|
Forums118
Topics9,232
Posts196,218
Members1,326
| |
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
8 registered members (Daryl, Karen Y, dedication, daylily, TheophilusOne, 3 invisible),
2,463
guests, and 12
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15437
09/13/05 01:34 PM
09/13/05 01:34 PM
|
OP
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Tom, as you know, I agree with Mark and Rosangela, who I believe are in harmony with the Bible and the SOP. According to your view there is nothing "strange" about acts of God. In a court of law I am considered guilty of murder if I pull the plug on a terminally ill loved one. Some people, however, consider it a strange act of mercy. Nonetheless, I am responsible for the person dying.
Again, Tom, you're putting words in Sister White's mouth. She never, ever said Jesus didn't use water to kill millions of unsaved sinners in the Flood. You are taking it upon yourself to say that's what she meant when she penned your favorite quote. If that's truly what she meant then please quote her in her own words. Where did she specifically say that Jesus did not kill anyone in the OT, or that He will never kill anyone in the lake of fire?
Does the following passage sound like the Jesus you know?
Matthew
10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15438
09/14/05 02:30 AM
09/14/05 02:30 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Mark:By placing a one-sided construction on the passages you quote, you have arrived at a position where you will not be in harmony with God. It should give you pause. Tom:Doesn't this pronoucement seem a bit popish? "You have arrived at a position where you will not be in harmony with God." Do you disagree? Or do you see nothing wrong in statements such as this? I am insisting that God really is exactly like Jesus Christ, and that His character was fully revealed by Jesus Christ. So I will only be out of harmony with God if I am wrong about this. Correct? Mark:To answer your last question, it will be no more callous of me to rejoice than it was for the Hebrews to rejoice at their deliverence. Christ said 'Who are my mother and brothers and sisters?' We know how He answered that. Was He callous? Tom:Reasking my original question, with a few more: Would you really want me to rejoice at the suffering and death of your loved ones? Would you want God to do this? Do you think this is what God will do? Rejoice while our loved ones suffer and die? quote:
"People of Ephraim, how can I give you up?
Israel, how can I hand you over to your enemies?
Can I destroy you as I did the town of Admah?
Can I treat you like Zeboiim?
My heart is stirred inside me.
It is filled with pity for you. (Hosea 11:8)
There will be great rejoicing when God's character will have been completely vindicated, and sin will be no more. But God will suffer incredibly when His children are lost to Him forever, more than we can possibly fathom, and He will be looking for like-minded spirits to comfort Him.
quote:
Those who think of the result of hastening or hindering the gospel think of it in relation to themselves and to the world. Few think of its relation to God. Few give thought to the suffering that sin has caused our Creator. All heaven suffered in Christ's agony; but that suffering did not begin or end with His manifestation in humanity. The cross is a revelation to our dull senses of the pain that, from its very inception, sin has brought to the heart of God. Every departure from the right, every deed of cruelty, every failure of humanity to reach His ideal, brings grief to Him. When there came upon Israel the calamities that were the sure result of separation from God,--subjugation by their enemies, cruelty, and death, --it is said that "His soul was grieved for the misery of Israel." "In all their affliction He was afflicted: . . . and He bare them, and carried them all the days of old." Judges 10:16; Isaiah 63:9. (Ed 263)
Sin and death cause God great pain. He doesn't rejoice in these things.
In answer to your question, Christ said His mother and brother and sisters were those who do God's will. God's will is that we should love Him with all our heart and love our neighbor as ourself. This doesn't seem at all callous to me. Rejoicing while someones child is suffering and dying does.
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15439
09/13/05 05:57 PM
09/13/05 05:57 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Mike:Tom, as you know, I agree with Mark and Rosangela, who I believe are in harmony with the Bible and the SOP. According to your view there is nothing "strange" about acts of God. Tom:I don't know what you mean by this. I assume you are referring to the destruction of the wicked, referred to as God's strange act? And something you think I don't think it's strange? Is that what you are asserting? At any rate, I've never said what you are asserting I said. Perhaps you could provide a quote of something I've written? Mike:In a court of law I am considered guilty of murder if I pull the plug on a terminally ill loved one. Some people, however, consider it a strange act of mercy. Nonetheless, I am responsible for the person dying. Tom: quote:
"The government of the kingdom of Christ is like no earthly government. It is a representation of the characters of those who compose the kingdom. 'Whereunto shall we liken the kingdom of God?' Christ asked, 'or with what comparison shall we liken it?' He could find nothing on earth that would serve as a perfect comparison. His court is one where holy love presides, and whose offices and appointments are graced by the exercise of charity. He charges His servants to bring pity and loving-kindness, His own attributes, into all their office work, and to find their happiness and satisfaction in reflecting the love and tender compassion of the divine nature on all with whom they associate." The Review and Herald, March 19, 1908.
