The End Of The World

Dedicated to the scholarly study of the bible as text and the discussion thereof

Moderator: Moderators

DavidLeon
Under Probation
Posts: 701
Joined: Sat May 23, 2020 12:07 pm
Has thanked: 50 times
Been thanked: 31 times

The End Of The World

Post #1

Post by DavidLeon »

Some Bible critics think the Bible says that the end would come within the lifetime of Jesus' listeners. I will demonstrate why this is not the case by explaining the verses they use to conclude this. They mistake the transfiguration, the destruction of Jerusalem, Jesus being at the right hand of power, and John's Revelation at Patmos.

Matthew 16:28 - Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. (Also see Mark 9:1 / Luke 9:27)

The Interpreter's Bible says: "The prediction was not fulfilled, and later Christians found it necessary to explain that it was metaphorical."

What believers and skeptics alike seem to have glossed over is the fact that in the very next verse Matthew reveals that just 6 days later this prophecy was fulfilled. Peter, James and John witnessed the transfiguration. (Matthew 17:1-2; Luke 9:27-36; 2 Peter 1:16-18)

Matthew 23:36 - Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. (Also see Matthew 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32)

All of the above verses differ from the verses given in consideration of Matthew 16:28. British scholar G. R. Beasley-Murray: "The phrase 'this generation' should cause no difficulty for interpreters. While admittedly genea in earlier Greek meant birth, progeny, and so race, . . . in the [Greek Septuagint] it most frequently translated the Hebrew term dor, meaning age, age of humankind, or generation in the sense of contemporaries. . . . In sayings attributed to Jesus the term appears to have a twofold connotation: on the one hand it always signifies his contemporaries, and on the other hand it always carries an implicit criticism."

So Jesus could have been directing that statement to the Jewish opposition there around him at that time, who, within a generation would see the destruction of Jerusalem in 66 - 70 C.E. by Titus, the son of Emperor Vespasian where 1,100,000 Jews died and 97,000 were taken captive, most of whom died horrible deaths and the Christians who knew it would come were saved. (Matthew 24:16, 22) And Jesus may have been applying the same to those in opposition in the future as well.

Matthew 26:64 and Mark 14:62 are parallel accounts to one another and you won't have to wait or look far to see them fulfilled. Acts 7:55-56: "But he, being full of holy spirit gazed into heaven and caught sight of God's glory and of Jesus standing at God's right hand, and he said: "Look! I behold the heavens opened up and the Son of man standing at God's right hand." Also see Psalm 110:1; Luke 22:69; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1.

John 21:20-23 is somewhat interesting. Jesus may have been telling Peter that John would live longer than him, and in fact John would live 70 years, but more likely he might have been referring to the prophetic vision that John was given at the end of his life while in exile on the island of Patmos. As recorded in the book of Revelation John was transported to "the Lords day." (Revelation 1:1, 10; Revelation 22:20)

Was The End Meant To Come Within The Lifetime Of The New Testament Authors.

Jesus taught his followers that no one, not even Jesus himself, knew the time of the end of the world. (Matthew 24:36; Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7)

Also at this point some clarification should be made as to what exactly is the "end of the world." The Bible says that Earth was given to man for him to fill and subdue it, that the meek will inherit the earth and live forever upon it, and that it will last forever. (Genesis 1:28; Psalm 37:29; 115:16; Ecclesiastes 1:4) The end of the world is the end of the present system of things and all that involves. Of Satan's influence and sin, which, upon conclusion, brings much destruction, but when ended, allows peace.

1 Corinthians 1:7-8; 7:29; Philippians 1:10 all convey the importance of the missionary work in the early stages of Christianity. They all had important work to do before the end of their lives. Nowhere in any of these passages is it conveyed that they expected the end of the system of things to occur during that time.

1 Thessalonians 4:17 is often used to support the rapture, but actually it is referring to some who were mourning the death of their fellow Christians. Paul was reminding them as well as faithful Christians in the future of the resurrection hope, some to heaven immediately upon death and some to paradise earth upon resurrection.

1 Thessalonians 5:23 refers to the presence of Jesus Christ. The Greek noun parousia is used. It means "being alongside." In his work on The Parousia, Israel P. Warren, D.D., wrote: "Had our translators done with this technical word 'parousia' as they did with 'baptisma,' - transferring it unchanged, - or if translated using its exact etymological equivalent, presence, and had it been well understood, as it then would have been, that there is no such thing as a 'Second Presence,' I believe that the entire doctrine would have been different from what it now is. The phrases, 'second advent,' and 'second coming,' would never have been heard of. The church would have been taught to speak of The Presence Of The Lord, as that from which its hopes were to be realized, whether in the near future or at the remotest period, - that under which the world was to be made new, a resurrection both spiritual and corporeal should be attained, and justice and everlasting awards administered."

