Evidence for God from Science

Posted: **Fri Nov 17, 2006 3:07 pm**

There's another discussion group I'm in, whose purpose is the discussion of Catholicism and the differences between Catholic and Protestant beliefs. One person posted this on that group, and I thought I'd share it and see what you guys' (and girls) perspectives on it are:

What the Bible Says
To be saved, you must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31), but the Sacred Scriptures show other things you must also do to be saved.

You must endure to the end. Matthew 10:22, Matthew 24:13, Mark 13:13.
You must accept the Cross (suffering). Matthew 10:38, Matthew 16:24-25, Mark 8:34, Luke 9:23, Luke 14:27.
You must be baptized with water. Mark 16:16, John 3:3-5 Titus 3:5, I Peter 3:20-21.
You must be a member in God's true church. Acts 2:47.
You must confess your sins. James 5:16, I John 1:9
You must keep the Commandments of God. Matthew 5:19-20, Matthew 7:21
You must heed the words of St. Peter, the first Pope. Acts 11:13-14, Acts 15:7.
You must eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus Christ. John 6:51-58, I Corinthians 10:16, I Corinthians 11:23-29

Opinons?

Swamper

Posted: **Fri Nov 17, 2006 3:13 pm**

Short and sweet, if those are the requirements, we are all going to hell. It is a works-laden list of requirements with impossible standards.

EDIT: By the way, this is a discussion with very strong emotional undercurrents, and will leave many angry.

Posted: **Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:55 pm**

Swamper wrote:
What the Bible Says
To be saved, you must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31), but the Sacred Scriptures show other things you must also do to be saved.

You must endure to the end. Matthew 10:22, Matthew 24:13, Mark 13:13.
You must accept the Cross (suffering). Matthew 10:38, Matthew 16:24-25, Mark 8:34, Luke 9:23, Luke 14:27.
You must be baptized with water. Mark 16:16, John 3:3-5 Titus 3:5, I Peter 3:20-21.
You must be a member in God's true church. Acts 2:47.
You must confess your sins. James 5:16, I John 1:9
You must keep the Commandments of God. Matthew 5:19-20, Matthew 7:21
You must heed the words of St. Peter, the first Pope. Acts 11:13-14, Acts 15:7.
You must eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus Christ. John 6:51-58, I Corinthians 10:16, I Corinthians 11:23-29

Hmm i think all of those are somewhat necessary however i would be unsure on one: baptized with water. i heard some saying, oe maybe even read on G&S website that baptizing is not what absolutely needs to be done for salation. But arent those "other things" part of belief in God? Sub-parts of belief? And one question whoch always bothereed me with this is this one: Why exactly we need to eat flesh and drink blood of Jesus? How often do we need to take Holy Communion? Isnt confession enough? What if we believe, confess, redempt, accept etc but still do not take HC often enough i.e. we go once a year? Is this acceptable? IS HC needed for salvation? And often confessing?

Posted: **Mon Feb 19, 2007 11:45 pm**

madscientist wrote:
Swamper wrote:
What the Bible Says
To be saved, you must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31), but the Sacred Scriptures show other things you must also do to be saved.

You must endure to the end. Matthew 10:22, Matthew 24:13, Mark 13:13.
You must accept the Cross (suffering). Matthew 10:38, Matthew 16:24-25, Mark 8:34, Luke 9:23, Luke 14:27.
You must be baptized with water. Mark 16:16, John 3:3-5 Titus 3:5, I Peter 3:20-21.
You must be a member in God's true church. Acts 2:47.
You must confess your sins. James 5:16, I John 1:9
You must keep the Commandments of God. Matthew 5:19-20, Matthew 7:21
You must heed the words of St. Peter, the first Pope. Acts 11:13-14, Acts 15:7.
You must eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus Christ. John 6:51-58, I Corinthians 10:16, I Corinthians 11:23-29

Hmm i think all of those are somewhat necessary however i would be unsure on one: baptized with water. i heard some saying, oe maybe even read on G&S website that baptizing is not what absolutely needs to be done for salation. But arent those "other things" part of belief in God? Sub-parts of belief? And one question whoch always bothereed me with this is this one: Why exactly we need to eat flesh and drink blood of Jesus? How often do we need to take Holy Communion? Isnt confession enough? What if we believe, confess, redempt, accept etc but still do not take HC often enough i.e. we go once a year? Is this acceptable? IS HC needed for salvation? And often confessing?