You can't use annologies from earthly governments to try to prove things related to God's government. That won't work. God's government is like no earthly government; it is not based on the principle of force or "eye for eye; tooth for tooth" but is moral in nature and run on the principles of love and truth. Earthly governments must of necessity be run by force, so we're dealing with two totally different entities here. Do you agree with this? If no, why not?
Regarding the specific example of your pulling the plug, that doesn't fit as a good analogy, because it is not you who are sustaining the life but a machine. Your analogy would have to be something akin to God unplugging Himself, which analogy just doesn't work.
Mike:Again, Tom, you're putting words in Sister White's mouth. She never, ever said Jesus didn't use water to kill millions of unsaved sinners in the Flood. You are taking it upon yourself to say that's what she meant when she penned your favorite quote.
Tom:From previous conversations with you, I understand that my "favorite quote" would be some quote that I repeatedly reference to which you have no response. However, there are several which would fit the bill here, so you could be more specific? Also you are accusing me of putting words in Sister White's mouth, and I have no idea how or why you think I'm doing this. What specifically do you think I have claimed her to be saying where I am adding words to her mouth? Is what you mean by accusing me of these things in any way different than simply saying you don't agree with what I'm saying? If not, you could just say, "I don't agree" and leave it at that.
Mike:If that's truly what she meant then please quote her in her own words.
Tom:What is "that"? What quote do you have in mind?
Mike:Where did she specifically say that Jesus did not kill anyone in the OT, or that He will never kill anyone in the lake of fire?
Tom:Ok, here's a specific question. I'll treat this at the end of the post.
Mike:Does the following passage sound like the Jesus you know?
Matthew
10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
Tom:Yes, it sounds just like Him. Here's how the Spirit of Prophesy comments on this from the Desire of Ages:
quote:
The Saviour bade His disciples not to hope that the world's enmity to the gospel would be overcome, and that after a time its opposition would cease. He said, "I came not to send peace, but a sword." This creating of strife is not the effect of the gospel, but the result of opposition to it.(DA 357)
Notice that the "sword" comes about as a result of opposing the gospel, not the gospel itself. This is exactly in harmony with the principles I have been trying to present.
Back to the other point. Actually, rather than responding to it here, I'm going to start another post, because this one would be too long.
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15440
09/13/05 06:21 PM
09/13/05 06:21 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
(Continuing from the other post of Mike's) Regarding the destruction of the wicked, this is carefully explained in my "favorite quote" quote:
This is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God. The rejecters of His mercy reap that which they have sown. God is the fountain of life; and when one chooses the service of sin, he separates from God, and thus cuts himself off from life. He is "alienated from the life of God." Christ says, "All they that hate Me love death." Eph. 4:18; Prov. 8:36. God gives them existence for a time that they may develop their character and reveal their principles. This accomplished, they receive the results of their own choice. By a life of rebellion, Satan and all who unite with him place themselves so out of harmony with God that His very presence is to them a consuming fire. The glory of Him who is love will destroy them.
At the beginning of the great controversy, the angels did not understand this. Had Satan and his host then been left to reap the full result of their sin, they would have perished; but it would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin. A doubt of God's goodness would have remained in their minds as evil seed, to produce its deadly fruit of sin and woe. (DA 764)
This quote brings out the following principles:
1)Destruction does not occur due to an arbitrary act of God's power.
2)The rejecters of mercy reap what they have sown.
3)When one chooses sin, death results from cutting oneself off from God, the source of life.
4)Those who reject God's mercy, receive the results of their own choice.
5)Satan, and those who unite with him, so damage themselves that God's presence is a consuming fire.
6)Destruction takes place as a result of God's revealing His character.
7)Reaping the full results of sin means perishing.
I see that these principles are the same that are always involved when destruction occurs.