The word occurs 24 times in the Christian Greek scripture: Matthew 24:3, 27, 37, 39; 1 Corinthians 15:23; 16:17; 2 Corinthians 7:6, 7; 10:10; Philippians 1:26; 2:12; 1 Thessalonians 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; 2 Thessalonians 2:1, 8, 9; James 5:7, 8; 2 Peter 1:16; 3:4, 12; 1 John 2:28.

Pareimi is a related verb with the similar meaning of being present. It also occurs 24 times in the Christian Greek scripture: Matthew 26:50; Luke 13:1; John 7:6; 11:28; Acts 10:21, 33; 12:20; 17:6; 24:19; Acts 12:20; 1 Corinthians 5:3, 3; 2 Corinthians 10:2, 11; 2 Corinthians 11:9; 13:2, 10; Galatians 4:18, 20; Colossians 1:6; Hebrews 12:11; 13:5; 2 Peter 1:9, 12; Revelation 17:8.

The Greek word, eleusis (Latin adventu), which conveys the physical act of coming is different and only occurs once in the Christian Greek scripture, at Acts 7:52. Paul was encouraging those with a heavenly hope to remain blameless until their death, or the conclusion of the system of things and the presence, not the physical presence, of Jesus Christ.

In discussing Hebrews 1:2; 9:26; 1 Peter 1:20; 4:7 it is somewhat difficult to stay on topic of the so called end of the world because the last days that Paul was referring to were not the last days of the present system of things, but rather the last days of the Jewish system of things. Jehovah had given the prophecy of those days 850 years earlier. (Joel 2:28-32; Acts 2:16-21; Hebrews 1:1-2) It was the end of God's favor upon the Jewish congregation and the beginning of his favor for the new Christian congregation.

1 John 2:18 refers to the end of the apostolic period. The work mentioned as important in the scriptures at the beginning of this article were near completion and would conclude upon the death of John shortly after he completed the writing of Revelation.

It is interesting that, as with the case of Philippians 4:5, the Lord that is being referred to isn't Jesus Christ but rather, Jehovah. Codex Sinaiticus, Greek, fourth century C.E., Codex Alexandrinus, Greek, fifth century C.E., Vatican ms 1209, Greek, fourth century C.E., Christian Greek Scriptures in 12 languages, including Hebrew, by Elias Hutter, Nuremberg, 1599, Christian Greek Scriptures, Hebrew, by William Robertson, London, 1661, and the Latin Vulgate, by Jerome, c. 400 C.E. (Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem) all read Jehovah.

James 5:7-8 is talking about the presence (parousia) mentioned earlier in this article.

At Hebrews 10:37 Paul quotes Habakkuk 2:2-3 from the Greek Septuagint, which reads "And the Lord answered [me] and said: Write a vision; write it distinctly in a book that the reader may trace these things [may run]; for the vision is for a time yet to come. But it will spring up at last and will not be vain. Though he may tarry, wait for him; for he will assuredly come and will not fail [and will not tarry]."

Revelation 1:1, 3; 3:11; 22:7, 12, 20 may undoubtedly amuse the skeptic, who, of course, is familiar with the Biblical fact that a thousand years are as a watch in the night to God (Psalm 90:4), but to the writers of the Bible, especially John when writing Revelation and who would die shortly afterward, the resurrection hope would follow sleep in death which would seem, upon that resurrection, as the same day as they died, though it actually had been thousands of years.
I no longer post here

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 18123
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 437 times
Been thanked: 669 times
Contact:

Re: The End Of The World

Post #11

Post by JehovahsWitness »

elphidium55 wrote: Sun Jun 07, 2020 12:25 am
That a day is like a thousand years with God is a latter cop-out.



A cop out a cop out is a poor excuse for not doing something; Slang : A failure to fulfill a commitment or responsibility or to face a difficulty squarely.
Here you imply the theological idea of relativity is not only scripturally problematic* but evasive but I am at a loss to see why. Perhaps you can explain what issue is being avoided by referencing to this biblical truism.


