[Gods wrath]

To whoever:  Reading on my thread...........

Pretribulationists,  equate Matthew 24:9 with the fifth seal judgment as stated in Revelation 6:9–11.
This is exactly the understanding of pretribulationism.

Pre warth rapture supporters agree, tribulation occurs  in both the 1st half and the 2d half  of Daniels seventieth week, what is disputed is that not all the tribulation is Gods wrath.

Yet if the tribulation in Matthew 24:9 is "wrath of God"—then it would provide another item that contradicts the pre tribulation theory, and rejects a  principle scripture that helps understrand when this wrath of God begins
A cursory reading of a Greek concordance reveals that the word "tribulation" (thlipsis) is used in prophetic contexts to refer to both the first and second halves of the seventieth week of Daniel.
Matthew 24:9, which chronologically relates to the first half of the seventieth week as evidenced by its preceding the midpoint of the abomination of desolation (Matt. 24:15-21) states:
Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted [thlipsis *2347  Strong's Comparative Concordance, as tribuation], and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.[/color]
Clearly the biblical text describes the first half of the seventieth week as a time of tribulation.
Is this tribulation wrath of God??  According to pre tribbers it is, and this is where they make their left turn, which leads them to error.

The second half of the seventieth week is also described as a time of tribulation.
2 Th1:6 uses the Greek word thlipsis *2347 Strong's Comp. Concordance, as tribulation] while referring to the second coming of Christ which occurs during the second half of the seventieth week of Daniel, note;:
Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation [thlipsis] to them that trouble you;

 "Therefore, it is proper and even biblical to refer to, and even describe, the seventieth week of Daniel as "The Tribulation," or "A Time of Tribulation." (John McLean, "Chronology and Sequential Structure of John's Revelation" in Thomas Icxe Timothy Demy, eds., When The Trumpet Sounds (Harvest House Publishers, 1995), p. 341.) "

But notice that this tribulation is not of God and not, just upon the Jews, as pre tribbers would have one believe, this is  tribulation brought about by the wrath of the Satan, who is wroth with the woman; after being cast out of heaven;

Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.  Rev 12;12

Rev 12;  tells us;
17  And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

which is stated again at;

Rev 13
Rev 13:6  And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
Rev 13:7  And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

So these afflictions (tribulations) brought about by Satan upon Gods people, occur before and after the mid point of Daniel's seventieth week, are to be recompensed by the LORD at His Second Coming.

When is this according to 1 Cor 15?

When He comes with all His Saints (1 Th 3:13), but  note carefully;

1 Cor 15
12  Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?
13  But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:
14  And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
15  Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
16  For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
17  And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
18  Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
19  If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.
20  But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
21  For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22  For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23  But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

Here at this, verse 23 those that sleep in Christ shall be made alive at His coming, after the apostasy, the pre trib position rejects this out of hand, since they  place the second coming of Christ before  the begining of the Tribulation, even agree that His second coming is at the mid trib.....go figure??

I am not mid trib, but clearly, the mid trib position is closer to the truth of scripture than the pre trib.

 
Blessings,

Petro

Imagine that, someone post a thread using the word verses between names, and them wants the party he invites not to participate................hah, what a joke.

paul2 you do take the cake..............LOL

You kill me.....  I usually do not use smilies but this is called for herein...

Blessings to you,

Petro

    Petro, Petro, Petro,

    Are you trying to take over this thread to with your no theories rules? You truely never cease to amaze me. This is my thread Petro just as the "best of Paul2's Pre-Trib. Rapture" is my thread. There are 333 reply's on that thread and 30 on this one as of now. I know this must disturb you.

    You could start your own thread and make the rules and even lock the thread. You could ask me not to post on your thread and I wouldn't. I don't mind you debating on my threads but I do resent you trying to control me and my thread.

    The reason you are on my threads is because this is where the action is. You don't want to have your own thread because the people you want to reach are on my threads. You've made it your mission to attack the  Pre-Trib. Rapture, anyone who believes it and most importantly keeping us from being able to effectively teach our interpretation.

    I think another reason you don't start your own thread is because attacking the Pre-Trib. Rapture is what you do. If you were to start your own Pre-Wrath Rapture page it would be boring because you never present the Pre-Wrath interpretation. You don't even know how it works.

   I can explain how my theory and interpretation work but you don't like my methods, too bad. I've seen where your method of study has left you unable to address when the effects of the 7 vials of God's Wrath take place on the earth in relation to the Rapture, the Second Coming and Daniel's 70th week. I presented some facts using Scripture but you won't address them.

    You see us Pre-Tribbers as you call us as a threat and thats why your here.

