"Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

aklym · 01-09-10 11:41 am

Adventists (and other conservative denominations) send their missionaries around the world preaching that the Bible is the "Word of God" and that it is an integrated document. That is to say, the various books of the Bible consistently teach the same message. (Anyone who has seriously studied the Bible knows that is not true.) Adventists (and other conservative Christians) also defend the indefensible genocidal acts of the god of the OT. Why should we be surprised when SDA and Bible believers take seriously as God's directive the OT injunction to execute homosexuals? We haven't educated these converts sufficiently to understand that the Bible must be taken with a very large grain of salt and that we/it/god don't/doesn't really mean what we/it/he say(s). All Christians select those parts of the Bible that they like and ignore (or explain away) the portions that make them uncomfortable.

don · 01-09-10 12:48 pm

We haven't educated these converts sufficiently... This is the concern. The term "disciple" involves an educational component. Because the Bible is proclaimed as the Word of God and because the Mosaic law is not the legal guide for the Christian, then how to apply Biblical principles needs to be taught. .

elaine · 01-09-10 1:25 pm

In punishing Ford, the church has fully demonstrated that differences in doctrine is far worse than "merely" advocating death for sexual "crimes." That shows the deference given for what the church considers the worst of errors. Des Ford's was an internal problem; the Ugandan SDA union president has publicly spoken and is far worse, IMO.

aklym · 01-09-10 1:37 pm

I don't find anything about Union President John Kakembo's educational background, but I suspect he has received some form of higher education in some manner. I also suspect that the education has been done in Adventist schools. Does anyone know the answer?

charles_parker · 01-09-10 5:07 pm

Perhaps a BS from Griggs University, a MBS from University of Idi Amin, and an Amazing Facts GED-magna cum laude ? (Message edited by Charles_Parker on January 09, 2010)

john8verse32 · 01-09-10 11:08 pm

don · 01-10-10 12:58 am

I don't find anything about Union President John Kakembo's educational background, but I suspect he has received some form of higher education in some manner. I also suspect that the education has been done in Adventist schools. Here is a chronology available from Adventist Archives re: John Kakembo. He seems to have begun his career as a dean of boys at Bugema Adventist College. Notice the ten year gap from 1989 to 1999. This probably was when he furthered his education. Notice in 2006, Ministry Magazine refers to him as "Dr. John Kakembo". It seems fair to conclude that John Kakembo is comfortably associated with SDA leaders both on the Division and General Conference levels. In other words, he seems like a "team player." Thus, I suspect that he will be more careful in the future. When serious issues of life and death plague a region of the world, such as HIV in much of Africa, we can expect extreme measures to be popular. Unfortunately, part of the popularity will affect Adventists; apparently even experienced leaders such as Dr. Kakembo. (The Rwandan tragedy also illustrates Adventist vulnerability to tribal extremes.) As a church we seem destined to experience more of these kind of problems. Each one is unacceptable and should provide a teaching moment in the life of the world church. __________________________________<blockquote>1978 Ordained minister, Uganda Field (J. Kakembo, different person?) <a href="http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/YB/YB1978/index.djvu?djvuopts&page=112" target=_top>http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/YB/YB1978/in dex.djvu?djvuopts&page=112</a> 1981 Dean of boys at Bugema Adventist College <a href="http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/RH/RH19811119-V158-47__B/index.djvu?djvuopts&page=19" target=_top>http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/RH/RH1981111 9-V158-47__B/index.djvu?djvuopts&page=19</a> 1983, 1984, 1985 Licensed minister, Central Uganda Field <a href="http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/YB/YB1983/index.djvu?djvuopts&page=89" target=_top>http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/YB/YB1983/in dex.djvu?djvuopts&page=89</a> 1988 Ordained minister, Central Uganda Field <a href="http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/YB/YB1988/index.djvu?djvuopts&page=74" target=_top>http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/YB/YB1988/in dex.djvu?djvuopts&page=74</a> 1999, 2000, 2001, Professor, Religion and Theology, Bugema University <a href="http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/YB/YB1999__B/index.djvu?djvuopts&page=407" target=_top>http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/YB/YB1999__B /index.djvu?djvuopts&page=407</a> 2002, 2003 Secretary, Uganda Union Mission <a href="http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/YB/YB2002__B/index.djvu?djvuopts&page=81" target=_top>http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/YB/YB2002__B /index.djvu?djvuopts&page=81</a> 2006, Dr. John Kakema, ministerial secretary, East Central Africa Division <a href="http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/MIN/MIN20060801-V79-08__B/index.djvu?djvuopts&page=28" target=_top>http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/MIN/MIN20060 801-V79-08__B/index.djvu?djvuopts&page=28</a> 2009, Head of the Ministerial Association, East Central Africa Division <a href="http://www.adventistyearbook.org/ViewAdmField.aspx?AdmFieldID=ECD" target=_top>http://www.adventistyearbook.org/ViewAdmField.aspx ?AdmFieldID=ECD</a> Executive Director, Uganda Union Mission <a href="http://www.adventistyearbook.org/default.aspx?&page=viewadmfield&AdmFieldID=UGUM&Year=9999" target=_top>http://www.adventistyearbook.org/default.aspx?&pag e=viewadmfield&AdmFieldID=UGUM&Year=9999</a> Adventist Review reports rebuttal <a href="http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=3054" target=_top>http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=3054</a></blockquote> .