* I presume since we are in a bible study subforum you are assuming there is something scripturally problematic /evasive and not just problematic for an atheist to believe or accept as true (which is totally irrelevant)
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 18123
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 437 times
Been thanked: 669 times
Contact:

Re: The End Of The World

Post #12

Post by JehovahsWitness »

TO CONCLUDE
elphidium55 wrote: Sun Jun 07, 2020 12:25 amKingdom was a mystery that would happen soon but which were non-commital as to it's exact timing
which were non-commital as to it's exact timing more garbled English which actually conveys little. Perhaps less verbiage would help clarify the thought . Possibly you want to say "the bible writers did not say/know when the kingdom would come" ...? But like the human appendix this might be a case of a sentence that should be viewed as redundant awaiting the discovery of its true function.




JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

DavidLeon
Under Probation
Posts: 701
Joined: Sat May 23, 2020 12:07 pm
Has thanked: 50 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: The End Of The World

Post #13

Post by DavidLeon »

Difflugia wrote: Sun Jun 07, 2020 2:13 pmIf you don't mind me asking, what kind of discussion are you looking to have with these "Bible Study" posts? Each of the ones you've made so far has essentially been an apologetic dissertation about why a topic should be interpreted with a particular kind of literalism, but you're not posting in "Christianity & Apologetics" nor are you actually asking a debate question. In the post above, every single sentence is, to put it mildly, arguable. None of them is self-evident from the Bible and you haven't offered any justification of any of them. Is that what you want to discuss? Or are you looking for a structured Bible study where everyone agrees to a certain set of premises and you're laying out what those are? Is it something else and I'm missing the point entirely?
I don't mind at all. In fact, thank you for the feedback, questions and constructive criticism. These posts are what I think the Bible means, presented by me for discussion and comparison. Everything is arguable. I've been debating with theists and atheists alike online since 1996 and though I've learned a great deal from it and I still enjoy it it isn't my primary focus. Also during that 23 year period I've avoided any semblance of a formal debate like the plague because I see it as too restrictive for my personal tastes. My idea of a debate is state your case, someone argues that, you argue back. Simple. In the Christianity & Apologetic forum the Bible has no authority. In Theology, Doctrine & Dogma it does. That makes no sense to me. I should be polite, stating my case as opinion, but opinion has no authority either. If I have to think that much about what I'm going to say I'm not likely to say anything in a debate because any of these rules can be weaponized against me and just get in the way of what I have to say. If I say, for example, the soul according to the Bible is mortal; it dies; it can be destroyed and I cite Ezekiel 18:4; Matthew 10:28 that means nothing. If I say it's my opinion then the fact that millions of Christians, including respected theologians disagree, then me and the Bible lose the debate. The Bible can be interpreted any way. If that's your thing I say enjoy yourself and from time to time I may step in when I see something that interests me, but my participation will likely be sparse.
Difflugia wrote: Sun Jun 07, 2020 2:13 pmYour theology so far has aligned with that of Jehovah's Witnesses and you've said that you like the NWT. I'm not assuming that you're a baptized Witness or anything, but I am guessing that you're familiar with their Bible studies and that might be sort of what you're going for. Witness Bible studies are generally far too scripted for something similar to unfold organically unless everyone involved has participated in enough such studies to be able to intuit how it might go. If that's what you're looking for, there are enough Witnesses that are regular posters here that you might be able to get that if you let them (and us) know up front that that's what you're after. I'm not looking to rain on your parade if that's what you want and though I can't speak for otseng, I would imagine a subforum that nobody's posted to in four years is probably a fine place to have it.
When I was 4 or 5 years old my parents listened to vinyl records. I started listening to them and wondered if I could do it, so I imitated the singers thinking if I did it like they did I must be doing it right. I don't like to sing in front of people but when I do jaws drop. Over time George Jones, Charley Pride, Buck Owens, Waylon Jennings, Bob Dylan, Steven Stills, Paul Rodgers, Robert Plant, Rob Halford, Steven Tyler, Eddie Vedder, Wayne Staley, Scott Weiland, Chris Cornell pretty much anyone. About that same time, 4 or 5, I had a book called Danny And The Dinosaur. I would make my grandmother read it over and over. When she started getting bored with it I had her put her fingers under the words and taught myself to read.

By the time I was 6 my dad had filled my head with political nonsense. The rich are evil and the poor are good. He and my mother had both been raised in abject poverty. But since then he had become well off. Still seeing himself as poor with the nonsensical idea that the Democrats are for the poor and the Republicans for the rich. In his mind he was still poor but he had, in reality a contempt for the poor and hatred for the rich. I quickly saw through this. The Democrats and Republicans were both for the rich.