    Stop trying to control me and my threads Petro. If you want to be in control then start your own threads. If you want to post on my threads don't try to control them.

    You have a theory Petro and not facts. Fact of the matter is you can't present your facts or your theory. You claim to search for truth and facts but never seem to search out the "facts"and truth in my 4 part explaination of why your "theory" doesn't work.

    Fair is fair in love and debate! You want to attack then learn how to defend!

                                                        Paul2
 
                                                               

paully,

Yolu took the liberty to put my name on this thread, so I guess this makes it my thread just as much as it is yours.

So,   I say you just have to live with it.....


Blessings,

Petro

[they without us should not be made perfect.]

What do you guys think about this...

Chapter 12

Who are the Woman and Her Children?

http://www.restoringthevision.com/Ch12RtheV.htm

Like he said... i think this is the key to the Rapture...ive been studying this for two years now and i still dont have it all understood. I do agree with at least 95% of what this guy has to say but not all. As im still studying it

God Bless

AJ

 

aj,

The article at the site you have pointed out  is well presented and very good.  This person connects scripture to scripture in a carefully thought out and meticulous way, I enjoyed reading it.

The conclusion, that the first fruits are raptured, before the main harvest is what creates a problem for all postisions;

The pre tribbers will accuse God, of being unfair and unjust if any believers are left to go thru the Great Tribulation, so they place a rapture before, even the signs, which are given to believers as a source of comfort, while the Mid Tribbers reject a the pre trib rapture, they also teach the marriage union of the church to Christ during the Great Tribulation which we agree is the last half of the tribulation period, while pre wrath futurists reject both because it excludes what are clearly members of the church the body of Christ, as being excluded from the union to Christ, for that reason the rapture taught by both camps is not viewed as what is taught in scripture;

And that is that all who belong to Christ are members of the church and more particular members of His body.

And if being made perfect means being united with Christ, then how does one reconcile, the scriptures, more particular;

Heb 11
40  ....................That they without us should not be made perfect.

speaking of all the men of FAITH listed in this chapter at Heb 11??


It actually brings me back to my core questions which I have been asking from the very begining of Paul2's thread on the pre trib rapture.

Who are the called chosen elect saints?? and

Are these, members of the church or not??


If not what scriptures can anyone post which proves they are not??

As you can see if you go back to the begining of Paul2's thread, this has never been addressed, a feeble attempt was made at one point, but beyond that no effort has been made to reconcile any ideas, thoughts or theories to the pre trib position.

At one point their misunderstanding of Rev 12, to mean national Israel, brought the discussion to a standstill.

I agree with most everything this person who wrote the article stated, and I really appreciate the scriptures he ties together solidly, however, identifying who the members of the church are is of the utmost importance before rendering a conclusion who is and isn't left out of the wedding union, and when it occurs.

The rapture will not precede the signs given at 2 Th 2:3, and neither will it be after pouring out of Gods Wrath upon the earth.

This article reminded of two things,

1.  That Jesus reminded the apostles while discoursing with them at the mount of olives (Mat 24), that  "there shall not an hair of your head perish." Lk 21:18

Yet all of them were martyred for their FAITH in HIM.

and;

2.  That Gods will is that none perish, but that all should come to repentance...........

Some of us Christians, seem to believe God says we will not go through tribulation, nor Satans wrath, which is clear some of  the saints will experience that wrath during the tribulation,
pre tribbers even accusing God, of being a butcher, (as some have of the other thread) for putting NT saints thru tribulation.

I think what they are really offended at, is the idea that they may have to experience the great tribulation, it doesn't seem to matter to them, some of the brethern will, after all they will be happily attending a wedding ceremony, while other saints are on the earth running and hiding for their lives.

Any scriptures which will help this thread along are welcome.

ut please no more theories.


Blessings,

Petro




I would

paul

you  have done some great work. thanks

petro
    i'm open to what your saying, your makeing me dig deeper into this, wich is good.  

butcha,

Great, that is my objective.

I have an answer but, being an ole hand at poker in my days before being saved, there are certain things that one retains in his thinking, I never reveal my hand, until it is time, and no one can force it either, I played this game before.

At the appointed time I will share where I stand, I am looking for answers to questions presently to establish FACTS.  And there is a good possibility, I may not even have to, since the horse will always drinks water, when led to it with patience.

It is not issue should not be theory against theory, it is a theory against Gods Word, as I see it.

Let's disprove one at a time, not match them up, and then start argueing about the theories.

It is silly to want to compare my theory against yours, there are to many theories out there already.

