Jump to content
Online Baptist Community
  • Newest Sermon Entry

    • By Jim_Alaska in Jim_Alaska's Sermons & Devotionals
         14
      Closed Communion
      James Foley
       
      I Corinthians 11:17-34: "Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's Supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world. Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come."

      INTRODUCTION

      Historic Baptists, true Baptists, have believed in and still believe in closed communion. Baptists impose upon themselves the same restrictions that they impose on others concerning the Lord’s Supper. Baptists have always insisted that it is the Lord’s Table, not theirs; and He alone has the right to say who shall sit at His table. No amount of so called brotherly love, or ecumenical spirit, should cause us to invite to His table those who have not complied with the requirements laid down plainly in His inspired Word. With respect to Bible doctrines we must always use the scripture as our guide and practice. For Baptists, two of the most important doctrines are Baptism and The Lord’s Supper. These are the only two doctrines we recognize as Church Ordinances. The Bible is very clear in teaching how these doctrines are to be practiced and by whom.

      We only have two ordinances that we must never compromise or we risk our very existence, they are Baptism and The Lord’s Supper.

      The moment we deviate from the precise method God has prescribed we have started down the slippery slope of error. True Baptists have held fast to the original doctrine of The Lord’s Supper from the time of Christ and the Apostles.

      Unfortunately, in this day of what the Bible describes as the age of luke warmness, Baptists are becoming careless in regard to strictly following the pattern laid out for us in Scripture. Many of our Bible colleges are graduating otherwise sincere, Godly and dedicated pastors and teachers who have not been taught the very strict, biblical requirements that surround the Lord’s Supper. Any Bible college that neglects to teach its students the differences surrounding Closed Communion, Close Communion and Open Communion is not simply short changing its students; it is also not equipping their students to carry on sound Bible traditions. The result is men of God and churches that fall into error. And as we will see, this is serious error.

      Should we as Baptists ignore the restrictions made by our Lord and Master? NO! When we hold to the restrictions placed upon the Lord’s Supper by our Master, we are defending the "faith which was once delivered to the saints" Jude 3.

      The Lord’s Supper is rigidly restricted and I will show this in the following facts:

      IT IS RESTRICTED AS TO PLACE

      A. I Corinthians 11:18 says, "When ye come together in the church." This does not mean the church building; they had none. In other words, when the church assembles. The supper is to be observed by the church, in church capacity. Again this does not mean the church house. Ekklesia, the Greek word for church, means assembly. "When ye come together in the church," is when the church assembles.

      B. When we say church we mean an assembly of properly baptized believers. Acts 2:41-42: "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers."

      The church is made up of saved people who are baptized by immersion. In the Bible, belief precedes baptism. That’s the Bible way.

      Acts 8:12-13, "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done."

      When we say properly baptized, we mean immersed. No unbeliever should take the Lord’s supper, and no non-immersed believer should take the supper. Those who are sprinkled are not baptized and cannot receive the supper. The Greek word for baptize is baptizo, and it always means to immerse.

      "In every case where communion is referred to, or where it may possibly have been administered, the believers had been baptized Acts 2:42; 8:12; 8:38; 10:47; 6:14-15; 18:8; 20:7. Baptism comes before communion, just as repentance and faith precede baptism".

      C. The Lord’s Supper is for baptized believers in church capacity: "When ye come together in the church," again not a building, but the assembly of the properly baptized believers.

      D. The fact that the Lord’s Supper is a church ordinance, to be observed in church capacity, is pointed out by the fact that it is for those who have been immersed and added to the fellowship of the church.

      E. The Lord’s Supper is never spoken of in connection with individuals. When it is referred to, it is only referred to in reference to baptized believers in local church capacity I Cor. 11:20-26).

      I want to quote Dr. W.W. Hamilton,

      "The individual administration of the ordinance has no Bible warrant and is a relic of Romanism. The Lord’s Supper is a church ordinance, and anything which goes beyond or comes short of this fails for want of scriptural example or command".

      “The practice of taking a little communion kit to hospitals, nursing homes, etc. is unscriptural and does not follow the scriptural example.”

      IT IS RESTRICTED TO A UNITED CHURCH

      A. The Bible in I Cor. 11:18 is very strong in condemning divisions around the Lord’s table. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
      19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
      20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.

      There were no less than four divisions in the Corinthian church.
      I Cor. 1:12: "Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ."

