Billy Graham 1918-2018

Open discussion on general Baptist-related topics of interest to Baptists around the world.

Moderator: Dave Roberts

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby JE Pettibone » Sat Feb 24, 2018 12:45 am

Dave Roberts wrote:There was also another strong pro-Graham faculty member at SBTS when i was there. Dr. Don Hustad, Professor of Music, was the long-time organist for the Billy Graham crusades.


Dave I think you will find this interesting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Hustad
JE Pettibone
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 10:48 am

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Sandy » Sat Feb 24, 2018 12:49 am

Haruo wrote:And let's not forget Fox's long-running thread (starting its third index page now) in the Baptist Heritage and History forum.


Yes, that's an interesting thread. It completely blows Jim's contention about the perspective of the "mod-libs" regarding Graham out of the water.

You know, Billy Graham certainly left a legacy behind. He wasn't perfect, didn't claim to be. He made mistakes, and he took criticism, most of it as a result of his associations with presidents and politicians. There's no question he fulfilled a prophetic calling. But the fact of the matter is that he didn't take any of his reputation or his work to heaven with him, and none of that is what got him through the pearly gates, so to speak. He wouldn't compare himself to someone else's ministry or work. He was obedient to his call, as millions of Christians are. He went to heaven with empty hands, pleading the blood of Christ as the sacrifice that paid for his sins, just like everyone else. And if I claim belief in the scriptures, then I know that there's no difference in God's sight between Billy Graham, or anyone else who comes into His presence under the same terms.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8743
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Jim » Sat Feb 24, 2018 7:53 am

Sandy wrote:
You know, Billy Graham certainly left a legacy behind.

You're kidding, surely. Everyone leaves a legacy behind (where else?). Hope folks will not gnash their teeth at looking at yours, like you're doing regarding the Grahams.

He wasn't perfect, didn't claim to be. He made mistakes, and he took criticism, most of it as a result of his associations with presidents and politicians.

Jesus ate with the publicans and crooked tax collectors, and (gasp) talked with a prostitute, but, of course, that put him in a class with the Grahams, so he was being naughty - right?

But the fact of the matter is that he didn't take any of his reputation or his work to heaven with him, and none of that is what got him through the pearly gates, so to speak.

You're assuming that Billy made it to heaven. He was pretty wicked, according to your posts and hung out with outcasts (today's drug addicts?). Actually, according to scripture, his "treasures" preceded him to the pearly gates. Hope you get that lucky. God can be pretty tough!

He went to heaven with empty hands, pleading the blood of Christ as the sacrifice that paid for his sins, just like everyone else.

So what else is new?

And if I claim belief in the scriptures, then I know that there's no difference in God's sight between Billy Graham, or anyone else who comes into His presence under the same terms.


Bully for you! I don't know what the "same terms" are but I'm certain there's quite a difference in God's sight between Billy Graham and me. Makes you look pretty good in your own estimation, so congratulations.
Jim
 
Posts: 3770
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Haruo » Sat Feb 24, 2018 10:53 am

Amazing, Jim.
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12171
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Sandy » Sat Feb 24, 2018 2:06 pm

Nothing amazing there. Jim just didn't read any of the posts.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8743
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Dave Roberts » Sat Feb 24, 2018 2:23 pm

JE Pettibone wrote:
Dave Roberts wrote:There was also another strong pro-Graham faculty member at SBTS when i was there. Dr. Don Hustad, Professor of Music, was the long-time organist for the Billy Graham crusades.


