It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Some serious theological problems with the Christian religion

page: 21
22
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 07:15 PM
link   
a reply to: [post=20975303]Matrixsurvivor[/pos


The whole Christian religion is built on "Paul's gospel". Every Christian tries to explain Jesus through the lense of a false apostle and YHWH.

That statement is not true at all. Christianity as you know it was devised by the Roman organizations and are simply offshoots of the perversions who claim the title of Christianity. These many offshoots or denominations who mention Jesus are almost all not Christians whatsoever. Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, Islam and most other splinter groups are not Christian.

The synagogue of James was established almost immediately in the upper room while Saul/Paul was still gathering and imprisoning the Jesus people. Paul had nothing to do with the first Nazarene movement and for well over five years was not even remotely connected to the synagogue of James. In fact Saul/Paul was an outspoken enemy of James and was also involved in the beating of James and left James for dead.

Paul had contact with certain Apostles long after his conversion and did not adhere to the liturgy of James. In other words James was not Paul's boss (so to speak). Paul had an entirely different approach to teaching the heathens than did James and had to have that approach because he was teaching an altogether different religious group. Paul's teachings were not intended for Jews but were mostly intended for the gentile heathens.

Then why is Paul so pronounced in the NT? Because he was set there by the Roman organizations who embrace all sorts of heathen beliefs but Paul had no influence with the first century Christians church. That would be like blaming Peter for claiming that he was the first pope when in fact Peter had nothing to do with that claim. Peter was tagged and used by Rome to further their purpose. And by the way it was long after his death also.

So to say that Christianity was built upon Paul is not true at all. If you mean that Roman Catholicism was built upon Paul, then you may have a case but the Nazarene church was not in any way connected with Roman Catholicism or in fact the Greek Orthodox.




posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 01:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Seede
What John 1:3,4 really says, NW:

All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.

What has come into existence 4 by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men.


All things came into existence through him (the Greek is very clear, it says through, not "by" as those part of the Man of Lawlessness would have you believe in their translations). Not even one thing came into existence apart from him (i.e. without coming into existence through him). The writer assumes that the reader will understand that he's not including the Word and the God he is with mentioned in verse 1 as already being in existence when he's discussing "all things" and "not even one thing".

Revelation 3:14,21:

14 “To the angel of the congregation in La·o·di·ceʹa write: These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God:
...
21 To the one who conquers I will grant to sit down with me on my throne, just as I conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne.


You get one guess who "the Amen", "the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God" that is speaking here all the way to the end of the chapter is...
edit on 12-7-2016 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 02:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

I have not read each and every page but I feel you have done a rather good job of explaining the faults portrayed in the OP...
The Lords wealth bestowed upon mankind for the most part is not intended for this world... Of which I'm sure you will receive a great deal...
But as for the rewards he bestows here... It is obvious to me he has granted you a wealth of wisdom!


edit on 12-7-2016 by 5StarOracle because: Word



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 04:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: whereislogic

So I see where you're coming from, a 20th century position in which Christianity and the 5th Century Bible Canon are already the default "truth".


Hardly an accurate way to describe "where I'm coming from". I'm sorry but I don't think you're seeing very well. What I believe to be true or false is based on my ability to apply logic to facts (intelligence, that which IQ-tests for example test, one of the reasons you get "true" or "false" questions in IQ-tests). Knowledge (a familiarity with facts acquired by personal experience, observation or study), insight, understanding and my intelligence are some of the tools I use to evaluate the bible (by comparing what it says with the evidence, the facts that are related to the subject in question).

Here is some more advice that relate to what I said above:

1 Thess 5:21:

Make sure of all things; hold fast to what is fine.


A man may imagine things that are false, but he can only understand things that are true, for if the things be false, the apprehension of them is not understanding. - Isaac Newton


Newton followed the same methodology of inductive reasoning as I do, but I'm afraid I've talked about that enough so I don't want to drag all that up again. It's all related to 1 Thess. 5:21 and other verses in the bible where arguments of induction are used (Romans 1:20 comes to mind).
edit on 12-7-2016 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 05:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: CB328
Why should people be willing to devote their lives to a belief system that isn't even clearly defined?


That there has bugged me for ages. How is it that people choose to believe in the eternal nature of a character who lived 2000 years ago, who held a speech in his wedding that saved the day when there was no more wine so he serves water together with a few notes about the miraculous properties of water? Being a carpenter, he built a boat he walked about upon as it crossed the local lake, that's not a miracle, surviving crucifixion sort of was, though. That he truly survived crucifixion should be clear from the texts, but that his escape from Gehenna would last for thousands of years by simply believing the dogmatic lies explaining his deadness so terminally impossible to bring back to life? Well, their cruelty in describing the most humiliating moments of their Savior's and saints' deaths, is only surpassed by their gullibility.