We need to weed out the obvious erroneous ones first.

Don't you think??


Blessings,

Petro

[Apantesis]

posted by paul2,
Petro,

I used Scripture to make my case against your pre-Wrath theory which you conceal.

paul2,

The scriptures you used, you had to twist, stretch and re-interpret, how does that make your theory right??

I wouldn't brag about it.

You don't have the answers. You don't "put forth theories with holes in them", you believe a theory with holes in it! I've shown you the holes which you've chosen to ignore. You don't seem to have an answer to when the Wrath of God found in the 7 vials take their effect on the earth in relation to the timing of the Rapture and the Second Coming and Daniel's 70th week. I've used Scripture to prove my point. Not fast and loose, I just used Scripture to prove that your theory is not possible. You have offered no other explaination.

You have lost sight of  your purpose for posting this thread, you have almost become rabid about this issue, you need to take a few steps back, and take a deep breath, an  consider what has been said, to you,  ............you have become  mesmerized by your writings, as though they are become inspired.  

Are you sure you are not trying to convince anyone about your theory??

Relax,it is clear, you are trying to convince us of your theory ,it won't happen, unless you first begin by  reconciling the errors you embrace, contrary to scritural teaching,  you can't disregard the truth of Gods word forever concerning this matter, and still expect to have followers.....

Is  the "falling away" the great apostasy or is it as you state, the rapture??

Is the word "meet", apatensis,  in 1 Th 4:17, defined as a turning back into the heavenlies for 7 years, as you have re interpreted it to mean, or  is it "as defined by biblical scholars and Gods inspired Word??

 Apantesis[/i] is used is in John 12:12-13. (Note, some Greek manuscripts show a one letter difference between this word and the one used in I Thes.4:17. The difference is in the first letter #5222, hupantesis,  which is why it is not shown as being the same word in Strong's Concordance .

However, the Nestle text of the Greek shows it as the same word.

You and others may be unaware of this, this is why, you miss this VERY important point.

I am not trying to confuse you or your friends; thou you may NOT believe this to be so, (but rather, I am attempting to  connect dots for you. Since it is clear to me, you have no interest in addressing the truth of these hard questions, I have shared with you).

Verses 12-13 in John chapter 12 reads as follows:

The next day the great crowd that had come for the feast heard that Jesus was on His way to Jerusalem. They took palm branches and went out to meet [apantesis] him shouting "Hosanna:"......

After meeting Him, where did they all go??  

Did they return with Him, back where He came from??

This may shock you, but the answer is NO,  He (Jesus) entered the city, followed by the crowd, His entrance into the City is fulfillment of Zechariah 9:9 and is also a picture of His future entrance  into the City of  Jerusalem in triumph as King over all the earth, at His Second Coming. (Zec 14:9)

I can't help it if you haven't considered any of this, while fabricating your theory and whether you except this or not, does not matter to me, but this is truth.
 
Now, Note verses 15-18;

Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass's colt.
These things understood not his disciples at the first: but when Jesus was glorified, then remembered they that these things were written of him, and that they had done these things unto him.
The people therefore that was with him when he called Lazarus out of his grave, and raised him from the dead, bare record.
For this cause the people also met him, for that they heard that he had done this miracle.

posted by paul2 as the opening line on this theory thread;

First let me say I'm not trying to convince you personally.

Yaa, I here you....................but

I think, you are trying to make me believe what you do, and
since I don't swoon and fall at your feet,  .........this is what is so frusterating for you...........sorry charlie,

I can see the deception in the words you began this thread with.  Now

Blessings

Petro

[butcha]

petro
the pretrib. comeing of christ isnt litteral . 1 thess 4;16-17/ cor. 15;51-58.the second comeing is after the rapture and the 7 yr. trib matt 24;30 / rev. 19;11-21
                                   
                       you both are very intence its great
                                     
                                           butcha

Hello buthcha,

You have stated correct, the second coming of Jesus, does follow the rapture.

It is your insertion of a 7 year period, that does butcha the word.

The Bbile does not teach that, point at all........you will never find 7 years between a rapture and the Lords return in scriture,  ..........that is the point I am making.....

That is why Paul2 is wrong,  unfortunately, the books popularized by Tim La Haye, are uninspiured, this is one of the primary reasons why the rapture has gained such popurlarity and attention these days these days.

There is no evidence their is a rapture seven years before the Lords coming, this is the error being perpetuated by the pre trib theory..... but hey, we are in the last days, it shouldn't surprise Christians, that all sorts of theories and ideas will be put forth, to distract Christians from what they ought to be doing in the end times,  there is an apostasy, followed by the revelation of the man of sin, then comes the rapture.................this by itself should raise red flags to christians, since the pre trib theory, have the rapture preceding all other signs....go figure?

