, everywhere, has heard (past tense?) the Gospel?

Or, do you find yourself in agreement with that hyper Calvinist, John Gill:

and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; and therefore since it was the same which was everywhere preached, they might depend upon the truth of it, should have the greater value for it, and by no means relinquish it. This must be understood not of every individual creature, even human and rational, that was then, or had been in, the world; but that it had been, and was preached far and near, in all places all over the world, to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews; who are sometimes styled "every creature", "the creature", "the whole creation", "all men", &c. see Mar_16:15 ***_2:11; and of this, the first preaching of the Gospel by Peter after our Lord's resurrection, was an emblem and pledge, Act_2:14; and some time after that, the sound of all the apostles went into all the earth, and their words to the end of the world:

Jerry_M · Jul 30, 2003

Jerry_M said:
and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; and therefore since it was the same which was everywhere preached, they might depend upon the truth of it, should have the greater value for it, and by no means relinquish it. This must be understood not of every individual creature, even human and rational, that was then, or had been in, the world; but that it had been, and was preached far and near, in all places all over the world, to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews; who are sometimes styled "every creature", "the creature", "the whole creation", "all men", &c. see Mar_16:15 ***_2:11; and of this, the first preaching of the Gospel by Peter after our Lord's resurrection, was an emblem and pledge, Act_2:14; and some time after that, the sound of all the apostles went into all the earth, and their words to the end of the world:

Wow, in my quote from Gill, his evil abbreviation for Titus was censored by the forum! Instead of ***_2:11, it should be Titus 2:11. I am certainly glad that we have censorware to protect us from ourselves. </sarcasm>

Maximus · Jul 30, 2003

Reformationist -

Since this is the Protestant forum, I cannot debate here. That makes my post a soft target for your Calvinist response.

I do believe that God's desire that all men be saved (1 Tim. 2:3-6) is thwarted by the free agency He Himself gave to men. That should be obvious: God wants everyone saved (as the Bible says), yet not everyone is saved. Sounds like God not getting what He desires to me.

Why? Because, for some reason known only to Him, the free will of man is important to God.

If His absolute sovereignty is what is most important to God (which seems to be what Calvinists believe), then one would think, given that God wants all people saved, that all people would be saved.

Yet not all people are saved.

In order to explain this paradox, Calvinists posit a god who pre-arranged everything, including the First Sin and its consequences, a god who chose to create human beings in His own image in order to eternally **** some and save others, according to His good pleasure. Neither the ****** nor the redeemed have any real choice in the matter, yet the Calvinists tell us we are to believe this is just and this god the same One St. John called love.

Pardon me if I demur.

Note: Hope this doesn't sound like argument. It is simply a statement of opinion, not a point-by-point answer to Reformationist. I will avoid this thread from now on so that I do not debate here against the rules.

rnmomof7 · Jul 30, 2003

servingtheking said:
The intent was to make salvation possible for all people, even if only a few accept it.

Yes anyone that truly accepts Christ as their savior recieves salvation.

Excellent question reformationist, I believe that he only saved those that accept him. He makes salvation possible for all people through his death, and saves those who accept him as their savior. I honestly think that a solid argument can be made for either opinion.

So in effect Christ saved no one?

rnmomof7 · Jul 30, 2003

servingtheking said:
1 Timothy 2:3-4
"This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."

God desires all of us to be saved through his plan, but since part of his creation is in hell, salvation isn't automatic. Jesus' death provided an opportunity for God's plan to work, yet some still go to hell.

Do all men REALLY have an equal (read fair) opportunity to be saved? Or are some more equal than others?

If God desires something can he not bring it to pass?

Romans 1:16

"For I am not ashamned of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and then the Greek."

Click to expand...

Context means everything / At this time the jews felt they were the elect of God and they held the way to salvation. It was the purpose of Christ to ingraft other limbs on that vine (the symbol of Israel) .So over and over you read that God wishes all men or jews and gentiles because the message was being given to the jews that they were no longer Gods exclusive people. All( PAS) does not always mean all without exception . It often means a limited part of a group.

You have quoted Roman 1:16. What do you do with the rest of Romans?

Rom 3:10**
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Rom 3:11**
There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

clear stated unregenerated man does not want or seek God

I see this verse as all those who choose to believe in the Gospel are saved, like the Greeks. They were not God's choosen people but through Christ's death salvation was made possible for them if they believed.

Click to expand...

Are you saying that Jesus did not die for anyone?

Click to expand...

rnmomof7 · Jul 30, 2003

Bastoune said:
How does God "fail" if not everyone is saved? Did God then not also "fail" with Adam and Eve who did not even have the taint of original sin in them when they sinned?

Before I expound, think a minute about Judas Iscariot.

I'll be back.

Do you believe that Adam surprised God? Do you believe that Adams sin was not predestined ?

rnmomof7 · Jul 30, 2003

servingtheking said:
How so? [color]=red]Am I able to boast becasuse I recived and accepted Gods free gift of His Son?[/color] Didn't Christ die for the sins of the world? Therefore doesn't everyone have an opportunity to be saved? God knows who will accept this gift and who will go to hell.

Is it your position that the elect are the elect because God foresaw that they chose him?

That makes God mans debtor.God owes him election because he chose correctly .

That is not grace and it is not mercy

I do believe I will. If God had wanted to save everyone he would have made man without a choice to do good or evil, right? He wouldn't have given man a choice.

So in-spite of your quotes you do not really believe that God wants all men saved?

If God made the world and all that was in it and it became what it is today, isn't it by the sinful choices of the humankind? The possibility for salvation is possible to all men becasue Christ died for all therefore all have died. So if we chose not to accept the greatest gift of salvation that is given to all through Christ then we are ****** to hell are we not?