Well for starters: To be saved, you must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ Acts 16:31 no debate for me here.

However what is meant in their discussion ... "but the Sacred Scriptures show other things you must also do to be saved."

What other things???

I would suggest a study of the Greek and Hebrew words for believe and faith. The best picture one can give about believing in someone and having faith in someone is by looking at marriage.

Much of the imagery given in the bible was common knowledge to the first century Jewish and Christian communities. Much of this has been lost to our modern understanding.

For example, the breaking of bread and sharing the Cup was used in marriage ceremony to say to each — "I am committed to you, all I have is yours, all I own is yours, all I am is yours, I give you all my hopes and dreams, all my wealth is yours, I hold nothing back to you, I will feed you and give the blood of my life for you — I love you that much.”

That is what the Holy Communion or Eucharist used to mean — you were not only saying that to the Lord but also to those members in your local church: and as often you do this do in remembrance of Christ and that we who love God must also love our brothers and sisters in Christ likewise.

This concept has been lost in most of the church world today, yet that is what it meant back then. The Holy Communion or Eucharist was a remembrance of Christ love, not a means of salvation, or to stay saved but rather ones continued commitment to Christ and his bride — the church and that means between Christians in a local fellowship. Can you trust, depend, rely on the person sitting next to you in Church? See how far we fallen from this concept?

To believe and have faith in someone is similar to the concept of what marriage is and how it comes about. The man proves his love to his betrothed by displays of character [in arranged marriages giving of gifts depending on custom of the era] and she in turns does likewise. During this courtship time trust builds between the two and they get married and this builds a bond between two built on trust and faith as each grow together as they take care of the gift of life in marriage.

I like how one pastor put it — to believe in Christ comes by his great display of love towards us. Too believe is to trust, commit, rely, depend on, remain forever loyal too, Christ Jesus and this means: "all I have is yours, all I own is yours, all I am is yours, I give you all my hopes and dreams, all my wealth is yours, I hold nothing back to you, I will feed you and give the blood of my life for you — I love you that much Lord because I know you love me and we will never betray each other no matter life's course." That is saving faith plain and simple. We need kind of commitment in the body of Christ today.

As for baptism, it simply means to be placed into or immersed in something. Again referring to the marriage ceremony bath or cleansing rite before marriage: symbolizing getting rid of the filth of the world and union with Christ and his church. It had nothing to do with salvation but rather identification with Christ and his church as pure before God and man. Do we live this or fake it? Does our manner of behavior reflect what we were baptized into?

You see, these concepts were lost through the passage of time and other ideas took their place. Maybe to fake it more than live it? Who knows? If you mention the marriage aspect of faith and believe now days, many people would not understand what you mean and instead twist it to mean something other than fidelity, loyalty, commitment through thick or thin, trust, reliance, dependability, built on and by [ever learning] love.

I guess it would be easier to argue the merits of Lordship salvation verses Baptism and Church rites than what it really means to believe in Christ.

Can you say to the Lord, “all I have is yours, all I own is yours, all I am is yours, I give you all my hopes and dreams, all my church works and activities I give up to you, all my wealth is yours, I hold nothing back for you, I will feed you and give the blood of my life for you — I love you that much Lord because I know you love me and we will never betray each other no matter life's course.”

Peter was confronted with this very concept I am speaking about and Peter, grieved, answered it, “Lord you know all things that I love you… Then Jesus answered him “feed my sheep...” John 21:2-19.

Will we???
-
-
-

Posted: **Tue Feb 20, 2007 11:00 am**

Nicely put B.W.

Well ya basically we need to believe, but that includes those "other things" such as commtiment, love, etc - what we do in marriage - or at lest what ewe should. But still about the Holy Communion thing... is it necessary to go and try to "feed ourselves" with HC as much as possible, and confess as often as possible? Does it mean that a man who confesses once a year and takes HC once a year - in 1 period, has a lower chance of salvation that one who does it on a daily basis? Coz there are people who always want to take HC when they can, and then there are those who do not do it on a daily basis - every time they go to church. So is this necessary, or just a good thing, or essential, or... significant? Or anything else?