I hated school. Arbitrary dogma, state sponsored propaganda, ideological possession peddled by underpaid egomaniacs. Babysitters in the guise of instructors with an academic agenda to dumb us down making obedient workers. I would tell them what they wanted to hear. At least enough to ensure I wouldn't have to repeat a year. Huddled in the back of the class with a good book. Douglas Adams, Frank Herbert, Rudyard Kipling, J.R.R. Tolkien, American History, Jack London, etc.

When I was, I don't know, 7, 8, 9, or 10 a kind elderly Jehovah's Witness came to the house and I overheard her sitting on the couch telling my mother about Jesus resurrection. I had no idea about such things but when she told my mom that Jesus was resurrected I pointed out that it couldn't have been Jesus' body because you can't sacrifice something then take it back. She argued with me but later the Jehovah's Witnesses changed their thinking.

When I was 9 I got a paper route and quickly tripled subscription. I found very little use of money and would burn checks for $10 to $60 dollars because it was too much of a hassle to take them to the bank and cash them.

I taught myself to play the drums, I taught myself HTML and web design, I taught myself the Bible from the Watchtower literature that my mom never read. I was an avid reader and over the years I had dug it out of the trash, a drawer or in back of the closet thinking someday I would read it. As an unbeliever at the age of 27 I did start reading the NWT comparing it with the KJV which I had also purloined. Within a year or so I had read pretty much all of the Watchtower literature going back to 1955 including the 749 page history of the Watchtower, their Proclaimers book, when the Society was admonishing JW's for not taking more of an interest in it. I have several of their CD Libraries and use them as my primary reference. I've studied with them on two occasions and trust them more than any other resource because they had a small army of volunteer researchers who gather data without or by acknowledging the pagan influence and traditional nonsense. Though I don't agree with all of it, especially when they insert themselves into prophecy or in the past changing policies on neutrality, higher education, vaccinations, organ transplants and blood transfusions. Interpreting the arrest of Rutherford (if I remember correctly) and a few others as the 2 witnesses in the book of Revelation, etc.

The result is I do things my own way but often come off as odd. It isn't very original but what is? especially as far as Bible discussion. My grammar is atrocious and every post I make I read and reread, always finding multiple mistakes. I'm not concerned about that, though, because I learn what is of interest to me without a hint of group think.
Difflugia wrote: Sun Jun 07, 2020 2:13 pmOn the other hand, if you're looking to have a debate with people that disagree with you, I have two bits of advice:

First, if any of your posts were intended as debate starters, the topics are just massively overbroad. Pretty much any sentence above would in itself make a good question for a C&A debate ("What does Luke 23:43 mean?" or "Does the Bible say that when you die, you are no longer conscious?").

Second, it looks to me that you've been reading and internalizing things that rhetorically state their interpretive claims as self-evident or established fact, while dismissing alternate viewpoints as irrelelevant. I offer the suggestion that you consciously try to avoid that yourself. There are already those here that take that tack and it's certainly not against the rules or anything, but if you do, I think you'll just find yourself having the same conversations over and over. That's certainly a comforting way to do things, but based on some of what you've written, that doesn't seem like what you're ultimately chasing. Then again, maybe I'm just projecting.
That's one way to look at it. I'm not necessarily interested in debate because I have had the same conversations over and over. I take a great interest in alternate viewpoints but I've heard it all before. Debate, I think, is a product of ego, an art form. I've lost debates where I was right and won debates where I was wrong. My posts are for people to read if they are interested and then hopefully inspired to give their own take.
I no longer post here

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 18123
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 437 times
Been thanked: 669 times
Contact:

Re: The End Of The World

Post #14

Post by JehovahsWitness »

Duplicate *** sorry***
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
elphidium55
Student
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:37 pm
Location: Champaign, IL
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: The End Of The World

Post #15

Post by elphidium55 »

@JehovahsWittness asks that I define the following:
first one would have to establish what "the kingdom" is
then in what sense it was "to come"
then one would have to establish that Matthew 16:28 refers specifically to (i) and (ii)
[ie. the two statements above, annotation by @elphidium55]

to which I (@elphidium55) respond:
Perhaps my assumption that the gospel idea of "the coming of the kingdom" was understood in the same way by both of us was unwarranted. I guess I need to spell this out so we are not talking past one another.

By the "coming of the kingdom," I mean the new reality that Jesus, upon his return, will usher in. Jesus' "second coming" will be what inaugurates this kingdom.

The statement in Matthew 16:28 that "There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the son of man coming in his kingdom" seems a straightforward reference to this "second coming." I find it hard to believe you think otherwise.

@JehovahsWittness, you seem to be saying that sometimes the bible writers were conveying their own thoughts rather than the ideas that Jesus actually intended. If so, then we agree. I think the gospel writers "put words in Jesus' mouth," you think the gospel writers "put words in Jesus' mouth." Now we just need to figure out how much is Jesus and how much is the gospel writers.

Of course, this might be problem for Christians with a high view of scripture. Saying that the words of Jesus in the gospels are mostly his words is like a married man saying that he's been mostly faithful to his wife.

@JehovahsWittness also states that:
Everything is relative, so "soon" for a black hole might be viewed as an eternity for a fruitfly.
The "soon" of which the gospel writers are referring to is relative to the span of a human lifetime. What else could Matthew 16:28 "There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the son of man coming in his kingdom" mean? Given this verse, it seems ridiculous to think that the writer might have meant "soon" in a cosmological time scale sense. As my father might have said, "What part of "soon" don't we understand?"

As to your question of which scripture do I cite to backup my statement that ...
"this is the "soon" of which many current Christians speak. It's just not the "soon" of which Jesus, as conveyed by the gospels, spoke.
Why, I cite Matthew 16:28, of course. You know – the verse we've been talking about.

DavidLeon
Under Probation
Posts: 701
Joined: Sat May 23, 2020 12:07 pm
Has thanked: 50 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: The End Of The World

Post #16

Post by DavidLeon »

elphidium55 wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:08 pm I cite Matthew 16:28, of course. You know – the verse we've been talking about.
Which the OP addressed: What believers and skeptics alike seem to have glossed over is the fact that in the very next verse Matthew reveals that just 6 days later this prophecy was fulfilled. Peter, James and John witnessed the transfiguration. (Matthew 17:1-2; Luke 9:27-36; 2 Peter 1:16-18)

One step of the coming of the Kingdom was Jesus' baptism, another, referred to in Matthew 16:28, was the transfiguration mentioned above.
I no longer post here

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 18123
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 437 times
Been thanked: 669 times
Contact:

Re: The End Of The World

Post #17

Post by JehovahsWitness »

Your Comment :
elphidium55 wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:08 pm
@JehovahsWittness, you seem to be saying that sometimes the bible writers were conveying their own thoughts rather than the ideas that Jesus actually intended.

MY RESPONSE : No ,if you read carefully I said {quote} the gospel writers and/or the individuals described in the gospels are depicted as ...believing "the Second Coming" was imminent (in the lifetime of the disciples that were alive at the time of Christ). There is biblically a difference between the imperfect perception of individuals (even if they were Apostles or bible writers) and the written biblical record which is presented as being the inspired thoughts of God.


To illustrate: The Apostles (arguably including "the gospel writers" Matthew and John) are depicted as asking Jesus if he was going to establish the kingdom "at this [1st century] time". Evidently then were expecting the Messianic promises to be fulfilled at that time. Jesus however corrected their wrong understanding. It seems from Paul's writings that not all Christians at the time fully understood what Jesus taught in this regard.
Thus what X or Y believed may not harmonize with what Jesus intended to be understood.
I wonder however what the significance of this might be since it doesn't mean that JESUS intended such an idea or that his (Jesus) words as recorded in scripture should thus be understood.

Hope that clarifies my point,



JW
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Wed Jun 10, 2020 1:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 18123
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 437 times
Been thanked: 669 times
Contact:

Re: The End Of The World

Post #18

Post by JehovahsWitness »

elphidium55 wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:08 pm I think the gospel writers "put words in Jesus' mouth,"...


Intersting. Now since this is a bible study subforum your job would be to prove that from scripture.


JW

ps: I thank you not to tell me what I think, I am well able to post what I think without your help.
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Wed Jun 10, 2020 1:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 18123
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 437 times
Been thanked: 669 times
Contact:

Re: The End Of The World

Post #19

Post by JehovahsWitness »

elphidium55 wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:08 pm
The "soon" of which the gospel writers are referring to is relative to the span of a human lifetime.
Interesting theory. I look forward to your attempting to support this position.



elphidium55 wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:08 pm
... I cite Matthew 16:28, of course. You know – the verse we've been talking about.
"this is the "soon" of which many current Christians speak. It's just not the "soon" of which Jesus, as conveyed by the gospels, spoke.

Matthew 16:28 doesn't have the word "soon" in it. When I asked for a reference I was asking what the source scripture was. If we are going to analyze how the word "soon" is used in scripture we will have to first need to see the word "soon" used in scripture.


You do realize this is a bible study subforum right?




JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

Post Reply