Jump to content
Online Baptist

Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Billy Graham

Attended Reformed Presbyterian Church as a youth with his parents & while attend it he claimed to have been saved.

The Presbyterian Church claims one is saved because of grace, yet they hold to lots of the same teaching of the RRC & Lutheran, that this saving grace is extended though baptizing & the Lord's Supper.

I had been told that he grew up as a Baptist, that was not true, it seems his 1st experience with Baptist was the 1st church he was pastor of was 1st Baptist Missionary Church of Western Springs in IL.

Now I understand where he was coming from in accepting false teaching about being saved, & joining together will the Catholics, Pentecostals, Lutherans, & so on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Billy Graham, over the years, went his own way rather than sticking completely with scripture. He was warned by a number of men who saw the trail he was beginning to take. He chose to ignore the warni

That is then even more egregious. Because if he is preaching salvation and then lying about other things he supposedly believes, then logically folks who are lost will reject salvation because Graham

1 John 4:1-5 4 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Ev

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Yes, Presbyterians are Catholic, but not "Roman Catholic" same with Lutheran and Episcopalian. They merely broke away from popish control, but kept most of their false doctrine.

I believe Billy Sunday was Presbyterian too, and he had some funny ideas. J. Vernon Mcgee also.

Edited by irishman
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

The Presbyterian statement of faith - the Westminster Confession - is almost identical with the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith.

The principle differences from Baptists concern:
baptism - of believers by immersion, rather than infants, optionally by sprinkling;
church government of churches by a presbytery of elders, rather than independency;
and the role of civil magistrates - the net effect being that where possible Presbyterians become the established church - as in Scotland & Geneva.

In England the Presbyterians & other non-conformists suffered harsh restrictions after the restoration of Charles II in 1660, & were expelled from their pulpits & suffered serious penalties if they continued to preach. The Ps largely departed from their doctrine by 1700 & many became unitarian. Happily the Methodist revival called the people back to the Gospel. The Baptists never had a national influence.

About 30 years ago the English Ps & Congregationalists (Independents) merged to form the United Reformed Church. The (dis)unity was such that the Congs divided into 4 - one faction merging, & one maintaining the faith & 2 more or less modernist. (The Evangelical Congregational Fellowship.) There were more in the Cong church before the merger than in the United Reformed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Yes, Presbyterians are Catholic, but not "Roman Catholic" same with Lutheran and Episcopalian. They merely broke away from popish control, but kept most of their false doctrine.

I believe Billy Sunday was Presbyterian too, and he had some funny ideas. J. Vernon Mcgee also.


I've read several of Billy Sunday's sermons, from them it seemed that he did not seem to be as liberal as Mr. Graham. I will try & do a bit more reading on Mr. Sunday.

And sad to say, the Presbyterians did bring much of the baggage of the RCC with them, as did Luther.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

The early English Baptists came out of the Presbyterians when they returned from exile in the Netherlands in the 1640s. The only thing in which they differed at first was in the matter of baptism. The congregationals were from the Independents, who included those of The Countess of Huntindon's Connexion. Samuel Eyles Pierce founded the first baptist church in Faversham, about 8 miles from here in 1818. He had been a preacher of "her ladyship." My previous pastor who was a baptist historian told me that Eyles was not a baptist, although near the end of his memoires, Eyles remarked, "..before I was a baptist."

William Huntington was also one of her ladyship's preachers and although not a baptist, some baptists walked miles to hear him preach in the early 1800s.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
And sad to say, the Presbyterians did bring much of the baggage of the RCC with them, as did Luther.

The Ps I am in contact with are reformed & strongly anti-RC. My principle objections to the Westminster Confession are infant baptism, which they justify from Scripture; & the concept of a national church rather than independency, with the civil authorities having responsibility to maintain order in the church. The tendency is to look to the OT & regulations for Israel.

Those things are not "RCC baggage" - can you list what you mean.