Posted: **Wed Feb 21, 2007 2:24 pm**

Chance of salvation? Believe in the Lord and thou shalt be saved. It is quite simple. The rest follows. No, gorging yourself with Eucharists will not increase your chance of salvation; but if you truly believe, you will participate in the ritual every time with a humble heart. It is significant, like you said, but not essential. Faith is essential.

As for confession, that should be done often before God: not to merit salvation, or increase your chance of salvation, but to build the relationship of trust, as B.W. has explained so beautifully.

Posted: **Wed Feb 21, 2007 2:51 pm**

Turgonian wrote:Chance of salvation? Believe in the Lord and thou shalt be saved. It is quite simple. The rest follows. No, gorging yourself with Eucharists will not increase your chance of salvation; but if you truly believe, you will participate in the ritual every time with a humble heart. It is significant, like you said, but not essential. Faith is essential.

As for confession, that should be done often before God: not to merit salvation, or increase your chance of salvation, but to build the relationship of trust, as B.W. has explained so beautifully.

Nicely said B.W. and Turgonian. It amazes me sometimes why people feel compelled to add to the process of salvation. I would say it's mostly a case of ignorance (of what is needed) rather than belief that more than faith is actually necessary. Either way, to add anything other than faith wrt salvation is to elevate man to a god-like status, capable of saving himself. We all know where that leads ...

Posted: **Sat Feb 24, 2007 11:25 am**

madscientist wrote:Nicely put B.W. Well ya basically we need to believe, but that includes those "other things" such as commitment, love, etc - what we do in marriage - or at lest what ewe should. But still about the Holy Communion thing... is it necessary to go and try to "feed ourselves" with HC as much as possible, and confess as often as possible? Does it mean that a man who confesses once a year and takes HC once a year - in 1 period, has a lower chance of salvation that one who does it on a daily basis? Coz there are people who always want to take HC when they can, and then there are those who do not do it on a daily basis - every time they go to church. So is this necessary, or just a good thing, or essential, or... significant? Or anything else?

I just finished reading several of the Early Church writings from the first century on to about 300 AD. It is amazing how each addresses the idea of Christian love towards one another. So does the New Testament. Somewhere along the march of time, this concept seems to have gotten lost and muddled in translation.

I would try to look up on google — Agape Feast — or - wedding feast. These feast in the Christian first century coincided with participating in Holy Communion: Breaking the bread, etc, to remember Christ's vow to those that believe and also to one another in the local community church.

What began to happen during these feast that were meant for remembrance and dedication was that human beings used these to party down! Paul records this happening in 1 Corinthians 11:20-34. Can you imagine someone bringing the wine to such an occasion and the excess that would happen as a result?

As I stated before, the Holy Communion was for remembering God's vow to us and ours to God. It was a time of dedication to one another and Christ, asking forgiveness amongst our Christian brothers and sisters, as well demonstrating Christian love to one and another, etc.

It was a time when as I stated that one would declare to Christ and to those in the local church: “all I have is yours, all I own is yours, all I am is yours, I give you all my hopes and dreams, all my church works and activities I give up to you, all my wealth is yours, I hold nothing back for you, I will feed you and give the blood of my life for you — I love you that much Lord because I know you love me and we will never betray each other no matter life's course and He or she who loves the Lord, must love their brethren also.”

Hence, that was the idea of the Agape feast or wedding feast of that era and time. Somehow through the passage of time, the feast became more like a wedding reception that many Western Countries hold. The booze and food flows free. Uncle Harry gets in a drunken fist fight with cousin Steve caused over a loan not repaid. Sue yells in drunken rage at Betty because she wore the same dress and shoes as she. If the booze wasn't there none of this would have happened.

I guess the idea of Holy Communion became ritualized in its many varied forms because of this and thus the concept of remembering God's love towards you, and yours toward God, demonstrated towards how we treat our fellow Christians became lost and thus as Paul wrote: “For this reason many are sick among you and many sleep.” 1 Corinthians 11:30 NKJV

It is easier to neglect the truth about remembering God's love towards us, and ours toward God, demonstrated towards how we treat our fellow Christians by reducing Communion to rituals and even concepts of earning or retaining salvation than it is to really love God because he first loved us and then demonstrate this within our local churches amongst each other where we attend: Matthew 22:37-40, 1 John 3:10-24.