Thanks for the fishing invite, but sitting in a boat packed like cattle is not my idea of having fun,  walking a stream and fly fishings in the Hi Sierras ............. now, that gets me excited.


Blessings,

Petro

raphu,

I gues I don't see, her making the connection between Christ and ephraim as a type of Christ, I see this made clearly in King David, I guess, this something to consider further.



Blessings,

Petro

everyday newborn,

If by saving faith you mean having the faith to believe in him and accept him, yes that was my faith because it was my choice to choose him or not. Did he give you the faith to believe in him? If so then there is no free will

So you do admit, you conjured up saving faith.

This my friend is the error....man always confesses with his mouth what he believes in his heart.

A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.

As someone has said, God who knows the heart, will sort this out at a future date, since you believed, it is clear why, you have this desire to continue doing (keeping commandments or doing good works), lest you lose what you obatined by your doing.

The flesh profiteth nothing, it is the spirit that giveth life.

..........it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.

For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

petro said;
Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another. (1Jhn 3:9-11.)

I suppose you would take issue with verse 9.........
everyday answered;

everyday replied;
No I wouldn't actually. The difference between you and I is the free will involved.

Well this then is the difference between day and night, unfortunately dead men do not possess free will, maybe you really were not that dead spiritually ..............huh??

Somehow you equate physical life with spiritual life, this is false.....perhaps if you considered what scripture says, you might come to a biblical understanding of this matter.

And you hath he made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins:
Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
Even when we were dead in sins, hath hath made us alive together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)

I assume you know these verses I have given you.

Concenring John 10:27-30, you said;

I do believe him, cause in vs. 27 he is speaking about those that follow him.

It sounds to me as thou you believe others above Jesus, own words, believing Him, only when it is convenient.







Blessings,
Petro

PS                      Paul2,

It matters little if you start another thread on this same subject, the same questions I have posed will need to be addressed, sooner or later.

Otherwise the end result of your conclusions will be incomplete..

So you simply will find yourself at sqaure one.


Period.........


Blessings,

Petro

Paul2,


I say keep waiting!

You have refused to asnwer issues raised by me, from the very begining.

It is now clear to me, your invitation for input  by anyone, was only a come on, in an attempt of advancing your  teaching.


You really had no intentions of having your theory tested, at all.

Well, I hate to tell you, your theory has not passed muster.

Good luck, selling it.....to others.


Blessings..



Petro

[not]

eddielee,

I have one thing to say concerning your statement;

posted by eddielee at reply #09

There are people who are neither saved nor taken by the mark of the beast throughout all of it;

It is understood, that those who have not received the mark of the beast where not deceived by the false prophet.

I don't buy the idea, that anyone who has not been decieved neither has received the mark of the beast, will perish, however, if this were so, this may very well explain why, the Everlasting Gospel is preached by the angels at the end.

Deception by nature has to sow sin, which brings on death, so it is insufficient to say, the undeceived will perish, the Judge of all the earth, will do right, and only those who have rejected His Words will perish;

God desires one be hot or cold not lukewarm, only He knows the hearts of those He saves, and those who are chosen, have their names written in the Book of Life.

 
 Blessings,

Petro

[pre-tribulation rapture]

paul2 repliy #324

Petro,

LOL, you can call me anything you want, doesn't mean its true.

Back to attacking my interpretation again I see.

Your interpretation Paul on the pre-tribulation rapture is wrong because it is founded on the premise, that there is a secret coming of Jesus 7 years before He returns to establish His Kingdom on this earth.

You are only fooling yourself, and whoever else believes your rendition of this important account given by two men, in white apparel; at Acts 2:10-11.

The chief verse you rely on for this mis-interpretation is ;

1 Th 4
17  Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

Your distorted interpretation of the word meet, prevents you from seeing and understanding the significance of this word in being able to set the end times eschatological prophecies in some semblance of order.

As I stated before you have been swept off your feet, with your theory, which is founded on Margaret MacDonald's prophecy of 1830, ultimately embraced as "Millenial Dawnism" by the watchtower society, and a refusal to address serious errors, in your mis-interpretation and twisting of words, critical to the understanding and studying of such a hard subject of which Jesus himself, said;

But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.   Mat 24:30-36.

Clearly Jesus is speaking of His personal and visible return to earth, at the end days, when He comes with ALL HIS SAINTS 1 Th 3:13.

According to your theory, you would have us believe, you know when that day, will come contrary to Christs own words.