I understand Billy G justified his ecumenism by a desire to preach to as many as possible, including RCs & liberals who need the gospel, & so co-operated with them. We would not approve that attitude, but to what extent sinners heard the Gospel & were saved in spite of their church allegiance, only God knows.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The Ps I am in contact with are reformed & strongly anti-RC. My principle objections to the Westminster Confession are infant baptism, which they justify from Scripture; & the concept of a national church rather than independency, with the civil authorities having responsibility to maintain order in the church. The tendency is to look to the OT & regulations for Israel.

Those things are not "RCC baggage" - can you list what you mean.

I understand Billy G justified his ecumenism by a desire to preach to as many as possible, including RCs & liberals who need the gospel, & so co-operated with them. We would not approve that attitude, but to what extent sinners heard the Gospel & were saved in spite of their church allegiance, only God knows.



What your asking for is easily found in this day & time, & its seems your trying to defend him, before doing that you need to check him out thoroughly.

They do believe in works base salvation, & most of it comes from the RCC as has been stated by more than one person.

You can't justify not standing, supporting, all of God's truths, & that's exactly what Mr. Graham has been doing for many years.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

What your asking for is easily found in this day & time, & its seems your trying to defend him, before doing that you need to check him out thoroughly.

They do believe in works base salvation, & most of it comes from the RCC as has been stated by more than one person.

You can't justify not standing, supporting, all of God's truths, & that's exactly what Mr. Graham has been doing for many years.

One of the worst aspects of Billy Graham's yoking with the RCC and other false and watered down churches was that it gave an air of legitimacy to them, leading many who would have never have considered such wayward churches to think of them as sound.

Along these same lines is the practice of Billy Graham to send all who came forward and made any mention of being Catholic or having some connection to some wayward church, to refer them back to these churches.

No doubt some were saved over the years through Billy Graham's preaching, yet how many had their growth in Christ stunted by being shuttled into unsound churches and false religions? How many were not saved through a Billy Graham event yet went forward to learn more only to be pointed to a church which didn't preach the Gospel?

Any time we trust in our own efforts there will be trouble and work for the Lord will be hampered. While it may seem right and smart to yoke with the RCC and wayward churches in order to preach to more people, what is truly right and smart is obeying the Word of God and trusting Him with the results.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I have never supported BG's ministry, though my ONLY visit to Wembley Stadium was to hear him in the 50s - coaches were running from all over the country to his meetings.

The point is that despite the excellence of IFB churches & similar, probably most people are converted through churches & ministries that are less than ideal. WE were guided into sound Gospel churches from wherever we were converted, but there are many Christians in unsound churches. We need to welcome those who do come to us, at least initially without disparaging the preachers through whom they came to faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

My uncle, aunt and one of my cousins were converted at an early BG rally in London. They were anglicans, but left to join an evangelical baptist church. I believe my uncle fell away later but my Aunt and cousin went on with the Lord. Another son was converted at the church they now attended, and his children were also saved, so the work of BG was not all failure.

I heard BG in his early ministry and:
Graham preached Christ crucified. 1Co 1:23
He preached repentance. Acts 2:38, Acts 3:19

However, he did not recognize the absolute evil of the church of Rome, the Mystery Babylon of the Apocalypse, the harlot church, as opposed to the true church, the Bride, the New Jerusalem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

At a Billy Graham Crusade.

Mr. Graham preaches his message, them an invitation is given. They have several trained counselors for those who come forward. During their brief training they have to agree, when someone comes forward to them, to ask if they have a preference, if they state Catholic or whatever, if they are Baptist they have to send that person to a Catholic or whatever counselors.

Mr. Graham will accept pastors, or Church Workers from almost any church to be counselors at his crusades, in fact he sends people ahead to try & get all of the local churches to join in with him & support his crusade, for that gives him credibility, an insures a larger crowd of people, with more people supporting him with their money, & of course, that insures many will leave with a false hope.