don · 01-10-10 9:54 am

Additional chronological notes: John Kakembo was listed as the East-Central Africa Division's Director of Family Ministries and the Ministerial Association. Now Maguliro Mwakalonge is listed in that capacity. <img src="http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/messages/16/2423.jpg" alt=""> John Kakembo's picture remains there, as of January 10. Mrs. Kakembo, formerly listed as the Shepherdess Coordinator, is not mentioned and the position seems vacant, as of January 10. Sources: For the official division site <a href="http://www.ecd.adventist.org/staff/staff.asp" target=_top>http://www.ecd.adventist.org/staff/staff.asp</a> For the former cached site at Google: <a href="http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:SEd2pClL8OYJ:www.ecd.adventist.org/staff/staff.asp+%22john+kakembo%22%2C+staff&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca" target=_top>http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:SEd2pClL8OYJ:www.ecd.adventist.org/staff/staff.asp+%22john+kakembo%22,+staff&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca</a> Further Observations Elaine asked: Shouldn't the administration of the SDA church "police" its representatives? It seems as though we are witnessing such administrative effort regarding John Kakembo. .

don · 01-10-10 11:18 am

I have a responsibility to stand between the innocent and the evil doers, if I am in a position to do so. We should not stand idly by and watch evil being inflicted on the innocent. I wrote this on an earlier post on this thread before our discussion about John Kakembo began. Now, I have several questions:<blockquote>1. How involved should the Christian and the Christian Church get in this protecting of the innocent? 2. Should we advocate laws for the nations of the world to enact to protect the innocent? 3. The "aggravated homosexuality" section of the bill seems to be concerned with protecting the innocent. Notice: <blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:3. Aggravated homosexuality.<blockquote>(1) A person commits the offense of aggravated homosexuality where the<blockquote>(a) person against whom the offence is committed is below the age of 18 years; (Corruption of a minor) (b) offender is a person living with HIV; (attempted murder) (c) offender is a parent or guardian of the person against whom the offence is committed; (incest) (d) offender is a person in authority over the person against whom the offence is committed; (abuse of authority) (e) victim of the offence is a person with disability; (abuse of the helpless) (f) offender is a serial offender, or (g) offender applies, administers or causes to be used by any man or woman any drug, matter or thing with intent to stupefy overpower him or her so as to there by enable any person to have unlawful carnal connection with any person of the same sex, (abuse and assault)</blockquote>(2) A person who commits the offence of aggravated homosexuality shall be liable on conviction to suffer death. (The Death Penalty) (3) Where a person is charged with the offence under this section, that person shall undergo a medical examination to ascertain his or her HIV status. </blockquote><a href="http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/10/15/15609" target=_top>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/10/15/15609</a><!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>3 cont. How involved should the Christian Church be in the protection of the innocent? 4. Should the Christian Churches seek to advise government on the types of laws to enact? Rick Warren has done so, as have those, contrary to Warren, who support the Ugandan bill. 5. Many states in the USA still have capital punishment for heinous crimes. Certainly, if Christians follow Jesus, they would not want anyone to be killed, would they? 6. How should the church be involved in civil society?</blockquote> (Message edited by Don on January 10, 2010)