Here's another favorite quote:
quote:
The Jews had forged their own fetters; they had filled for themselves the cup of vengeance. In the utter destruction that befell them as a nation, and in all the woes that followed them in their dispersion, they were but reaping the harvest which their own hands had sown. Says the prophet: "O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself;" "for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity." Hosea 13:9; 14:1. Their sufferings are often represented as a punishment visited upon them by the direct decree of God. It is thus that the great deceiver seeks to conceal his own work. By stubborn rejection of divine love and mercy, the Jews had caused the protection of God to be withdrawn from them, and Satan was permitted to rule them according to his will. The horrible cruelties enacted in the destruction of Jerusalem are a demonstration of Satan's vindictive power over those who yield to his control.
We cannot know how much we owe to Christ for the peace and protection which we enjoy. It is the restraining power of God that prevents mankind from passing fully under the control of Satan. The disobedient and unthankful have great reason for gratitude for God's mercy and long-suffering in holding in check the cruel, malignant power of the evil one. But when men pass the limits of divine forbearance, that restraint is removed. God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression; but He leaves the rejectors of His mercy to themselves, to reap that which they have sown. Every ray of light rejected, every warning despised or unheeded, every passion indulged, every transgression of the law of God, is a seed sown which yields its unfailing harvest. The Spirit of God, persistently resisted, is at last withdrawn from the sinner, and then there is left no power to control the evil passions of the soul, and no protection from the malice and enmity of Satan. The destruction of Jerusalem is a fearful and solemn warning to all who are trifling with the offers of divine grace and resisting the pleadings of divine mercy. Never was there given a more decisive testimony to God's hatred of sin and to the certain punishment that will fall upon the guilty. (GC 35, 36)
Let's take a look at the principles mentioned here:
1)Destruction occured as a result of reaping what was sown.
2)There was a reaping of what was sown.
3)Satan represents his own work as the work of God. He does this to deceive people into thinking that God is responsible for things he himself is doing, so that they will view God in a false light. (this principle should cause us to reflect on our own views, IMO)
4)God was caused to withdraw His protection.
5)Ruin resulted when God's protection was withdrawn.
6)The benefits of the protection God gives to us is beyond our ability to fathom.
7)When man passes the limits of divine forebearance, the restraint is removed.
8)What happened in Jerusalem is a warning for ALL who choose not to respond to God's mercy.
9)NEVER was there given a MORE DECISIVE testimony of God's hatred of sin and the CERTAIN PUNISHMENT of the wicked.
It appears to me that you, and others who have been rejecting the principles I've been attempting to share, view the destruction of Jerusalem, and of the wicked, as isolated events which do not produce principles which are general in nature. In other words, you think in this particular instance God acted in this way to bring about destruction, but this should not be viewed in any way as a general description of how the destruction of the wicked occurs, but is only specific for this one specific case.
I find this problematic. It seems obvious to me that the Spirit of Prophesy is discussing general principles here. For example, she states:
quote:
The destruction of Jerusalem is a fearful and solemn warning to all who are trifling with the offers of divine grace and resisting the pleadings of divine mercy.
She gives what happened to Jerusalem as a warning to ALL. Also she says:
quote:
Never was there given a more decisive testimony to God's hatred of sin and to the certain punishment that will fall upon the guilty.
Now if your view were correct, I don't see how she could write this. Surely some incident where God were destroying in some different, some more active way, would be a more decisive testimony that this, don't you think? Why would she present a destruction which occurs as God's withdrawing His protection as THE MOST DECISIVE example of how God destroys if God also destroys by more active means?
I have repeatedly quoted from the Spirit of Prophesy where she states that ALL that we can know of God was revealed in the life and character of God's Son and asked you to explain how your view harmonizes with this principle, but you have heretofore refused any attempt to do so. Based on this statement, which is really based on John, and actually the teachings of Christ, I must reject any teaching regarding God's character which is out of harmony with what Christ revealed as false. It has to be false. There's not way it couldn't be false, unless Christ's revelation of God's character was incomplete.
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15441
09/13/05 11:38 PM
09/13/05 11:38 PM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2020
4500+ Member
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,583
USA
|
|
You have basically said you will not rejoice at the deliverance of the saint when Babylon is destroyed. That is directly contrary to what God says the saints should do. You'll recall it is the merchants and great men of the earth who lament Babylon's demise. They do this because they have put their own selfish interests first. If they were just and merciful they would acknowledge that this monstrous system is guilty of the blackest crimes, the foulest vices, the worst practises of the black arts in the guise of religion and the cruellest inhumanity. Babylon and those associated with it will have become the haunt of demons. But how do they feel now that God has brought all of this corruption to an abrupt end? They should rejoice in Babylon’s demise and the fact that God has delivered His people. But do they? Instead, they weep. And you seem inclined to join them, albeit for different reasons. Given this and several other things you have said that several people have validly objected to, I would have to conclude you are not open, at least at this point, to modifying your opinion to harmonize better with what is revealed.