I have pointed out to you, that the word meet at  1 Th 4:17, is the Greek word apantesis Strongs #529, which is used only 4 times in the entire NT.

This word is not only rejects your understanding of themeaning of this word, but your understanding actually distorts it, to state that after this meeting in the air with Jesus, both Jesus and those whom He met in the air will return back to heaven is no0t indicated because of the Greek definition and meaning of this very word, and of course from this point onward, you create your scenario of a 7 year period of absence of the Holy Spirit upon the earth, while the wrath of God, which you define as great tribulation, ending upon Jesus second coming.

Contrary to the language of this verse, you build a theory , not based on plain scriptural understanding, but on a private understanding only you possess;  we do not have a time signal in this passage, telling us that this occurs seven years before Christ sets foot on the Earth.
 
Nor do we have any indication as to where our destination is, in English. It just simply states,  that we will meet Christ in the air. It is certain that we do not stay suspended in space; we have to be going somewhere.

However the Greek word meet describes exactly what occurs after the meeting in the air;
We don't have to twist the word to make it fit, our understanding of the text.

This word as I previously pointed out, appears in only 4 in verses of the NT.

It is only used to describe one certain situation. In all three of its usages in the other NT verses, and it is used in a specific way.

The first time apantesis (meet) occurs is in Matt 25:1 & 6.
At verse 1, the full extent of this word is not made clear, but the next two uses of this word, leave no doubt to the reader, what is in view concerning the use of this word.

Note:
 
Matt. 25:6 "At midnight the cry rang out: 'Here's the bridegroom! Come out to MEET (apantesis) him!'
Here, in the parable of the 10 Virgins, is the first occurence of the word, apantesis.    The 10, not knowing when the Bridegroom is coming, go out to meet him. They know he is coming, but not when. They bring lamps, and 5 bring oil. When the cry comes that the Groom is coming, 5 are ready to meet him, and go to meet him, and accompany him back to the house of his bride. The Groom approached the house of the Bride, the virgins went out to meet him, and then returned with the Groom as he continued on his journey to the bride's home. In this event, notice that it is the virgins who turn around, not the groom. They go out to MEET (apantesis) the groom, turn around, and go back to where they came from. The groom does not turn around and go back to his home, having as his companions the five wise virgins.

This is a favorite verse of pre tribbers, isn't it.

He is met by the five wise virgins, who turn around and accompany him to the home of the Bride.

In your theory, you do butcher this word.....by claiming the Lord returns back where He came from, after having met, Christians in the air at 1 Th 4:17.

This is error, pure and simple..

The second occurence of the word apantesis come in Acts 28:15.

Acts 28:15 The brothers there had heard that we were coming, and they traveled as far as the Forum of Appius and the Three Taverns to MEET (apantesis) us.
In this passage we understand;

 Paul is being sent, as a prisoner to Rome. He is under guard. Christian brothers in Rome who know of Paul hear about his imminent coming to Rome, and go out on the road of Paul's approach to meet him. When they meet Paul at the Forum, they rejoice with him, and then turn around and accompany Paul back to Rome.

This is the second time MEET (apantesis) is used, and the second time that it shows those who go out to meet someone,  then turn around and accompany that person on their journey to his intended destination.

For your information , Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, p. 402, (Nelson, 1985) has this to say about the word apantesis:

"It is used in the papyri of a newly arriving magistrate. "    (It seems that the special idea of the word was the official welcome of a newly arrived dignitary) (Moulton, Greek Test. Gram. Vol. I, p. 14)"


This example of what I have written herein, is used to point out a major foundational error in your theory, of a pre-tribulation rapture.

Proper use and understanding of the Greek word apantesis, demands an explanation, of your mis-understanding of this word, which is diferent from that of expositiors.

Unitl you address this inconsistency of your mis-interpretation of this word which leads to your understanding of an pre-tribulation rapture, you have nothing to crow about, much less call forth  other theories, which may be examined in the lite of your distorted understanding of these ends times prophecies by Daniel or any other prophets.

No offense to you personally, it is your theory I take issue with, and only by defending something which is clearly erroneouness,  you have turned this into a personal matter.

Instead of being offended that Gods Word is herein violated by your theory, you are offended by hard to answer questions posed to you, which you cannot defend, thereby making it clear you are not interested in seeking out the truth of Gods word, at all but, advancing your own agenda on this pre trib theory.

Thanks but NO thanks...............

Blessings,

Petro

Amen Little John  ................Amen..


Blessings,
Petro

Amen Little John  ................Amen..


Blessings,
Petro