Which, if a person goes to a Catholic counselor, & their preference is Baptist, that is great, for likely they will be truly counseled on the one & only way a person can be saved. Yet if they go to one of the other counselors, they will likely be told the wrong ways.

Yet, the Catholics are not the only other one that teaches works based salvation, most organized churches teach some sort of work based salvation. So in effect, most that go forward at a Mr. Graham Crusade will be taught a false hope of being saved, its harder to win someone to Christ that has a false hope than one that has no hope.

Yet, the Baptist that joins in this service, just by being there, is saying, I approve of everything that is preached, taught, & or done at this crusade.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I have never supported BG's ministry, though my ONLY visit to Wembley Stadium was to hear him in the 50s - coaches were running from all over the country to his meetings.

The point is that despite the excellence of IFB churches & similar, probably most people are converted through churches & ministries that are less than ideal. WE were guided into sound Gospel churches from wherever we were converted, but there are many Christians in unsound churches. We need to welcome those who do come to us, at least initially without disparaging the preachers through whom they came to faith.

The Billy Graham of the 50s was much more biblically sound than the Billy Graham of any of the decades after that.

No doubt many come to Christ outside IFB churches, as I did, and there are true Christians in non-IFB churches, but I would guess the number of true Christians in many of these churches is far less than what is reported or even believed.

I agree that we should not disparage preachers that may have helped someone come to Christ but we should kindly and biblically tell the truth about them.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

My uncle, aunt and one of my cousins were converted at an early BG rally in London. They were anglicans, but left to join an evangelical baptist church. I believe my uncle fell away later but my Aunt and cousin went on with the Lord. Another son was converted at the church they now attended, and his children were also saved, so the work of BG was not all failure.

I heard BG in his early ministry and:
Graham preached Christ crucified. 1Co 1:23
He preached repentance. Acts 2:38, Acts 3:19

However, he did not recognize the absolute evil of the church of Rome, the Mystery Babylon of the Apocalypse, the harlot church, as opposed to the true church, the Bride, the New Jerusalem.

Billy Graham early on preached the Gospel. As time went by he watered down his message and eventually stated that there are other ways for people to get to heaven.

Very early on Billy Graham kept separate from the RCC but he obviously didn't recognize their evil because it didn't take long before he was reaching out to the RCC and then yoking with them, even sending anyone who came forward and said they were a Catholic back to the RCC.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

At a Billy Graham Crusade.

Mr. Graham preaches his message, them an invitation is given. They have several trained counselors for those who come forward. During their brief training they have to agree, when someone comes forward to them, to ask if they have a preference, if they state Catholic or whatever, if they are Baptist they have to send that person to a Catholic or whatever counselors.

Mr. Graham will accept pastors, or Church Workers from almost any church to be counselors at his crusades, in fact he sends people ahead to try & get all of the local churches to join in with him & support his crusade, for that gives him credibility, an insures a larger crowd of people, with more people supporting him with their money, & of course, that insures many will leave with a false hope.

Which, if a person goes to a Catholic counselor, & their preference is Baptist, that is great, for likely they will be truly counseled on the one & only way a person can be saved. Yet if they go to one of the other counselors, they will likely be told the wrong ways.

Yet, the Catholics are not the only other one that teaches works based salvation, most organized churches teach some sort of work based salvation. So in effect, most that go forward at a Mr. Graham Crusade will be taught a false hope of being saved, its harder to win someone to Christ that has a false hope than one that has no hope.

Yet, the Baptist that joins in this service, just by being there, is saying, I approve of everything that is preached, taught, & or done at this crusade.

That has long been one of the most dangerous aspects of the Billy Graham crusades. Thousands went forward, not all of which were born again at that time, only to find themselves referred back to whatever church they claimed an affliliation with, even if it was the false church of the RCC or some other gospel preaching church like a liberal Episcopal or United Methodist church. What opportunity did these folks then have of actually hearing the Gospel there?