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15442
09/14/05 01:12 AM
09/14/05 01:12 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Maybe it's a case of misunderstanding. I will rejoice when Babylon is destroyed. That's a good thing. Babylon is the anti-Christ, a horrible system, which is diametrically opposed to God's purposes. So we're agreed on this, OK? I don't see anything you are describing as God's will in your post that I would not rejoice in. So I'm clear on all charages of this post.
Returning to unanswered questions:
Should I rejoice when you child or sister or mother or wife is suffering and dying in the lake of fire? Is this something you want me to do? Do you believe this is something God wants me to do? Do you believe this is something God Himself well do?
You wrote:By placing a one-sided construction on the passages you quote, you have arrived at a position where you will not be in harmony with God. It should give you pause.
To which I asked:Doesn't this pronoucement seem a bit popish? "You have arrived at a position where you will not be in harmony with God." Do you disagree? Or do you see nothing wrong in statements such as this?
I am very interested in knowing your response to these questions.
Hoping you'll oblige with answers,
Tom
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15443
09/14/05 01:25 PM
09/14/05 01:25 PM
|
OP
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Tom, once again you have either failed or refused to prove from the SOP that Sister White never, ever wrote that Jesus killed people using the Flood. Please, please quote what she wrote about the Flood. Thank you.
PS – You have very nicely established the point that Jesus sometimes destroys people by withdrawing His protection. Thank you. Now, let’s switch gears and talk specifically about the Flood quotes. Okay? Please? Which one of the many Flood quotes says Jesus killed the Antediluvians by stopping holding back the inevitable forces of nature, impending forces which were ready and eager to spread desolation everywhere?
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15444
09/14/05 10:20 PM
09/14/05 10:20 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
When dealing with a subject like this, it's helpful to consider the Bible as a whole, or even broader, the Bible and the Spirit of Prophesy as a whole, and look for the overlying principles involved. It's as we compare Scripture with Scripture that we arrive at a correct understanding of truth. God does not contradict Himself, so if a given interpretation in a given portion of Scripture would contradict principles established elsewhere, that needs to be taken into account. Consider, for example, the following Scripture: quote:
10And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.(Rev.20:10)
Non-Adventists like to use this Scripture to prove that God will torture those who reject Him for all eternity. The text certainly seems to be saying that there is an eternal hell where the wicked will burn and suffer without end. How do we answer this text?
By comparing Scripture with Scripture, and looking at the underlying principles. Quoting from the Spirit of Prophesy:
quote:
How repugnant to every emotion of love and mercy, and even to our sense of justice, is the doctrine that the wicked dead are tormented with fire and brimstone in an eternally burning hell; that for the sins of a brief earthly life they are to suffer torture as long as God shall live. Yet this doctrine has been widely taught and is still embodied in many of the creeds of Christendom. Said a learned doctor of divinity: "The sight of hell torments will exalt the happiness of the saints forever. When they see others who are of the same nature and born under the same circumstances, plunged in such misery, and they so distinguished, it will make them sensible of how happy they are." Another used these words: "While the decree of reprobation is eternally executing on the vessels of wrath, the smoke of their torment will be eternally ascending in view of the vessels of mercy, who, instead of taking the part of these miserable objects, will say, Amen, Alleluia! praise ye the Lord!"
Where, in the pages of God's word, is such teaching to be found? Will the redeemed in heaven be lost to all emotions of pity and compassion, and even to feelings of common humanity? Are these to be exchanged for the indifference of the stoic or the cruelty of the savage? No, no; such is not the teaching of the Book of God. Those who present the views expressed in the quotations given above may be learned and even honest men, but they are deluded by the sophistry of Satan. He leads them to misconstrue strong expressions of Scripture, giving to the language the coloring of bitterness and malignity which pertains to himself, but not to our Creator. "As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die?" Ezekiel 33:11. (GC 535)
I beg your indulgence in this rather long quote, which doesn't tie in directly to your question. But it fits very well to make the point I'm trying to get across. Take a look who she argues her case. It's not based upon a whole bunch of Scriptures (in fact, there's none, until the very end, and even that was quoted not as a proof text, but to state a principle), but is rather based on principles relating to God's character. And it's a very pursuasive argument (it was this very argument which convinced me the doctrine of the immortality of the sould was incorrect when I was a non-Adventist studying Adventism).