Dave I think you will find this interesting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Hustad


Good article. I got to know him during the years I served in maintenance for the chapel and ran sound there. He never tired of coming in and playing the organ.
"God will never be less than He is and does not need to be more" (John Koessler)

My blog: http://emporiadave.wordpress.com/
User avatar
Dave Roberts
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7220
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:01 pm
Location: Southside, VA

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Rvaughn » Mon Feb 26, 2018 3:40 pm

Jim wrote:I think the say-no-ill-of-the-dead crowd know exactly who they are but may not understand their profound hypocrisy...
Not being a card-carrying member of the speak-no-ill-of-the-dead club, I'll make a brief comment. My estimation of Billy Graham is that his message was kept simple, his methods (using decoys, repeat-after-me prayers, etc.) were misguided, and his alliances were ecumenical.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 816
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby JE Pettibone » Mon Feb 26, 2018 7:26 pm

Rvaughn wrote:
Jim wrote:I think the say-no-ill-of-the-dead crowd know exactly who they are but may not understand their profound hypocrisy...
Not being a card-carrying member of the speak-no-ill-of-the-dead club, I'll make a brief comment. My estimation of Billy Graham is that his message was kept simple, his methods (using decoys, repeat-after-me prayers, etc.) were misguided, and his alliances were ecumenical.


Ed: using decoys ???
JE Pettibone
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 10:48 am

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Tim Bonney » Mon Feb 26, 2018 7:44 pm

Never heard of “allegiances were ecumenical” as in insult before. That’s like, “he’s so bad because he was understanding and cooperative with a wide variety of Christians.” Way to go Jim. :lol:
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5883
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Rvaughn » Mon Feb 26, 2018 11:45 pm

JE Pettibone wrote:Ed: using decoys ???
People in the audience who start moving to the front when the invitation begins, specifically people who are in the audience for that purpose. It's easier to move when you see others moving.
Tim Bonney wrote:Never heard of “allegiances were ecumenical” as in insult before.
That's because you've been hanging with the wrong crowd! :lol:
Graham changed over the years, and began to include modernists and Catholics in the work of his evangelistic campaigns -- a matter that was opposed by many who once supported him. Obviously this is not a negative to those who see nothing wrong with that, but it is a negative to those who do.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 816
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby KeithE » Tue Feb 27, 2018 8:34 am

Rvaughn wrote:
JE Pettibone wrote:Ed: using decoys ???
People in the audience who start moving to the front when the invitation begins, specifically people who are in the audience for that purpose. It's easier to move when you see others moving.
Tim Bonney wrote:Never heard of “allegiances were ecumenical” as in insult before.
That's because you've been hanging with the wrong crowd! :lol:
Graham changed over the years, and began to include modernists and Catholics in the work of his evangelistic campaigns -- a matter that was opposed by many who once supported him. Obviously this is not a negative to those who see nothing wrong with that, but it is a negative to those who do.

The use of decoys would be deceptive but I’m not sure that was ever substantiated. As I remember it he asked for pre-arranged counselors to come forward first (my uncle was often one of those) and then asked for those of us that were stricken and wanted to hear more to come and talk with the counselors.

If you keep your message simple and pure ‘like repent and follow me’, your allegiances can be large, not only ecumenical but interfaith. That is part of what made Billy Graham so effective. If you start adding you must believe a,b,c, ....z (something not in the gospel of Jesus, but exemplified by so many creeds, confessions, and statements of faith), you are in the league of the Pharisees. And if you demand belief in biblical inerrancy you are in the league of the scribes and teachers of the law. Jesus pointed us to Spirit and following that Spirit would lead us to all truth - it is that simple. I agree with Paul when he said “the Law kills but the Spirit gives life”.

The focus on and fine-tuning of creeds (while it can be interesting) has led to the scourge and shame of true Christianity and much judgmentalism of others be it their beliefs or actions. True Christianity (as to biblianity or churchisnity) is simply following Christ (as depicted in the Gospels) and who He taught us to follow - the Holy Spirit our conscience, guide, comforter and leader into all truth. That takes active listening and follow through as the Spirit leads.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
http://www.weatherly.org/discoverycenter
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8795
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Sandy » Tue Feb 27, 2018 9:20 am

I don't think I've ever heard the people who start coming forward during an invitation at a Billy Graham crusade referred to as "decoys." It was a standard practice to have those who were serving as counselors come forward as well as those who were responding to the invitation. Where else would they come from? Anticipating several hundred decisions required having several hundred counselors available, and they'd have to get up and walk forward in order to meet those responding to the invitation.