While many did come to Christ over the years at his crusades, many more made emotional "decisions for Christ" and then left those crusades feeling okay with God and in no need of further attention to the matter.

Much of the material put forth by Billy Graham ministries, especially as time went by, was of a very watered down, ecumenical and simplistic nature.

The ministry is now in the hands of Billy's son Franklin. While there are issues to address with how Franklin does some things, I have noticed that he takes every opportunity to present the Gospel no matter where he is at. There has not been a time I've seen him on a news program or any other show on TV where he didn't present the Gospel message, and oftentimes more than once.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

His son uses the same plan for counselors as his father did, so its the same old thing at their crusades. And son carry's much of his fathers baggage.

I agree, that aspect is still a mess. The only thing I was pointing out is that, unlike his dad, Franklin takes the opportunity to present the Gospel any time he has an audience, whether in public, on radio or TV and no matter who is present. Billy became to worried about offending someone to do that, but at least for now, Franklin puts the Gospel forth often. Even so, I would certainly not endorse Billy Graham Ministries.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

The Presbyterian statement of faith - the Westminster Confession - is almost identical with the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith.

The principle differences from Baptists concern:
baptism - of believers by immersion, rather than infants, optionally by sprinkling;
church government of churches by a presbytery of elders, rather than independency;
and the role of civil magistrates - the net effect being that where possible Presbyterians become the established church - as in Scotland & Geneva.

In England the Presbyterians & other non-conformists suffered harsh restrictions after the restoration of Charles II in 1660, & were expelled from their pulpits & suffered serious penalties if they continued to preach. The Ps largely departed from their doctrine by 1700 & many became unitarian. Happily the Methodist revival called the people back to the Gospel. The Baptists never had a national influence.

About 30 years ago the English Ps & Congregationalists (Independents) merged to form the United Reformed Church. The (dis)unity was such that the Congs divided into 4 - one faction merging, & one maintaining the faith & 2 more or less modernist. (The Evangelical Congregational Fellowship.) There were more in the Cong church before the merger than in the United Reformed.


That is what I thought
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I've seen a quote from Billy Graham in the late 1940s showing his ecumenism, rejection of separation and other heresies. He's been a great tool for Satan and awful for the cause of Christ by sending many millions more to hell than to heaven.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 7 months later...

Billy Graham

Attended Reformed Presbyterian Church as a youth with his parents & while attend it he claimed to have been saved.

The Presbyterian Church claims one is saved because of grace, yet they hold to lots of the same teaching of the RRC & Lutheran, that this saving grace is extended though baptizing & the Lord's Supper.

I had been told that he grew up as a Baptist, that was not true, it seems his 1st experience with Baptist was the 1st church he was pastor of was 1st Baptist Missionary Church of Western Springs in IL.

Now I understand where he was coming from in accepting false teaching about being saved, & joining together will the Catholics, Pentecostals, Lutherans, & so on.

Gotta love that amazing Catholic grace. How sweet the sound. We don't like Presbyterians either. Women pastors? What will they think of next.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

He did preach salvation at one stage, but came.out many years ago with a changed perspective, including all religions as legitimate.

My mum was saved at a Billy Graham "crusade" many many years ago, but as was their method, those that did actually get saved were left to wander in the wilderness without a "Philip" to guide them.

As a result I was brought up in a moral, but non-christian home.
Years later my mum and Dad (saved in Vietnam about the same time as mum - again, no follow up) were invited by friends to an IFB church - knew that the message was.what they both heard years before, and have never looked back.

He did preach it once, but not for many years now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

My aunt and cousin were both saved at a Graham 'crusade'.

I have always had problems with that word. Crusades were evil wars. Many of them were conducted to exterminate Christians.


Yes, and I also have problems with the method.
To tell people of salvation and then leave them to whatever wolves are prowling is not only dangerous, it is also unbiblical.