If these death-advocates were right, Jesus would have been biological dead. That is, dead beyond repair. Had he been merely clinically dead, there are a few tricks that can be done to reverse the process of dying, and several of these methods are displayed or hinted to in the Gospels, but no Christians seem to pay any attention to it, since their sort of certificate to live, depends fully on Jesus being dead as a sandal so they can live instead. The mantra is that Jesus died for our sins and that Saulus the Murderous Saintan teaches us the importance of Jesus being dead, and monkey see monkey do-- there you have more than a billion people who openly testify their complicity in the supposed murder of their sacrificial beast man-god of 2000 years ago, who rises from the bottomless pit to save all mankind. But they're completely OK with it (!) -- The murder of their Messiah seems to be literally crucial to them, their whole tower-of-cards falls to the ground by the whisper of the ages, that Jesus didn't die, he was about as dead as dead can be through his death sentence and the whole shambles, but he was saved by soldiers and some pretty influential people.

So to you Christians, drop the whole born again Jesus died for my sins crap, it is as good as murder. Be rather good and caring instead, then maybe your hangman will pardon you in his heart and let you live to tell the tale, helping you in escaping your death sentence. That is the love of the Gospel. That Jesus was saved by his very enemies, whom he treated with the greatest promise. Jesus loved his Legions, and the legionaries loved him back, once a Legion of 6000 ran into certain death for him, by the wink of his hand. Jesus was Caesar. We don't know whether he was simply mad for believing it or whether he was in fact the son of Caesarion (Joseph the Prince of Egypt was actually Caesarion?).


The first issue we are going to look at is the rapture.


The lord giveth and the lord taketh. The whole rapture BS is naive at best. If someone comes and snatches you away from the land of the living, that just ain't a good thing. Then again, maybe that's the best for them. I'd rather be among those who are not reaped. I intend to survive Harmagheddon and fulfil my obligation to the good lord to make this planet a better place, sow his seeds and harvest his grapes, and in anger and wrath and frustration, with sweat and tears I'll stamp them all into proper grape-blood, and have the murderous bastards drink it so I can have a good laugh about the sorry basterds. Hey I'll have horses do their part a few stades away, just for the hell of it, and to see old battle-horse kinds work their way through the grapes, and the horses will be in heaven too, all fuzzy and jumping about.


The most surprising and most important unsettled issue however is salvation itself- namely how to earn it.


Salvation means to be salvaged. Rescued. From what? GTs and dancing? If you are lost at sea, you need salvation. What if I came to a float full of Christians and refused to save them since they were all saved already. Salvation is directly connected to the stem of the word; Salvae, that is the crap Jews used to pour over their kings' and high-priests' heads during their coronations, and it's composed mostly of cannabis- and olive oil. In my young adult years I received both a Johanite baptism, only saved by a couple airplanes and some gulls that passed over head, not a the proper dove, but convincing enough for the baptiser to go all 'Allelujah and release his grip so I could breathe again. Later I received the ointment ceremony which involved me being sort of raptured by being pulled out of the flock and smeared into a right Christian elect basterd.

Night before the baptism, I met the good lord in a dream, he was the spitting image of Bernard Black, and upon seeing how he tested my basic text skills and teaching me not to memorise or retell, but understand, see all the traps and links in the text, his exercise with me was about the part in Hosea when there are about fourty people carrying the same name, but belonging to angered factions, there are acts of cruelty and the gore is dripping from the pages. That the whole Hosea Yisre'el field massacres were fulfilments of curses and oaths sworn in the name of God placed a few generations earlier, well I just hadn't made that coupling.

Search to see the spark of heaven, and use it to become a better person. My whole becoming a Christian thing was nothing short of hypocrisy and the pride they had smeared into my forehead only made me a worse person, I later renounced everything I had been taught to believe church-wise, tossed it away like the garbage it is, and then really, I mean r e a l l y study the old texts as thoroughly as possible and with all the tools of the trade, to understand how these texts work and what their secrets are, and there are quite a bit of such hidden manna, woven into the texts.