This is exactly the same argument I've been trying to present related to the flood question; an argument based not on proof texts, but on principles. What are the principles? Here are a few:
quote:
"There can be no more conclusive evidence that we possess the spirit of Satan than the disposition to hurt and destroy those who do not appreciate our work, or who act contrary to our ideas." The Desire of Ages, 487.
quote:
"Sickness, suffering, and death are work of an antagonistic power. Satan is the destroyer; God is the restorer." The Ministry of Healing, 113.
quote:
"Rebellion was not to be overcome by force. Compelling power is found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order. (DA 79)
quote:
The Spirit of God, persistently resisted, is at last withdrawn from the sinner, and then there is left no power to control the evil passions of the soul, and no protection from the malice and enmity of Satan." The Great Controversy, 36.
quote:
"In order to be rightly understood and appreciated, every truth in the Word of God, from Genesis to Revelation, must be studied in the light which streams from the cross of Calvary, and in connection with the wondrous, central truth of the Saviour's atonement. (5ABC 1137)
quote:
"All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son." Testimonies for the Church, 8:286.
Whatever theory we come up regarding the destruction of the wicked MUST be in harmony with these principles, if it is truth. It doesn't matter what the individual incident is. The principles of God's government are eternal and changeless. And God does not change. He is the same yesterday, today and forever. He is exactly how Jesus Christ revealed Him to be, always has been, and always will be.
So in conclusion, if you look at how arguments are presented in inspiration, whether in Scripture or by the Spirit of Prophesy, you will see that they are presented along the lines I am suggesting (and illustrated above); on the basis of principles, not on the basis of proof texts. This is why I have repeatedly ask you to relate your beliefs to principles, and in particular the principles I have brought out (like those listed above) which I perceive to be out of harmony with your view.
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15445
09/15/05 12:46 PM
09/15/05 12:46 PM
|
OP
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Tom, the Flood does not require proof texts or private interpretation. It's an entire account in the Bible, and it's elaborated upon in great detail in the SOP. There's nothing obscure or symbolic about the language employed to describe the Flood.
Your unrelated arguments against these plain testimonies are irrelevant. Again, I’m begging you, please quote from the Flood account itself to prove Jesus didn’t send the Flood to punish and kill millions of unsaved sinners. Thank you.
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15446
09/15/05 01:52 PM
09/15/05 01:52 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
quote:
Your unrelated arguments against these plain testimonies are irrelevant.
This is what you say, Mike. But this is what the Spirit of Prophesy says:
quote:
"In order to be rightly understood and appreciated, every truth in the Word of God, from Genesis to Revelation, must be studied in the light which streams from the cross of Calvary, and in connection with the wondrous, central truth of the Saviour's atonement. (5ABC 1137)
Your principles of interpretations are not correct. The principle of interpretation which is of the divine order is that EVERY truth, to be properly understood, must be studied in the light which streams from the cross.
So what I wrote was NOT unrelated, but provides a basis, the only basis, under which this, or any other Biblical truth, can be rightly understood.
As I pointed out, you will find not one example of your methodology in inspiration (i.e. the proof text method; a listing of texts devoid of reasoning or logical development). The method seen in inspiration is exactly the one I quoted to you from the Spirit of Prophesy. A well reasoned argument based on principles which are revealed in Scripture.
Regarding the flood, we all agree that God caused it. The only difference is I believe that God caused it by removing His protective and sustaining hand; by allowing the fountains of the deep to break forth, rather than continuing to prevent it. We are not given the scientific details as to exactly how God caused the flood. I have come up with a theory based on what I have read in creation science literature and what has been revealed in inspiration, keeping in mind that Scripture does not contradict itself.
If you wish to assert that God caused the flood in some means which is contrary to what I have suggested (His removing His protective and sustaining hand, which allowed the waters of the earth to burst forth) then you should adduce some evidence to support you view.
If one takes the time to think logically about the problem, even from a scientific standpoint what I'm suggesting makes the most sense. The waters of the deep broke forth, which indicates that those waters were under tremendous pressure. If they were under pressure, then all God had to do was remove that which was keeping the pressured water at bay. This makes perfect sense.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