That is Communion or should I say — Holy Communion!

Is this so within out local assemblies? We have a long way to go and much to remember.
-
-
-

Posted: **Sat Feb 24, 2007 11:49 am**

B.W.,

Might I recommend you pick up Thomas Torrence's The Doctrine of Grace in the Apostolic Fathers (Eugene, OR : Wipf and Stock, 1996. ISBN: 0965351769)? It's pretty slim, at a whopping 120 pages. There is some technical aspects to it (a bit of Greek text, as well as some other languages), but it is overall very, very readable.

Long story shorts, he very clearly demonstrates that the early church (90 - 300) lost almost all understanding of the doctrine of grace and fully taught a works based salvation. He does this by examining such literature as Barnabas, Hermes, Clement, the Didache, etc. He further looks at the effect of Hellenistic theology on the broader church, especially with reference to the lack of a uniform NT in the hands of every bishop (much less every believer!).

OUTSTANDING read.

God bless

On topic: I don't see the need to add anything other than belief that Jesus told the truth in John 3:15, 16; 5:24; and 11:25-16 to salvation. Grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Everything else is a discipleship matter . . . but we've been through that debate before. When will people stop believing mere men and start believing Jesus?

Posted: **Sat Feb 24, 2007 12:27 pm**

Jac3510 wrote:B.W.,

Might I recommend you pick up Thomas Torrence's The Doctrine of Grace in the Apostolic Fathers (Eugene, OR : Wipf and Stock, 1996. ISBN: 0965351769)? It's pretty slim, at a whopping 120 pages. There is some technical aspects to it (a bit of Greek text, as well as some other languages), but it is overall very, very readable.

Long story shorts, he very clearly demonstrates that the early church (90 - 300) lost almost all understanding of the doctrine of grace and fully taught a works based salvation. He does this by examining such literature as Barnabas, Hermes, Clement, the Didache, etc. He further looks at the effect of Hellenistic theology on the broader church, especially with reference to the lack of a uniform NT in the hands of every bishop (much less every believer!).

OUTSTANDING read.

God bless

On topic: I don't see the need to add anything other than belief that Jesus told the truth in John 3:15, 16; 5:24; and 11:25-16 to salvation. Grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Everything else is a discipleship matter . . . but we've been through that debate before. When will people stop believing mere men and start believing Jesus?

Thanks Jack ! I'll check into this book.

That was what I was searching out - how the early church (90 - 300) lost almost all understanding of the doctrine of grace and fully taught a works based salvation - it is amazing how it happened!

You think the Church as a whole can return to an understanding of the doctrine of grace as well as the knowledge of who God is and is about?

-
-

Posted: **Sun Feb 25, 2007 1:12 pm**

Jac3510 wrote:B.W.,

Might I recommend you pick up Thomas Torrence's The Doctrine of Grace in the Apostolic Fathers (Eugene, OR : Wipf and Stock, 1996. ISBN: 0965351769)? It's pretty slim, at a whopping 120 pages. There is some technical aspects to it (a bit of Greek text, as well as some other languages), but it is overall very, very readable.

Long story shorts, he very clearly demonstrates that the early church (90 - 300) lost almost all understanding of the doctrine of grace and fully taught a works based salvation. He does this by examining such literature as Barnabas, Hermes, Clement, the Didache, etc. He further looks at the effect of Hellenistic theology on the broader church, especially with reference to the lack of a uniform NT in the hands of every bishop (much less every believer!).

Clement? Did Clement go wrong? Here, look at I Clement 32-34:

Clement wrote:CHAPTER 32 -- WE ARE JUSTIFIED NOT BY OUR OWN WORKS, BUT BY FAITH.