Like the OP says pretty clearly, a whole new world opens up when you toss away what you have been taught by the makebelievers in church, in 2016 we all live in kingdoms of heaven, a global village where the only Zion is Science and the only truths are empirical and how the knowledge base we have developed in the name of truth and science, we are all either aware that we are in fact in heaven, or we are using all sorts of lies and weirdness to claim otherwise. The good part is it's relatively nice and safe here on this our mother planet. Still. Actually. Earlier I would chant and pretend to be healed, testify on drinking and screwing around, but it was all madness. I'd rather drink and screw around and see the forest for trees and know the secrets of the Bible. I carry my own burden, and so did the good lord, what I don't need, is all the bread and circus; «Come lets hear about Jesus dying again, it's fun and refreshing!» Bollocks!


For me, the problems, inconsistencies, negativity, hypocrisy and irrationality of Christianity were enough to make me give up religion, but when you add on the downright shakiness of the whole theology now I can't see how anyone can take Christianity seriously. At least paganism had something real at it's root with nature.


Word. S/F.

edit on 12-7-2016 by Utnapisjtim because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic


Hardly an accurate way to describe "where I'm coming from". I'm sorry but I don't think you're seeing very well.

I'm sorry that I projected my experiences on you as if yours and mine were the same. However, that is one of the factors that should be taken into account when applying inductive reasoning.

The example you cite from Romans chapter 1:WEB

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19because that which is known of God is revealed in them, for God revealed it to them. 20For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse. 21Because, knowing God, they didn't glorify him as God, neither gave thanks, but became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless heart was darkened. 22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23and traded the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and four-footed animals, and creeping things.

Some scholars have concluded (based on word usage, sentence structure, and meme usage mostly) that Paul's worldview was influenced by Stoic philosophy. From his perspective, people are without excuse because "they know the same God he does" yet don't glorify Him. But isn't he also projecting? I doubt that all people in his time were Stoics. I doubt that all people in his time had the same Stoic/Judaic fusion as a definition for God.

Through his observation of the behavior he witnessed in the Hellenistic World and his understanding of his God he reaches these conclusions. It may have been valid for some (else he would have had very few converts) but certainly his conclusions couldn't be made for all. I would hazard to guess that somewhat less than 50%. But then that's me projecting upon Paul what I think he was projecting on the whole World based from his worldview.



edit on 12-7-2016 by pthena because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 09:00 AM
link   
a reply to: pthena

Point to note friend, you're talking to a Jehovah's Witness. They have their own special translation of the Bible.



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 09:13 AM
link   
a reply to: NOTurTypical



They have their own special translation of the Bible.

I use biblehub to get quotes. I did have a link to NW translations on my last laptop, but not this one. Sometimes I quote NIV, NASB, but prefer World English because it's free use, royalty free.



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: KazeKurai




I found this post to be....well...as one might put it obsered(sic). Let me just dissect it a bit...


I mean how can anyone take someone seriously that blindly believes in a book "Written" by man, from the copper-age.

It is no wonder that we have all these serious issues & major setbacks in a modern age that should gravitate towards science & technology.

So let me start by saying that what someone believes really should not concern you. You don't know what I believe...and it doesn't affect you...so why get involved? Until my beliefs start affecting your daily life you should probably just live and let live. As far as setbacks go, I know nothing of what you speak...unless you refer to things that happened centuries ago....in which case the "setbacks" are moot to begin with because we're not living in that era anymore, are we? Setbacks happened, it's time to get over it and move on...because dwelling on a setback is only setting us back further....


There are people that seriously believe the world was created in a week & on a Sunday he rested... Who rested all of the brainwashed sheep who sleep in on a Sunday because there was no work.. Take a guess they are referring to the origin of our working week.

That aside I can't understand why so many Christians believe the earth is 6000 years old & that dinosaurs were put in the ground to test your faith..


Again, until their beliefs affect your daily life personally, best to live and let live. For the sake of argument, let's say I'm a christian....how do any of my beliefs, which you don't even actually know, affect your life?


I understand there are people suffering in the world that turn to God for answers.. But please tell me how that's working out for them.

You do know the vast majority of charity work done in the world is done in the name of religion right? "God's people" as some might call them are helping millions of people who suffer daily....I'd say it's working a little better than the billions of dollars we spend on (military)technology that is mostly used to spy on, kill, and destroy our fellow man....


The world needs to be liberated from the emotional blackmail & fear of reporting to a deity that represents mans goodness + & mans darkness - both god & the devil are, personified thought of a representation of positive & negative..

I beg to differ. I believe what the world needs is people who understand that not everyone views life as they would view it. The world needs to be open minded and accepting...we need to get rid of this tribal thought that just because someone isn't like us, doesn't look like us, or doesn't believe the same things as us, that they must be wrong or evil....We are all one tribe that came out of east africa...it's time we start acting like family...(and I don't mean the typical dysfunctional family)


The bible, Quran etc are all a plagerisium on the Egyptian believe systems & serves as an astrolical hybrid. Stories that are literally about the zodiac & the stars eg.
Fact or hearsay?