      Because of these divisions, it was impossible for them to scripturally eat the Lord’s Supper. Division in the local church is reason to hold off observing the Lord’s Supper. But there are also other reasons to forego taking the Lord’s Supper. If there is gross sin in the membership we do not take it. Here is scriptural evidence for this: 1Co 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us:
      8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. 9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
      10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. 11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

      B. At this point, I want to ask these questions: Are there not doctrinal divisions among the many denominations? Is it not our doctrinal differences that cause us to be separate religious bodies?

      IT IS RESTRICTED BY DOCTRINE

      A. Those in the early church at Jerusalem who partook "continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine" Acts 2:42. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

      B. Those that do not hold to apostolic truth are not to partake. This means there is to be discipline in the local body. How can you discipline those who do not belong to the local body? You can’t. The clear command of scripture is to withdraw fellowship from those who are not doctrinally sound.

      II Thes 3:6: "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us."
      Rom. 16:17: "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them."
      To commune together means to have the same doctrine.
      II Thes. 2:15: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
      II John 10-11: "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds."

      C. Some Baptists in our day have watered down this doctrine by practicing what they call “Close Communion.” By this they mean that they believe that members of another Baptist church may take communion with us because they are of the same beliefs. Once again, this is unscriptural.

      The welcome to the Lord's Table should not be extended beyond the discipline of the local church. When we take the Lord’s Supper there is supposed to be no gross sin among us and no divisions among us. We have no idea of the spiritual condition of another church’s members. If there is sin or division in the case of this other church’s members, we have no way of knowing it. We cannot discipline them because they are not members of our church. This is why we practice “Closed” communion, meaning it is restricted solely to our church membership. 
      So then, in closing I would like to reiterate the three different ideas concerning the Lord’s Supper and who is to take it. 
      Closed Communion = Only members of a single local church. 
      Close Communion = Members of like faith and order may partake. 
      Open Communion = If you claim to be a Christian, or simply attending the service, you may partake. 
      It is no small thing to attempt to change that which was implemented by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 
      Mt. 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. 
      Many of our Baptist churches have a real need to consider the gravity of the act of observing The Lord’s Supper. It is not a light thing that is to be taken casually or without regard to the spiritual condition of ourselves or our church.
      1Co. 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

       28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

       29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

       30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

Rapture


Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The general persecutions and tribulations of the church age saints are caused by the "the wrath of wicked men and the devil" (John 16:33). The coming 7 year tribulation is a period which pertains to "God's wrath"...or the "day of His wrath" (Psalm 110:5; Revelation 6:17; Isaiah 13:6-13, etc.). The Body of Christ/the Church will not see God's wrath, but will be delivered from it, as God promised (1 Thessalonians 1:9-10; 1 Thessalonians 5:1-9; Romans 5:9; Revelation 3:10).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member
I think with this topic it's good to make a difference where Scripture talks about general tribulation as a principle and then on the other hand the great tribulation, a specific, future event which as far as I can see doesn't relate to the church.

Agreed - the great tribulation was certainly a specific, event which didn't/doesn't relate to the church. It was future when Jesus prophesied it, but what about the Revelation refs? In Rev. 1 & 2 the church suffers, while the Thyatira great tribulation is a specific judgment, not THE great tribulation. That leaves:
7:
14
And I said u
nt
o him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their r
ob
es, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Have they suffered tribulation, or been protected from it? Protected. They include the 144,000 Jewish believers who were sealed before the four angels were turned loose to wreak havoc on the earth, together with a great multitude of the redeemed from all mankind.

These Jewish believers, who had continued faithful through the increasing apostasy of the nation prior to the destruction, & saw the loss of everything as they fled the city before the final siege - & great tribulation prophesied by the Lord - receive their full reward:
15
Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them.

16
They shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more; neither shall the sun light on them, nor any heat.

17
For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them u
nt
o living fou
nt
ains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.


They (these Jewish first-fruits (Rev. 14)) came out before the great tribulation in the run-up to the destruction through the Lord's protection, & John sees them numbered with all the redeemed in glory.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Agreed - the great tribulation was certainly a specific, event which didn't/doesn't relate to the church. It was future when Jesus prophesied it, but what about the Revelation refs? In Rev. 1 & 2 the church suffers, while the Thyatira great tribulation is a specific judgment, not THE great tribulation. That leaves:
7:
14
And I said u
nt
o him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their r
ob
es, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Have they suffered tribulation, or been protected from it? Protected. They include the 144,000 Jewish believers who were sealed before the four angels were turned loose to wreak havoc on the earth, together with a great multitude of the redeemed from all mankind.