Whosoever will candidly consider each particular, will recognise the greatness of the gifts which were given by him. For from him have sprung the priests and all the Levites who minister at the altar of God. From him also [was descended] our Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh. From him [arose] kings, princes, and rulers of the race of Judah. Nor are his other tribes in small glory, inasmuch as God had promised, "Your seed shall be as the stars of heaven." All these, therefore, were highly honoured, and made great, not for their own sake, or for their own works, or for the righteousness which they wrought, but through the operation of His will. And we, too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

CHAPTER 33 -- BUT LET US NOT OWE UP THE PRACTICE OF GOOD WORKS AND LOVE. GOD HIMSELF IS AN EXAMPLE TO US OF GOOD WORKS.

What shall we do, then, brethren? Shall we become slothful in well-doing, and cease from the practice of love? God forbid that any such course should be followed by us! But rather let us hasten with all energy and readiness of mind to perform every good work. For the Creator and Lord of all Himself rejoices in His works. For by His infinitely great power He established the heavens, and by His incomprehensible wisdom He adorned them. He also divided the earth from the water which surrounds it, and fixed it upon the immoveable foundation of His own will. The animals also which are upon it He commanded by His own word into existence. So likewise, when He had formed the sea, and the living creatures which are in it, He enclosed them [within their proper bounds] by His own power. Above all, with His holy and undefiled hands He formed man, the most excellent [of His creatures], and truly great through the understanding given him -- the express likeness of His own image. For thus says God: "Let us make man in Our image, and after Our likeness. So God made man; male and female He created them." Having thus finished all these things, He approved them, and blessed them, and said, "Increase and multiply." We see, then, how all righteous men have been adorned with good works, and how the Lord Himself, adorning Himself with His works, rejoiced. Having therefore such an example, let us without delay accede to His will, and let us work the work of righteousness with our whole strength.

CHAPTER 34 -- GREAT IS THE REWARD OF GOOD WORKS WITH GOD. JOINED TOGETHER IN HARMONY, LET US IMPLORE THAT REWARD FROM HIM.

The good servant receives the bread of his labour with confidence; the lazy and slothful cannot look his employer in the face. It is requisite, therefore, that we be prompt in the practice of well-doing; for of Him are all things. And thus He forewarns us: "Behold, the Lord [cometh], and His reward is before His face, to render to every man according to his work." He exhorts us, therefore, with our whole heart to attend to this, that we be not lazy or slothful in any good work. Let our boasting and our confidence be in Him. Let us submit ourselves to His will. Let us consider the whole multitude of His angels, how they stand ever ready to minister to His will. For the Scripture says, "Ten thousand times ten thousand stood around Him, and thousands of thousands ministered to Him, and cried, Holy, holy, holy, the Lord of Sabaoth; the whole creation is full of His glory." And let us therefore, conscientiously gathering together in harmony, cry to Him earnestly, as with one mouth, that we may be made partakers of His great and glorious promises. For [the Scripture] says, "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, neither has it entered into the heart of man, the things which He has prepared for those who wait for Him."

Posted: **Sun Feb 25, 2007 5:53 pm**

Pick up the book, Turgy. Torrence has 11 pages of small print and heavy footnotes to demonstrate the validity of his claim. I think you'll be convinced. To give you but one small excerpt from that chapter:

Torrence wrote:In all this Clement is apt to use traditional New Testament expressions. The most notable of these is "justification by faith." It is quite clear, however, that there is no real problem here, as for example St. Paul had, and consequently it does not carry with it the note of overwhelming astonishment at the flaring act of God in forgiving the ungodly. The fundamental idea at the back of the words dikaiosune, dikaioumai [note: translated "righteousness" and "I am made righteous," respectively] seems to be the moral qualification which avails before God conceived as a quality of the soul. That is achieved by faith which is fear of God working itself out in obedience. And so Clement can say that we are "justified by works, not by words" . . . and insists that we are not justified by [faith] alone but by [faith] and [religion], [faith] and [hospitality], by [faith] and [truth]. (see 1.2; 11.1; 15.1; 32.4; 15.2; 21.8; 50.5; 60.4; 18.6; 19.1; 31.2; 25.2, 5; 47.3; 60.2; 62.2; 63.1)

Taken from the edition cited above, pages 48-49. I transliterated the Greek, and the words in brackets are actual translations rather than transliterations so that you can see the force of the argument more easily. I used the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology for those translations.