With my father in Vietnam it is understandable. It was in the war, he met the guy once, never again, but that once was enough. The situation was that way.
Billy Graham and others of his Ilk? Should know better, and should at the very least have suggested contacts wherever they go. Alas, he was already ecumenical by that time and couldn't be seen to promote one over the other - it would affect his popularity.......

Even evangelical outreach should be done under a local church.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Yes, and I also have problems with the method.
To tell people of salvation and then leave them to whatever wolves are prowling is not only dangerous, it is also unbiblical.

With my father in Vietnam it is understandable. It was in the war, he met the guy once, never again, but that once was enough. The situation was that way.
Billy Graham and others of his Ilk? Should know better, and should at the very least have suggested contacts wherever they go. Alas, he was already ecumenical by that time and couldn't be seen to promote one over the other - it would affect his popularity.......

Even evangelical outreach should be done under a local church.

The sad thing is that many Baptist churches and Christians today do much the same thing. They go out soul winning, all too many do this in an unbiblical manner, and once they get someone to say a "salvation prayer" with them, they put a mark in their notebook and move on. The potential newborn believer in Christ is left undiscipled.

 

Billy Graham made a conscious decision to water down and ignore most all things for the sake of being able to preach the way of salvation to larger crowds. Those who responded were all too often ushered right into the watered down or false churches they came from. True discipleship was almost nonexistent and there was no consistent discussion with those coming forward to see if they actually understood the Gospel and had been born again or not.

 

Worse yet, as he got older he began making statements that contradicted the Gospel he had been preaching in his crusades! Billy came out saying he couldn't believe God would send someone to hell if they had never directly heard the Gospel clearly presented to them, so they must get some sort of free pass into heaven. (If I'm not mistaken, Charles Stanley has adopted a similar position latter in his life) Billy further stated that there were some in other religions who were "sincere" (whatever that may mean) in wanting to serve God so even if they were Muslim, Hindu, Mormon or whatever, they would be going to heaven too. (This is a position that Mother Teresa also promoted)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

John81 said:

 

"The sad thing is that many Baptist churches and Christians today do much the same thing. They go out soul winning, all too many do this in an unbiblical manner, and once they get someone to say a "salvation prayer" with them, they put a mark in their notebook and move on. The potential newborn believer in Christ is left undiscipled."

 

 

So true.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

He did preach salvation at one stage, but came.out many years ago with a changed perspective, including all religions as legitimate.

My mum was saved at a Billy Graham "crusade" many many years ago, but as was their method, those that did actually get saved were left to wander in the wilderness without a "Philip" to guide them.

As a result I was brought up in a moral, but non-christian home.
Years later my mum and Dad (saved in Vietnam about the same time as mum - again, no follow up) were invited by friends to an IFB church - knew that the message was.what they both heard years before, and have never looked back.

He did preach it once, but not for many years now.

 

If you will check out the Presbyterian you will find that they do not teach salvation only by grace though faith, although they do teach your save by grace,  but it though works, baptizing, & church membership.

 

And yes, many of his sermons seems to say by grace though faith, not of works, not of self, its a gift.

 

And because of that teaching is why he will call Catholics, brothers & sister in Christ, as well as all of those protestant churches that came out of the RCC bringing RCC teachings with them. He has been a great bridge builder, & led many churches, many people, into  false teachings.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

John81 said:

 

"The sad thing is that many Baptist churches and Christians today do much the same thing. They go out soul winning, all too many do this in an unbiblical manner, and once they get someone to say a "salvation prayer" with them, they put a mark in their notebook and move on. The potential newborn believer in Christ is left undiscipled."

 

 

So true.

 

 

Many of them are left undiscipled because they refuse to attend church, & you cannot make them attend church services. All you can do is try your best to encourage & invite them. 

 

For instants, you can lead the mule to water, but I guarantee you will not be able to make the mule drink water, if he does not want to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I don't think I ever hard a sermon by the guy - but my mum did, and she got saved that day - she is certain of it. I wasn't there, I can't say for sure.