george · 01-10-10 12:23 pm

. How should the church be involved in civil society? The church should not be involved at all with civil authorities in legislating, judicating, or enforcing civil laws. However, individual Christians should be very involved in these areas as their conscience directs and their circumstance allow. By separating the church from the civil functions of a society, it never becomes part of the political system, which could manipulate it and make it part of a legal governmental entity.

don · 01-10-10 12:48 pm

The church should not be involved at all with civil authorities in legislating, judicating, or enforcing civil laws. Let's apply this idea to Uganda's bill. John Kakembo should not have commented on the bill; nor should Rick Warren? What if a law discriminates against a racial group? What about apartheid in South Africa? or, the "Sit at the back of the bus" law of the Rosa Parks era? Some believe that sexual orientation is genetic. Should the Christian Church sit by silently while these people are criminalized? I present these questions, not to take sides, but to show the difficulty of the Christian Churches remaining silent. .

elaine · 01-10-10 5:16 pm

Since he has been called "Dr." can someone give the source for this degree? Or, is it an honorary one? Surely, if it was granted at Andrews, would that not be shown in his biography?

don · 01-10-10 5:26 pm

Surely, if it was granted at Andrews, would that not be shown in his biography? Is there a biography of him? I have collected and presented information I call a Chronology, but I have not found a biography of him. What I have found when doing these kind of chronologies is that time spent in education is not included in the Adventist Archives Yearbook, etc. Notice that after the ten year absence he shows up on the Religion and Theology faculty at Bugema University and he is also referred to as "Dr." I assume that, if he went to Andrews, he graduated with a Doctorate of religious studies from there. _____________________________________ (The following was added after posting the above) An addition to the Chronology for John Kakembo Andrews has a site where they "list" all their graduates over the years: <a href="https://vault.andrews.edu/vault/app/gradlist/collect_list_of_graduates" target="_blank">https://vault.andrews.edu/vault/app/gradlist/collect_list_of_graduates</a> 1992, June Kakembo, John Benon MDIV, Divinity 1997, August Kakembo, John Benon DMIN, Ministry 2000, August Kakembo, Milliam Bensue AT, Horticulture (This is Mrs. Kakembo.) 2006, May Kakembo, Caroline Damalie BS, Nursing, Cum Laude A Final Note About Adventist Archives I have begun to use Adventist Archives in my grade 10 class. I tell my students that they can do biographical research never done before. The format we use is the chronological one demonstrated here regarding Dr. Kakembo. Before this set of posts on John Kakembo, there was no biography available for this "newsmaker". Once again, hats off to the people at Adventist Archives, for this wonderful resource. (Message edited by Don on January 10, 2010)

george · 01-10-10 6:49 pm

Don, It seems to me that "the church" might comment by saying it doesn't comment on civil issues, and that it leaves comments to its members as they are free to comment according to their own conscience. If a comment is requested of an individual, they should be free to offer one.