I also don't see a problem with "ecumenical alliances", and there was a time when that would have bothered me. Association doesn't necessarily constitute "endorsement," and the BGEA had a pretty strong statement of faith. The scripture says, "Every spirit that confesses Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God." I don't believe the church organizations and structures that have been built on standards of human origins represent what "The Church" really is when it comes to what Jesus established. If Graham really had a gift for evangelism that came from the Holy Spirit, he would have developed a broader vision that recognized and included a much broader "Christian" community than separatist denominationalism could accept. That whole argument reminds me of the exchange recorded in Mark 9, where John tells Jesus that they stopped someone from casting out demons in his name because he wasn't one of them. Most of Graham's critics were his fellow conservative Evangelicals.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8743
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Jon Estes » Tue Feb 27, 2018 9:39 am

Rvaughn wrote:
JE Pettibone wrote:Ed: using decoys ???
People in the audience who start moving to the front when the invitation begins, specifically people who are in the audience for that purpose. It's easier to move when you see others moving.

I have been one of those who moved to the front a the call for receiving CHrit was being given. I was moving forward to be there to counsel those who came looking for Jesus. If that movement causes others who are hesitant to move --- to move, then I praise God for using such a simple gesture to get someone over their fears.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 607
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 3:14 am

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Jon Estes » Tue Feb 27, 2018 9:47 am

I think BG had it right. He was more concerned in whom people believed --- not so much the what.

That is one of most evangelicals problems. We focus on the what more than the who.

That's the main cause for the anti-Calvinist protest happening. The last time I checked (this morning), I share the same Who that my non-Calvinists brothers share.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 607
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 3:14 am

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Jim » Tue Feb 27, 2018 10:39 am

Sandy wrote: If Graham really had a gift for evangelism that came from the Holy Spirit, he would have developed a broader vision that recognized and included a much broader "Christian" community than separatist denominationalism could accept.

If the gift for evangelism came REALLY not from the Holy Spirit, from where did it come? Or, alternatively, was he just a fraud, having REALLY no spiritual gift at all?
Jim
 
Posts: 3770
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Rvaughn » Tue Feb 27, 2018 11:15 am

KeithE wrote:The use of decoys would be deceptive but I’m not sure that was ever substantiated.
Jon Estes wrote:I have been one of those who moved to the front a the call for receiving Christ was being given. I was moving forward to be there to counsel those who came looking for Jesus. If that movement causes others who are hesitant to move --- to move, then I praise God for using such a simple gesture to get someone over their fears.
Sandy wrote:I don't think I've ever heard the people who start coming forward during an invitation at a Billy Graham crusade referred to as "decoys."
Apparently "decoys" is not as common a term as I would have thought, but it is the one we used. After Ed asked about it I did a Google search and didn't find anything. Obviously it is a pejorative term that would not be used by those who accept it as a valid strategy.

Placing workers/counselors in the audience who move forward when the invitation begins is an evangelistic strategy, whether one thinks it is valid or invalid. For some it is a simple strategy or method used that evangelists think helps relieve folks of their fears of going forward. In some of the more extreme evangelistic "freak shows" this becomes a greater manipulation (I'm acquainted with it more so in revivals in church buildings than venues like Billy Graham used) in which the members are taught to basically force visitors into the aisles and herd them down to the front. I personally think the former is misleading and the latter is evil.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 816
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Haruo » Tue Feb 27, 2018 12:29 pm

Jim wrote:
Sandy wrote: If Graham really had a gift for evangelism that came from the Holy Spirit, he would have developed a broader vision that recognized and included a much broader "Christian" community than separatist denominationalism could accept.

If the gift for evangelism came REALLY not from the Holy Spirit, from where did it come? Or, alternatively, was he just a fraud, having REALLY no spiritual gift at all?