But because there was no follow up there was no growth.
When she heard the Gospel preached years later, she recognised it as what she did all those years before.

I know the guy had his problems doctrinally, and I know that his para-church methods are not biblical, and I know he he is VERY plainly teaching another gospel, which is not another today, but I also know my mum's testimony.

Maybe she got saved in spite of what he preached that day - I don't know.

But I don't endorse his ministry, and certainly didn't mean it to sound that way.

To be honest, I didn't know his background and didn't really care to. What he has preached for many years is enough to know that he is not on the narrow way now, regardless of which way he was on many years ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I don't think I ever hard a sermon by the guy - but my mum did, and she got saved that day - she is certain of it. I wasn't there, I can't say for sure.

But because there was no follow up there was no growth.
When she heard the Gospel preached years later, she recognised it as what she did all those years before.

I know the guy had his problems doctrinally, and I know that his para-church methods are not biblical, and I know he he is VERY plainly teaching another gospel, which is not another today, but I also know my mum's testimony.

Maybe she got saved in spite of what he preached that day - I don't know.

But I don't endorse his ministry, and certainly didn't mean it to sound that way.

To be honest, I didn't know his background and didn't really care to. What he has preached for many years is enough to know that he is not on the narrow way now, regardless of which way he was on many years ago.

 

 

There’s lots of people who think they got saved at a Billy Graham Crusade, yet the only thing they have is a false hope. The big problem comes from the councilors.
 
To be a councilors at one of his crusades you have to be counseled, & agree to his terms. Them at the invitation when a person comes forward before you can counsels that person you have to ask them if they prefer any certain church. So, if you’re a Baptist councilors & the person comes to you, & you ask them that question, & they say they prefer Catholic, you must send them to a Catholic councilor.
 
If that person says they prefer Presbyterian, them you have to send them to a Presbyterian councilor.
 
If that person says they prefer Pentecostal, then you must send them to a Pentecostal councilor.
 
Thus most people that come forwards will talk with a false teaching councilor, & leave lost.
 
The only good thing about his crusades it that the Catholic, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, or others beside Baptist councilor ask the person if they have a preference, & they say Baptist, them they're suppose to send that person to a Baptist councilor. But can they be trusted  if they teach a false gospel. I just cannot trust them, just think who their father is. "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it." Joh 8:44
 
 
So at his crusades many walk away having only a false hope of Heaven, & its much harder to win someone to Christ that has a false hope, than it is someone that has no hope. So his crusades have done very much damage, spreading a false gospel. God tells us to come out from among them, not join up with them, & not wish them God speed.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Many of them are left undiscipled because they refuse to attend church, & you cannot make them attend church services. All you can do is try your best to encourage & invite them. 

 

For instants, you can lead the mule to water, but I guarantee you will not be able to make the mule drink water, if he does not want to.

I've not yet met a person who was truly born again in Christ who wasn't interested in attending church. Every new believer I've ever known was eager to be discipled, eager to know what church to attend, eager to go as soon as possible.

 

There have been many false converts who professed they accepted Christ and not a one of them was interested in church or discipling. They claimed to be born again, but they were quick to make excuses why they couldn't go to any good church offered and why they couldn't get together for discipling.

 

This is something I also noticed when a friend and I were witnessing to Catholics. Every Catholic that was born again in Christ immediately rejected and renounced the RCC and asked about a true church they could attend. Each one of them was eager and excited to join our Bible study so they could learn the truth of Scripture.

 

Anyone we witness to that claims to accept Christ yet has no desire for the things of Christ, we need to try and guide them to examine their claim of salvation and go over the Gospel with them again; if they will allow it. Likely as not, if they claim to accept Christ but have no desire for the things of Christ, they are either outright lying about their profession or simply making a false profession for any number of reasons. Whatever the case, they are yet lost in their sins and need to be confronted with that so hopefully they won't walk away with a false sense of hope.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 40 Guests (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

×
×
  • Create New...