don · 01-10-10 7:13 pm

"the church" might comment by saying it doesn't comment on civil issues I understand the line you draw. I am testing my own thinking on this. Here is a bit more: The church is the "body of Christ". Thus, it should behave as it perceives Christ behaving. He certainly did not try to solve civil problems though he recognized an appropriate judicial process. Recall his telling two brothers, "who made me judge between you." Luke 12:14 Jesus called people to repentance and taught them how to live, this is the duty of the Church. Just as John the Baptist taught the inquiring soldiers to be fair, and the ruler to repent of his immorality, the church can take up these "prophetic" tasks within society. But, we don't find the sinners running from Jesus because he might turn them over to the authorities (for being "sinful homosexuals" or whatever.) This is not the role of the church. Further thoughts are welcomed, of course. .

john8verse32 · 01-10-10 8:04 pm

let's test (y)our thinking next with this issue: Don wrote: if Christians follow Jesus, they would not want anyone to be killed, would they? but our church claims that to properly follow Jesus we have to keep the 7thday sabbath ....as He is said to have done ....as we claim that God ordained at the creation ... and the penalty for gathering sticks on Sabbath is to be stoned to death ...if we follow the Old Test. Literally. also, the penalty for male homosexual acts was death as well. God even struck dead a guy for a simple premature withdrawal!!! again, if you believe the story literally. but since the ancients did not know about the female part in conception other than being an "oven", there was no similar punishment for female homosexuality. It was all a problem of a man "wasting" his precious seed in ways it would not germinate into more soldiers during the "40" yr wait on the edge of the Sinai...those soldiers were going to be needed to attack the inhabitants of the Promised Land, killing all the men and little boys, and any women who were no longer virgins (why worry about raising some other tribes kids), but saving the virgins after a Mengele like inspection, to make more little Hebrew soldiers, all the time not realizing that in amalgamating with foreign virgins, they were diluting their genetic uniqueness. so here's the question: the penalty for trespassing the sabbath, and for homosexuality was DEATH"... and we claim the sabbath rule was forever... where do we justify removing the penalty for that? and how do we justify removing the injunctions against homosexuality, and its divine death penalty, since we claim that (some of) Moses laws were carried forward into Christianity. I agree that the morality of Christianity should not include killing people...instead, it should emphasize change, modification of behavior... lets email that concept to God, and ask Him to reconsider His alleged plan to kill everybody who doesn't understand all the different ways that His word has been mixed up.... and its too bad that this same God could not have been encouraged by todays better Christian morals to refrain from trying to kill everybody by drowning only a few thousand yrs ago... ...of course, if, as scientists can prove, there was NO NOAH"S FLOOD, then at least we could hope God never did all that killing, and that maybe He could be encouraged to relent on His (alleged) promise to do it again, but by fire this time. so my question really is: How can we believe in Christian morality of not killing when we constantly emphasize all the killing God did in the past, if you believe his biographers literally, and all the killing He is planning for us in the future, if you believe all our 27-28 fundies literally? (Message edited by john8verse32 on January 10, 2010)

elaine · 01-10-10 9:08 pm

I believe that as a citizen of any nation, an individual has the freedom to speak out. However, as an officer of the SDA church, he is speaking in behalf of the church when he chooses to identify his position. There is a great deal of difference between a citizen and a spokesman for a religious organization which seems to carry the imprimatur of the SDA church. We frequently speak of the Roman Catholic church's spokesmen as speaking for the church, so why should it be different when an SDA official is designated by his employee status?

george · 01-11-10 6:51 am

Don, Because of the SDA paradigm within which we view ourselves - the sweeping epic in which we place ourselves (the great controversy) we can speak of the church as "the body of Christ" and imagine this body God's only influence in this world. I think we give ourselves too much credit. The "church" may be the BODY OF CHRIST, but only individually. The time for corporate salvation is over, was over with the death and resurrection of Christ. We respond, not through the organizational church, but individually. The church doesn't speak for me, I do.