These Jewish believers, who had continued faithful through the increasing apostasy of the nation prior to the destruction, & saw the loss of everything as they fled the city before the final siege - & great tribulation prophesied by the Lord - receive their full reward:
15
Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them.

16
They shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more; neither shall the sun light on them, nor any heat.

17
For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them u
nt
o living fou
nt
ains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.


They (these Jewish first-fruits (Rev. 14)) came out before the great tribulation in the run-up to the destruction through the Lord's protection, & John sees them numbered with all the redeemed in glory.


Covenanter:

Actually, I don't think that the great tribulation of Matthew 24.21 refers to AD70 at all:

'For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.'
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Matthew 24:21 is future....it will be the fulfillment of Daniel 9:27:

Daniel 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Matthew 24:21 is future....it will be the fulfillment of Daniel 9:27:

Daniel 9:27 And he (Christ) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:(He did, Romans 13:8) and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, (Christ fulfilled this by His death on the Cross in the midst of the week.) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. The desolations that were poured out on the Jews, for the ultimate sin, rejecting and crucifying their long promised Messiah, which would all come on the generation that perpetrated this, Matt 23:30-36, Matt 24:34, Mark 13:30, Luke 21:24, Duet 28. He made it desolate as these were the days of vengence, as Jesus said,Luke 21:22, completeing the quote from Isaiah, he made in Luke 4:18-21 .The overspreading of abominations were possibly those Jews who, rebelling against their legal government, Caesar, performed all forms of abomination the the temple, killing the high priests and shedding innocent blood in the temple. He made it desolate and took away their vineyard and gave it to another bearing the fruits thereof.
Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

OR

"He" refers the last person mentioned, the prince that shall come, and the prince that shall come confirms the covenant for 7 years, then stops animal sacrifices and commits the abomination of desolation.

No twisting, stretching, or subtracting of the text is needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I read some on the Rapture/Tribulation today and from what I was reading there is no consistency of agreement even among those who believe in this. What I was reading dealt only with those who are pre-trib, mid-trib and post-trib. Some fairly good arguments were put forth for the pre-trib and mid-trib, as well as a few good counters to both those. In the end, the pre-trib and mid-trib views came out looking about equally possible.

There was a little less on the post-trib and what they presented, this view didn't hold up as well as the other two had potential to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

There are two main views on Daniel 9. 1:

1:That it leads to the coming and work of Christ and the result of the rejection and murder of him by the Jews.

2: That is all about some coming Antichrist.

(at least one of these must be wrong and as such is a Satanic deception. We cannot all be right, but we can all be wrong.)

There is a third view, that 69½ weeks went till the crucifiction, but the last ½ week is carried into the future.

Again there is disagreememt on the annointing Most Holy.

1: Some future temple. This would go against all scripture as I see it regarding Christ's finished work. I cannot find that he temple was annointed, although the tabernacle was,

2: Christ being received in to the heavenlies. I have only found one writer who believed that and he later changed his mind to no 3:

3: The Holy Spirit annointing the Church at Pentecost. This would have ocurred during the 70th week.

4: Christ being annointed at his Baptism. Luke 4:18 "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me....." Announced as the Holy one of God, Luke 4:34, Mark 1:24.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member



Covenanter:

Actually, I don't think that the great tribulation of Matthew 24.21 refers to AD70 at all:

'For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.'


The key words her are "Such as."

There never was tribulation "Such as." that which began at that time as it still continues today.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


OR

"He" refers the last person mentioned, the prince that shall come, and the prince that shall come confirms the covenant for 7 years, then stops animal sacrifices and commits the abomination of desolation.

No twisting, stretching, or subtracting of the text is needed.


Is it OK to quote the Russian Synodal Translation (Masoratic/Textus Receptus based) on this particular verse or is the RST inferior though based on the same text? This is one of those verses where the RST has a different reading from the KJV.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

OR

"He" refers the last person mentioned, the prince that shall come, and the prince that shall come confirms the covenant for 7 years, then stops animal sacrifices and commits the abomination of desolation.

No twisting, stretching, or subtracting of the text is needed.


Yes there is. The prince who was to come was not the subject of that statement. The subject is the people of the prince who is to come., therefore the he must refer back to Messiah the prince. Titus did come and his people did destroy the temple against his orders. Even if the prince was the subject, which he isn't, the he would still refer back to Messiah the Prince as he is the subject of the whole prophecy. In the OT you will often find pronouns refer back to earlier people mentioned.

You absolutely ignore the fact that the city and sanctuary were both destroyed by the Roman troops, If you cannot get that right, and make something that has clearly happened, to still be in the future, how can anyone trust your interpretations and predictions about the future.