Anyway, even in sample passage you cited, Turgy, faith is not in Christ, but in an omnipotent God who created the universe. There is some more background information here that is important to the discussion as it relates to the (well documented) Hellenistic mindset toward Judaism and thus early Christianity, but again . . . just get the book. You can get it from Amazon.com for less than $20 plus shipping.

edit: and BW, no, I don't think the broader church can regain the true gospel. Yes, there will always be a remnent, if I may borrow from Jewish theology, but the church herself? No . . . she has been lost since 90 AD. The few of us who preach the clear and unadulterated gospel are maginalized by the "established church," and it will always be that way. Defeatest? No. Just realistic. It strengthens my drive to bring the lost to Christ . . . and a GREAT many of those are in the church pews. If you don't believe me, take this little test and, further, look how many people have already failed it!

Posted: **Sun Feb 25, 2007 10:40 pm**

Jac3510 wrote:...edit: and BW, no, I don't think the broader church can regain the true gospel. Yes, there will always be a remnent, if I may borrow from Jewish theology, but the church herself? No . . . she has been lost since 90 AD. The few of us who preach the clear and unadulterated gospel are maginalized by the "established church," and it will always be that way. Defeatest? No. Just realistic. It strengthens my drive to bring the lost to Christ . . . and a GREAT many of those are in the church pews. If you don't believe me, take this little test and, further, look how many people have already failed it!

Hey I passed!

Is there any correlation to the seven churches mentioned in Revelations at the time of the end to what you stated above? Now, How do you get to Philadelphia?

-
-
-

Posted: **Sun Feb 25, 2007 11:06 pm**

Jac3510 wrote:Pick up the book, Turgy. Torrence has 11 pages of small print and heavy footnotes to demonstrate the validity of his claim. I think you'll be convinced. To give you but one small excerpt from that chapter:
Torrence wrote:In all this Clement is apt to use traditional New Testament expressions. The most notable of these is "justification by faith." It is quite clear, however, that there is no real problem here, as for example St. Paul had, and consequently it does not carry with it the note of overwhelming astonishment at the flaring act of God in forgiving the ungodly. The fundamental idea at the back of the words dikaiosune, dikaioumai [note: translated "righteousness" and "I am made righteous," respectively] seems to be the moral qualification which avails before God conceived as a quality of the soul. That is achieved by faith which is fear of God working itself out in obedience. And so Clement can say that we are "justified by works, not by words" . . . and insists that we are not justified by [faith] alone but by [faith] and [religion], [faith] and [hospitality], by [faith] and [truth]. (see 1.2; 11.1; 15.1; 32.4; 15.2; 21.8; 50.5; 60.4; 18.6; 19.1; 31.2; 25.2, 5; 47.3; 60.2; 62.2; 63.1)
Taken from the edition cited above, pages 48-49. I transliterated the Greek, and the words in brackets are actual translations rather than transliterations so that you can see the force of the argument more easily. I used the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology for those translations.

Anyway, even in sample passage you cited, Turgy, faith is not in Christ, but in an omnipotent God who created the universe. There is some more background information here that is important to the discussion as it relates to the (well documented) Hellenistic mindset toward Judaism and thus early Christianity, but again . . . just get the book. You can get it from Amazon.com for less than $20 plus shipping.

Jac would Paul be as guilty as Clement for teaching what he did in Romans 12:11-21, Romans 15:1-3, Ephesians 4:1-32, Ephesians 5:6-21, Galatians 5:13-26, Titus 1:16, Titus 2:6-15?

I do not see the point about 'Clement' author of book makes. Can you cite something specific as I am having a hard time seeing how author derived his point of view from his source quotes from Clement of Rome. Seems his view of context is a little off and if true you could cite Paul guilty as well. Was Clement exhorting as Paul did or teaching something new? I do not know. That's a Missouri mule.
-
-
-

Posted: **Mon Feb 26, 2007 8:39 am**

I couldn't help but notice that the new birth was completely absent from the list. :?

Evidence for God from Science

Other things necessary for salvation?

Other things necessary for salvation?

Re: Other things necessary for salvation?

Re: Other things necessary for salvation?

reply...

Re: reply...