don · 01-11-10 8:12 am

Because of the SDA paradigm ... we can speak of the church as "the body of Christ" and imagine this body God's only influence in this world.<blockquote>The "member of the body" metaphor, as presented by Paul can also be translated "limb". Also, I believe it is incorrect to view the SDA denomination as the full expression of the body of Christ.</blockquote>The "church" may be the BODY OF CHRIST, but only individually.<blockquote>This seems like an oxymoron. The word "member" implies merely part of a bigger whole; i.e. a limb. To be a member is to be a part, but not the whole. The ears and the hands are part of the body. They do different functions. One needs the other. One member depends upon another member. The "Body of Christ" is not a collection of individual body parts. Rather, it must be viewed as a lively body; the head is Christ. Notice this word study from the Blue Letter Bible site: <a href="http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3196&t=KJV#" target=_top>http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexico n.cfm?Strongs=G3196&t=KJV#</a></blockquote>We respond, not through the organizational church, but individually. The church doesn't speak for me, I do.<blockquote>I agree that we are accountable individually. But, if I am a member of a group, when an appointed leader of that group speaks, I am considered part of what he says; rightfully or wrongfully. Thus, all Adventists are concerned about what a Union president, such as Dr. Kakembo, says. Does the church speak for Christ? We all attempt to, sort of. Members respond, yes. Even the church spokesperson responds as a member, not the whole. We don't need to view the SDA church as the whole. Rather, the SDA church is also a mere denominational collection of members of the larger body of Christ. When a Pentecostal, Baptist, even Roman Catholic, gives "one of the least of these" comfort they do it unto Jesus. When two or three gather in the name of Jesus, He is there. This gathered group, or church, is part of the body of Christ.</blockquote> (Message edited by Don on January 11, 2010)

george · 01-11-10 10:31 am

Don, You're still thinking institutionally. My concept of "the church" and as Jesus called it, "the body of Christ" is made up of individuals that can be miles and millenniums apart. If the SDA church can be called "the church body" as it spans continents with churches dotting the countrysides, so can the "body of Christ" span time and distance as individuals making up that body can be collectively called The Body of Christ" - and without an ecclesiastical designation we recognize. The only condition for membership is to be "in Christ" as Paul taught. In fact, Paul declared that "God does not dwell in houses made by human hands" or "in temples made with hands" - Acts 7:48;17:24. We, individually, are God's temples and priests because of the indwelling Christ, directed by His Spirit that makes us part of the larger body without walls. Just because someone has put up a shingle and herded in members does not make the group "the body of Christ". It can be, as individuals are, but not because of the organization that contains them. (Message edited by sirje on January 11, 2010) (Message edited by sirje on January 11, 2010)

don · 01-11-10 11:06 am

Just because someone has put up a shingle and herded in members does not make the group "the body of Christ". It can be, as individuals are, but not because of the organization that contains them. I agree that the body of Christ is not limited to an institution. But, an institution can function as part of the body of Christ. When Christians, of any ilk, get together in committee, their resolve, as a group, is part of the body of Christ. "Two or three gathering together" defines the active church. An individual is part of the body, but that person should desire to gather together to form the "two or three" spoken of by Jesus. This does not have to be Adventists. The criteria is simply to gather in Jesus' name. Individuals, without institutional connections, also are part of the "body". If, however, individual members organize themselves, that organization is also a function of the "body". This illustrates why Christian denominations should not "attack" each other; its like amputating part of the body. A part of the body can be sick, as well. (The illustration can be furthered.) When Paul and Barnabbas resorted to Jerusalem to solve the circumcision controversy, they relied on the "institution" of the body. James was the recognized head, according to Acts. The "institution" actually sent out a letter stating their corporate decision. Paul accepted the letter, though from his writings, we can conclude that he did not agree with all of it. Paul went earlier to discuss with the leaders in Jerusalem to make sure his understanding of Jesus was sound. Paul instructed Titus to appoint elders in every city. This was an institutional activity; led by the Spirit, hopefully. If a believer decides not to be part of a group of Christians and not unite with them, he or she is still part of the "body of Christ". The Biblical model includes the individual and the "group". Which is the right group? The one that gathers in Jesus' name. Does this mean its doctrines are without error? No. Is there any group with error-free doctrine? No. Should we be content with error? No. Humble, yes. .