As an additional sidenote and small jab, I can't believe someone can make so many grammatical errors yet be so "resentful" and involved with someone else's personal beliefs....maybe work on improving yourself before you attempt so valiantly to "correct" those who don't need correcting....I mean, how can anyone take someone who uses words like "astrolical" "plagerisium" and "obsered" seriously?

A2D
edit on 12-7-2016 by Agree2Disagree because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-7-2016 by Agree2Disagree because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: pthena

Bible hub is cool, I prefer the KJV because I want a word for word that isn't based on the Westcott and Hort Greek or the Alexandrian manuscripts. Lately I'm also enjoying the ISV as a secondary.



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic

a reply to: Seede
What John 1:3,4 really says, NW:


All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence. What has come into existence 4 by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men. All things came into existence through him (the Greek is very clear, it says through, not "by" as those part of the Man of Lawlessness would have you believe in their translations). Not even one thing came into existence apart from him (i.e. without coming into existence through him). The writer assumes that the reader will understand that he's not including the Word and the God he is with mentioned in verse 1 as already being in existence when he's discussing "all things" and "not even one thing".

Not meaning to show dis respect but your literature is not Christian nor Christian translated. It is taken from existing translations and word changed to suit your doctrine. You have also not addressed the entire subject which was John 1:1-3 and John 1:14 with the premise of the verses before and after in contextual thought.

What I wrote was from the 1611 KJV but will also give you the Cepher translation from Hebrew to English-------

Cepheriym Yahuchanon
The Besorah According To Yahuchanon –

Yahuchanon i:1-3
(1) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with Elohiym , and the Word was Elohiym.
(2) The same was in the beginning with Elohiym.
(3) All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Yahuchanon 1:14
(14) And the Word was made flesh, and tabernacled among us. (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of YACHIYD of the Father.) full of grace and truth.

I realize that you do not subscribe to the preexistence of Jesus as the Begotten of Elohiym. The Christian doctrine of James does not regard Jesus as an incarnate angel of any sort and therefore we could never be on the same page.



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: visitedbythem
a reply to: CB328 Jesus went after the religious leaders. And them came after him and got him crucified. He stood against religion. He stood for a personal relationship with God through him. You didnt know that? Mohhammad was a perv, liar, thief, and murderer. Take your choice



So Jesus' followers call Mohammed a perv, a liar, and a thief while Mohammed's followers respect Christ as an equal prophet in the eyes of God to Mohammed. Now which one sounds like a follower of Christs teachings?



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 10:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: damwel

originally posted by: visitedbythem
a reply to: CB328 Jesus went after the religious leaders. And them came after him and got him crucified. He stood against religion. He stood for a personal relationship with God through him. You didnt know that? Mohhammad was a perv, liar, thief, and murderer. Take your choice



So Jesus' followers call Mohammed a perv, a liar, and a thief while Mohammed's followers respect Christ as an equal prophet in the eyes of God to Mohammed. Now which one sounds like a follower of Christs teachings?


If they respect Jesus as an equal prophet as Muhammad and if YHWH is the same God as Allah, then explain why they are murdering us all over the middle east.



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: whereislogic

Were you not aware the man of lawlessness is the 11th horn? He overtakes 3 horns and leads the 10 kingdom "Beast Empire"? Don't be conused on this, the "man of lawlessness" is just one of the 33 titles the Bible uses for the man we call "the antichrist".


The Lawless One (11th horn) is a great orator and leads many to fall, including three of his own governmental offices. He would stand only a short while during which time Satan would give the Lawless One a given time to reign. Old Adolf did all that. His speeches still give me the creeps. When Adolf rose into power he closed the offices of the Reichs Kannsler + Head of Wehrmacht + Reichs Präsident and replaced them with a new office, Reichs Führer, most of these and related officials were killed and assassinated in these proceedings, soon after the Reichtag fire, when the Third Reich came marching in the tens of thousands to stand like poles and listen to Hitler speak, cheering with a Sieg or three at given moments.

The office of the Führer was more like a throne really, and Adolf used to fantasize about being the emperor of the revived Roman Empire, his Third Reich was an extension of the former Holy Roman Empire, though there were never made any official bonds between the Nazis and the Vatican.