Do all men have an opportunity to be saved?

Becasue if you don't believe that Christ died to forgive your sins, then you will go to hell. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too. You can't not believe in God and say, well I don't have to listen to his comandments because my sins are paid for by the Atonement. Isn't it Paul that said that our Liberty in Christ is not a liscence to sin?Yes God is immutable and I believe there is a hell.

Calvinists would argue that you chose Christ because He chose you first.

If you are looking for a verse try 1 Corinthians 1:3-9

3 Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
4 I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ;
5 That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge;
6 Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you:
7 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:
8 Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.
9 God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

Written to believers ..this is not a salvation passage

rnmomof7 · Jul 30, 2003

Andrew said:
Excuse me, but preaching and teaching that Christ did not die for all men but only some is the "heresy, vile and disgusting", not the other way round.

Christ died for all, plain and simple, not just a special group, which I'm sure the hyper Calvinists somehow include themselves in by virture of their own doctrine!

Are all men saved?

Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

Col 1:23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

The 2 verses wld not make sense if Christ did not shed his blood for the sins of all men.

God is the first cause of Salvation. He ordained the means and the method.He determined the elect. All before the foundation of the earth.

The means was the cross of Christ. The method was faith by the preaching of the word..grace coming through faith.

You will never meet a Calvinist that does not believe in the need to go into all the world. The greatest evangelists have been Calvinists.

Drotar · Aug 1, 2003

It was either Grace Unknown or Willing to Beleive.

I'll try to find it. Give me a sec...

Ah, I stand correctd. Sorry about that. Here's where I got messed up:

"What is generated anew is the person's nature."

It's on the topic "Regeneration and Dispensationalism". I find ocmments like that occasionally in his writing.

Then again, I also found, "Something is added to the human nature, namely the indwelling presence of the Holy SPirit."

In Lorraine Boettner, I remember reading something about regeneration being the "reversing of our old nature's polarity." Or soemething like that. Right now, my task is to make extra clear that regeneration is the ADDING, not the CHANGING of our nature. I'm pretty sure that I heard him say that it was the changing of our old nature, I've heard it somewhere... Oh well, yu're a bigger Sproul guy than I. I think you're right on this one.

TTYL Jesus loves you!

Reformationist · Aug 1, 2003

Drotar said:
It was either Grace Unknown or Willing to Beleive.

I'll try to find it. Give me a sec...

Ah, I stand correctd. Sorry about that. Here's where I got messed up:

"What is generated anew is the person's nature."

It's on the topic "Regeneration and Dispensationalism". I find ocmments like that occasionally in his writing.

Then again, I also found, "Something is added to the human nature, namely the indwelling presence of the Holy SPirit."

In Lorraine Boettner, I remember reading something about regeneration being the "reversing of our old nature's polarity." Or soemething like that. Right now, my task is to make extra clear that regeneration is the ADDING, not the CHANGING of our nature. I'm pretty sure that I heard him say that it was the changing of our old nature, I've heard it somewhere... Oh well, yu're a bigger Sproul guy than I. I think you're right on this one.

TTYL Jesus loves you!

I don't know bro. I don't think there is a substantial theological difference between "changing our nature" and "giving us a new nature." I will say that, at least from a theological pespective, as long as we don't say that God adds to our fallen nature without transforming us into the image of Christ then we'll be fine. Obviously this transformation is not, in reality, instantaneous but legally, according to justification, we are holy in God's eyes. But, as I said, there is a very real transformation but I would personally explain this as learning to live for our regenerate nature, which is now our natural nature, and learning to die to our fallen nature which still compels us to disobey God.

As always, it's been a pleasure reading your insight.

God bless

Chriƒt · Aug 8, 2003

1But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves. - 2 Peter 2:1

(and for this we labor and strive), that we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, and especially of those who believe. - 1 Timothy 4:10

Unless it can be proven from scripture that Christ did not die for unbelievers, I will have to stick with the fact that Christ's death was for everyone, sinners and saints alike.

Oh, and I don't have time to read the entire thread, but I have read enough to know to ask that you please refrain from calling me a Universalist or Arminian. lol

Peace in Christ.

rnmomof7 · Aug 10, 2003

Reformationist said:
I don't know bro. I don't think there is a substantial theological difference between "changing our nature" and "giving us a new nature." I will say that, at least from a theological pespective, as long as we don't say that God adds to our fallen nature without transforming us into the image of Christ then we'll be fine. Obviously this transformation is not, in reality, instantaneous but legally, according to justification, we are holy in God's eyes. But, as I said, there is a very real transformation but I would personally explain this as learning to live for our regenerate nature, which is now our natural nature, and learning to die to our fallen nature which still compels us to disobey God.

As always, it's been a pleasure reading your insight.

God bless

Yes we are declared righteous by our justification . We have an unearned righteousness . Sanctification is the process of conforming us into His image. That will not be complete until glorification.When we will be raised incorruptible. Praise God!

Hi Ref !

What was God's eternal purpose in Christ's atonment?

What was God's eternal purpose in Christ's Atonement?

To make salvation possible for all people

To make salvation actual for all people

To make salvation possible for His elect

To make salvation actual for His elect

Other (please explain)

Well-Known Member

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

Modern Reformationist

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

Orthodox Christian

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

<font color="darkblue"><i><b>A filthy, rotten, sin

<font color="darkblue"><i><b>A filthy, rotten, sin

Orthodox Christian

Legend

Legend

Legend

Legend

Legend

Drotar

Guest

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

Member

Legend

Similar threads