george · 01-11-10 11:50 am

Don, Perhaps we should rethink the function of the church in light of how and when it speaks; and what it means when it does. You and I are looking at this from different perspectives. There was a time when I tried my level best to make meaning out of simple church membership but over time and with various experiences, decided it was futile. I don't question anybody's right to call themselves part of the body of Christ - that's between them and God; and I can work for good causes and be part of programs as long as they're not set up to advertise the church, but rather, Christ and His work. There is a fine line that delineates that difference and we often cross it. We make sure our left hand knows exactly what our right one is doing -except when the deed is embarrassing. That's just human nature; but in this situation we have to get over that. Doing good for the sake of doing good is enough. In this light, the church should not be commenting on civil agendas because that lumps everybody in the organization together, while there may be huge differences, even among those that individually see themselves as "the Body of Christ".

don · 01-11-10 6:07 pm

Sirje, I agree with what you have written. Jesus has taught us to not draw attention to ourselves. Not speaking on matters where unity does not exist seems wise, as well. .

aklym · 01-13-10 2:45 pm

While driving this morning I heard that President Obama said the following about the Haiti earthquake: For a country and a people who are no strangers to hardship and suffering, this tragedy seems especially cruel and incomprehensible. It is hard to disagree with that statement. I thought about the outrage we would all feel if Al Qaeda was responsible for these senseless deaths. This would be the worst terrorist act in the lifetimes of most of us. Is there someone responsible for this tragedy? Is there someone who could have prevented it by just one word? I don't think there is. Events like this and the December 26, 2004 tsunami seem to me to be very strong evidence that there is either 1) no god or 2) a god who not only is not loving, but is evil. I guess there is a possibility that there is a god who is weak and ineffectual. If that is the case, he/she/it does not fit any Christian's idea of god. (Message edited by aklym on January 13, 2010)

george · 01-13-10 4:15 pm

Arthur, I hear you. But, if one word from on high could have prevented this, it could have prevented all the pain and suffering throughout the ages - personal and corporal. Life on this earth is not fair. Why is that? It rains and it shines on every single one of us, and eventually it befalls all of us to die. As Smutts VanRoyan said in one of his sermons, "in a hundred years everyone on earth now, will be dead". Now there's a calamity for you. It's almost amusing how the evangelical church can't accept evolution because it's so violent and unfair, but fail to see that the violence and unfairness continues today. If we have it with us today, why are we surprised it existed then... . It's all under the auspices of God. Well, maybe it's not about living a pain-free life now or back then. Maybe we're in the middle of birth pangs, waiting to be born into something better. Maybe, if we experience life as capricious as it is, we will be willing to submit to a pain-free world view. Maybe we're here to develop character, seeing as God couldn't create character without creating robots. When Eve wanted knowledge of "good and evil" she got it. Now we long not to have it. Maybe that's just the point.

Adventists for Tomorrow

Announcement

#76 01-09-10 11:41 am

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#77 01-09-10 12:48 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#78 01-09-10 1:25 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#79 01-09-10 1:37 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#80 01-09-10 5:07 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#81 01-09-10 11:08 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#82 01-10-10 12:58 am

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#83 01-10-10 9:54 am

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#84 01-10-10 11:18 am

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#85 01-10-10 12:23 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#86 01-10-10 12:48 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#87 01-10-10 5:16 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#88 01-10-10 5:26 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#89 01-10-10 6:49 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#90 01-10-10 7:13 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#91 01-10-10 8:04 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#92 01-10-10 9:08 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#93 01-11-10 6:51 am

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#94 01-11-10 8:12 am

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#95 01-11-10 10:31 am

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#96 01-11-10 11:06 am

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#97 01-11-10 11:50 am

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#98 01-11-10 6:07 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#99 01-13-10 2:45 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

#100 01-13-10 4:15 pm

Re: "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign?"

Board footer