I think Jim has a point here. Sandy seems to be putting forth a standard for acknowledging the gifts of the Spirit only when the fruits are presented the way he thinks they should be. Only those with (or developing) an acceptable ecclesiopolitical viewpoint can be gifted? There is none Good but God. Just because my sins are different than yours doesn't mean I have a right to throw stones.
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12171
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Sandy » Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:41 pm

Haruo wrote:
Jim wrote:
Sandy wrote: If Graham really had a gift for evangelism that came from the Holy Spirit, he would have developed a broader vision that recognized and included a much broader "Christian" community than separatist denominationalism could accept.

If the gift for evangelism came REALLY not from the Holy Spirit, from where did it come? Or, alternatively, was he just a fraud, having REALLY no spiritual gift at all?

I think Jim has a point here. Sandy seems to be putting forth a standard for acknowledging the gifts of the Spirit only when the fruits are presented the way he thinks they should be. Only those with (or developing) an acceptable ecclesiopolitical viewpoint can be gifted? There is none Good but God. Just because my sins are different than yours doesn't mean I have a right to throw stones.


That's not really the point I made. First of all, the use of the term "really" doesn't mean I think there's any possibility that he wasn't. It's addressing the criticism of his inclusion and ecumenism. The only Christian confession that I can find in the scripture is "Jesus is Lord." The specific connection I was making comes from I John 4:2, By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. And so that's the point I'm making. It has nothing to do with my standard of an acceptable ecclesiopolitical viewpoint, or my sins, the concept didn't originate with me. I'm just accepting it because of who wrote it.

It's not "every spirit that confesses Jesus is Lord, but doesn't venerate Mary," or "every spirit that confesses Jesus is Lord, but doesn't participate in the World Council of Churches," or "every spirit that confesses Jesus and only baptizes by immersion."
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8743
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Haruo » Tue Feb 27, 2018 6:07 pm

So Jim's "point" was the result of his cherrypicking which of your (Sandy's) sentences to cite?
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12171
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Tim Bonney » Tue Feb 27, 2018 7:04 pm

Rvaughn wrote: Graham changed over the years, and began to include modernists and Catholics in the work of his evangelistic campaigns -- a matter that was opposed by many who once supported him. Obviously this is not a negative to those who see nothing wrong with that, but it is a negative to those who do.


Wow, modernists and Catholics. I'll just have to let that sink in a while. Even when I was a Southern Baptist the churches I was involved in were involved ecumenically at least with other Protestant churches and often with local Catholics in St. Louis.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5883
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Tim Bonney » Tue Feb 27, 2018 7:06 pm

KeithE wrote:The focus on and fine-tuning of creeds (while it can be interesting) has led to the scourge and shame of true Christianity and much judgmentalism of others be it their beliefs or actions. True Christianity (as to biblianity or churchisnity) is simply following Christ (as depicted in the Gospels) and who He taught us to follow - the Holy Spirit our conscience, guide, comforter and leader into all truth. That takes active listening and follow through as the Spirit leads.


Agreed Keith. If we were going to use a creed at all, we should have stuck with the simple Apostles' Creed. None of the social issues we argue about now is in that creed. But when we over define, we divide.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5883
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby KeithE » Tue Feb 27, 2018 7:44 pm

Tim Bonney wrote:
KeithE wrote:The focus on and fine-tuning of creeds (while it can be interesting) has led to the scourge and shame of true Christianity and much judgmentalism of others be it their beliefs or actions. True Christianity (as to biblianity or churchisnity) is simply following Christ (as depicted in the Gospels) and who He taught us to follow - the Holy Spirit our conscience, guide, comforter and leader into all truth. That takes active listening and follow through as the Spirit leads.


Agreed Keith. If we were going to use a creed at all, we should have stuck with the simple Apostles' Creed. None of the social issues we argue about now is in that creed. But when we over define, we divide.