Some on the board decry the use of commentators, yet they base their interpretations on the notes of a convicted fraudster.

If you take time, and it will take time, to study the history of dispensationalism, as I have, you will find that it eminates from Jesuits. The saddest part of it, is that this teaching denies the true scripture teaching that the papacy is the antichrist, taught by all non Catholic Christians,from the time the papacy got its full powers in about 1200, till about 1800 and as a result Rome is widely now widely considered to be a true Christian church. Remember when he calls himself Vicar of Christ, the pope is using a Latin equivalent of the Greek Antichrist. Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Re 8:7 ¶ The first angel sounded, and there followed hail and fire mingled with blood, and they were cast upon the earth: and the third part of trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up.
Re 8:8 And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood;
Re 8:9 And the third part of the creatures which were in the sea, and had life, died; and the third part of the ships were destroyed.
Re 8:10 And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters;
Re 8:11 And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter.
Re 8:12 And the fourth angel sounded, and the third part of the sun was smitten, and the third part of the moon, and the third part of the stars; so as the third part of them was darkened, and the day shone not for a third part of it, and the night likewise.
Re 8:13 And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound!

Nothing like this has ever happened on this earth, & it will not happen until during the tribulations take place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I did some reading on the rapture today and for some reason the focus was upon pre-mil, post-mil and a-mil views. the post-mil view was pretty much dismissed and the a-mil view was also dismissed but given a bit more attention.

What I found interesting that with regards to the pre-mil rapture view, only the view that the rapture would occur prior to the tribulation was presented. I've noticed over the years this is often the case, with no mention at all of the mid-trib or post-trib rapture views. This seems odd, especially since the pre-trib and mid-trib views are so very close in their views, only varying a little and, of course, most prominently with regards to whether the rapture will occur pre-trib or mid-trib.

Likely this is because most of the books and articles written on this topic are by pre-trib folks, but it hardly helps to ignore these other views.

Similarly, I've noticed there seems to be more people, many who were once staunch pre-tribbers, who now espouse mid-trib. Has anyone else noticed this and do you have any ideas as to why this is occuring?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Similarly, I've noticed there seems to be more people, many who were once staunch pre-tribbers, who now espouse mid-trib. Has anyone else noticed this and do you have any ideas as to why this is occuring?


Apostasy!

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." - 2 Timothy 4:3-4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Oh yes, we lust for tribulation..being persecuted gives us sinful pleasure..that makes a ton of sense..


For most of these "no rapture" folks and the like, in order to hold to these heresies, they must hold to other heresies, so the Scriptures make some sort of sense to them even though their "proof" is full of contradictions and ignorance.

It has been erroneously said that a Pre-Tribulation Rapture followed by the Millenial Reign of Christ are new "inventions". These folks have not read the writings of first century Christians. All this apostasy ran amok again (first with Popery) with the proliferation of corrupt bible translations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist



For most of these "no rapture" folks and the like, in order to hold to these heresies, they must hold to other heresies, so the Scriptures make some sort of sense to them even though their "proof" is full of contradictions and ignorance.

It has been erroneously said that a Pre-Tribulation Rapture followed by the Millenial Reign of Christ are new "inventions". These folks have not read the writings of first century Christians. All this apostasy ran amok again (first with Popery) with the proliferation of corrupt bible translations.

Is it right to call ones differening view of the end times heresy? That term gets tossed around a lot and much of the time it's used out of context. Just wondering.

The first century Christians wrote many things, much of which contradicts one another. Many, if not most, modern Baptists of the more conservative and IFB varieties, most often dismiss their writings. That wasn't the case with earlier generations of Baptists who did refer to their writings.

It's amazing how quickly the world, the flesh and the devil corrupted Christianity. Sometimes we marvel at some of the beliefs held by some of the church fathers, or whatever they are often called, but when we read from Acts on in Scripture we can see the battle for the soundness of various local churches being played out.

I'm currently studying, once again, books on the pre-mil/pre-trib rapture and someone is supposed to be sending me a book which they say explains their view and belief in a pre-mil/mid-trib rapture.

Along with this, I'm also studying Ezekiel 38 & 39 (which I started a thread about), as well as a book on Spurgeon.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Views on the millennium don't constitute heresy by themselves. Views on the rapture only vary in dispensationalism. I consider dispensationalism itself heresy for the reasons I stated in the Gap thread. All non-dispensational systems (or lack of systems) would be considered post-trib, tho there is much more that can be said about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 16 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...