At the end of the Holy Roman Empire, the remaining empire (Germany mostly) was divided into ten imperial circles or 10 states. They all pleaded allegiance to the Empire, and then the Empire (the Second Reich) soon fell leading up to the «Jewish Problem», French and German nationalism, Communism, Zionism and Italian Fascism, Adolf and the two World Wars. At the end of the 19th century, The Throne of Zeus («Throne of Satan» from Pergamum) was moved from Turkey and reconstructed brick by brick in Berlin-- but it was a tad too small for Hitler's liking, he wanted to stuff in thousands more soldiers, so he had his favourite architect, Albert Speer, build him a new, much bigger throne as he saw fit for his Jovian excellence.

I believe «The Little Horn» from the Book of Daniel was Hitler and his Third Reich, and he played the part diligently and wilfully, and he must have known the inevitable end to his terrible reign, and his own fate. I believe the Thule Society was central in grooming Adolf for the role of The Lawless One or The Little Horn, and I think the other lodges and high class societies endorsed these efforts. In the end the little horn is also plucked out, and what remains of the beast is a creature with seven remaining horns, the number of horns on the Lamb of God. Does the Fourth Beast of Daniel turn into the Lamb of God? And is it the UN's creation of the State of Israel soon after the War? Or is it UN, or EU, where Germany, France and Italy are the greatest economies, now that UK has left the union?

To mods: I hope it's OK to write about Hitler, please contact me if I have breached some terms, it's been a while since I read them and I faintly remember a clause about the Nazis and Adolf Hitler, but I'm unsure, my intention here is to show how Hitler seems to have fulfilled most everything concerning the Little Horn from Daniel's visions about the four beasts.
edit on 12-7-2016 by Utnapisjtim because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

No sir, the catalyst for the end of this age was Israel being regathered into the land a 2nd time. First was the Babylonian exile. Hitler was a crazy chap, but not the coming man of sin. Also, the Roman Empire didn't end when the western leg collapsed, it carried on as the Byzantine Empire for another 1000 years before being conquered. Remember that the statue in Daniel 2 had 2 legs of iron.



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

No sir, the catalyst for the end of this age was Israel being regathered into the land a 2nd time. First was the Babylonian exile. Hitler was a crazy chap, but not the coming man of sin. Also, the Roman Empire didn't end when the western leg collapsed, it carried on as the Byzantine Empire for another 1000 years before being conquered. Remember that the statue in Daniel 2 had 2 legs of iron.


you are talking about the prophecies in revelations? what if someone decides to reinterpret the prophecies as instructions, a recipe for the apocalypse, and intentionally tries to jump start the end of the world?



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

No sir, the catalyst for the end of this age was Israel being regathered into the land a 2nd time. First was the Babylonian exile. Hitler was a crazy chap, but not the coming man of sin. Also, the Roman Empire didn't end when the western leg collapsed, it carried on as the Byzantine Empire for another 1000 years before being conquered. Remember that the statue in Daniel 2 had 2 legs of iron.


you are talking about the prophecies in revelations? what if someone decides to reinterpret the prophecies as instructions, a recipe for the apocalypse, and intentionally tries to jump start the end of the world?


That would be what these books are all about. A bunch of oaths amounting up to scenarios that are played out during certain planetary alignments using a calendar of 7 000 years, 6 000 years of sworn oaths and original sin, 1 000 years of labour to build humanity's final Ark, the New Jerusalem. Looks like it'll be a ball. Only a squared one. Of inasane proportions.



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 01:59 PM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm

The empire of the Beast hates the Bible, YHWH, and Christians/Jews. Now, there is a sect of Islam that thinks they need to create chaos to hasten the return of their Mahdi, they are trying to fulfil their end time scenario, it just so happens that it is the same end time scenario as Revelation, yet their Mahdi is our antichrist.



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Bollocks! The Beast loves the Bible, it is what gives him his power. Or, rather, t h e i r power, since they're a whole bunch of slightly inbred European royalty carrying on into this modern age. The Bible together with Church dogma have secured these kings their «divine right to rule», their right to issue currencies with their heads stamped on them, control nations and collect taxes, fight down rebellions with police, and make wars utilising their military forces (unleash the Dragon).
edit on 12-7-2016 by Utnapisjtim because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

The 8th Empire (the Beast empire) is a revival of the 7th empire. It had a deadly wound, seemed to disappear, and will revive at the very end. John was alive during the 6th kingdom/empire which was the Roman Empire, it moved it's Capitol to Constantinople and was conquered by the Ottoman Empire in the middle of the 15th century.

The 8th Kingdom/Beast is a revival of the Turkish Ottoman Empire.


edit on 7 12 2016 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join