The the key killing belief is the innerancy or infallibility of the bible (not mentioned in tha Apostles Creed). That belief leads to hundreds of disagreements in choice of one passage over contradictory passages or disparent interpretations all with a huff and puff.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
http://www.weatherly.org/discoverycenter
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8795
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Rvaughn » Tue Feb 27, 2018 8:28 pm

Tim Bonney wrote:Wow, modernists and Catholics. I'll just have to let that sink in a while. Even when I was a Southern Baptist the churches I was involved in were involved ecumenically at least with other Protestant churches and often with local Catholics in St. Louis.
Tim, I find your incredulity incredulous. You didn't know even a few Southern Baptists who opposed Modernism and Catholicism?? Even Billy Graham did at one time.

After an ad appeared in The Pilot in 1949 (the magazine of Northwestern where Graham was president from 1949 to 1952) for a book by Harry Emerson Fosdick, Graham wrote in the next issue, "I am sorry for this advertisement having appeared, because we do not condone nor have fellowship with any form of modernism...Dr. Fosdick's position is well known as that of an extreme modernist." The year before that he said, "The three gravest menaces faced by orthodox Christianity are communism, Roman Catholicism, and Mohammedanism." These things (opposition of Baptists to modernism and Catholicism) were not done in a corner.

[Note: edited to correct a typo.]
Last edited by Rvaughn on Wed Feb 28, 2018 1:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 816
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Haruo » Wed Feb 28, 2018 6:13 am

This is a bit off-topic (especially the Fosdick part), but is the sort of thing I am known to wonder about:

1) It's my understanding that in the 1950s there were demonstrations in England protesting Graham's being allowed into the country because of his extremist views, but I've never known what particular issue sparked them. Was it his anti-Catholic positions (which also, by turning him towards Nixon, may have helped initiate his long-running collusion with worldly power in DC)?

2) The mention of Dr. Fosdick, and his regret that such a fine paper would print an ad for such a modernist, pope-loving book, reminds me of the question whether there are many anti-modernists who refuse to sing "God of grace, and God of glory" because of its author's modernist inclinations, and on a related line of thought, whether there are many Trinitarians (Baptist or otherwise) who refuse to sing "It came upon the midnight clear" or "A mighty Fortress is our God" because their author and translator, respectively, were Unitarians.
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12171
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Billy Graham 1918-2018

Postby Rvaughn » Wed Feb 28, 2018 9:47 am

Tim Bonney wrote:Never heard of “allegiances were ecumenical” as in insult before. That’s like, “he’s so bad because he was understanding and cooperative with a wide variety of Christians.”
KeithE wrote:The focus on and fine-tuning of creeds (while it can be interesting) has led to the scourge and shame of true Christianity and much judgmentalism of others be it their beliefs or actions.
Sandy wrote:The scripture says, "Every spirit that confesses Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God."
It's not that hard to present yourselves as relatively pretty when comparing yourselves to ourselves. But we'll not mention your own separation from fundamentalists, inerrantists, primitivists, and such like, who confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. Nor would we mention the problems of judgment, division, and separation within your own fellowships, conferences, and denominations.
Haruo wrote:2) The mention of Dr. Fosdick, and his regret that such a fine paper would print an ad for such a modernist, pope-loving book, reminds me of the question whether there are many anti-modernists who refuse to sing "God of grace, and God of glory" because of its author's modernist inclinations, and on a related line of thought, whether there are many Trinitarians (Baptist or otherwise) who refuse to sing "It came upon the midnight clear" or "A mighty Fortress is our God" because their author and translator, respectively, were Unitarians.
We don't sing "God of grace, and God of glory" or "A mighty Fortress is our God" for simpler reasons -- not in the books we use! We do sing "It came upon the midnight clear" and I doubt anyone in our church knows (other than me) or cares about who wrote it. In the broader "anti-modernist" home where I hang my hat, I don't see a lot of people searching behind the words of hymns to worry over the theology of the authors (though I have seen some of it); that is, if they agree with the theology of the hymn itself (and sometimes we aren't really all that careful about that either). I vividly remember one preacher opposed singing "I Saw the Light" because it was written by a boozing womanizer (Hank Williams) -- or perhaps some other words not so kind. Usually we find more being sticklers over the words of the hymns themselves.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 816
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

PreviousNext

Return to Baptist Faith & Practice Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests