Which is more important?

Discussion in 'Belief and Spirituality' started by juantoo3, Jan 2, 2006.

  1. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,502
    Likes Received:
    147
    Which do we value more?

    Do we place a greater value on the individual as a person, or the deeds and actions they perform?

    This is a rhetorical question of course, I suspect the answer I will get most often is “why, the person, of course!” But is this the reality? Is this the truth of the matter? Better not to rush to answer, better I think to first explore the question.

    (*I suppose I should preface this, in that I did write this from a Christian perspective, but I encourage those of other faith walks to add their perspectives if they so desire.)

    We naturally associate a person with what it is he or she does. He’s a cook, she’s a stay-at-home mom, he’s a carpenter, she’s a liar, and he’s a thief. This is an ingrained tendency, at least in the West, where when people first began to take surnames, they very often choose (or had chosen for them as the case may be) names that associated them with what jobs they performed. The first John Baker most likely was a baker by trade. The first James Carpenter likely worked with wood, and the first Tom Sawyer likely cut wood into lumber. This begins a latent association in the Western mind, linking the individual with the choices and actions they make in life.

    This is an important distinction, we associate people with what actions they do.

    We still link people today with the things they do. He’s a businessman, she’s a career woman, he’s a great dad, she’s a great mom. He’s a dead beat, she’s a crack head, he’s an alcoholic, she’s a loose woman.

    We tend to get a bit judgmental regarding the actions other people perform. We pretend this judgement is justice, recompense, or maybe some interpretation of Karma. What goes around comes around. And we, personally each of us as individuals, know exactly what is right and correct for everyone on the planet. Except our own self of course, if we are truthful. The hardest person to judge fairly is the one we face in the mirror.

    We all make mistakes. That is how we learn. The difference is that when we make a mistake, we justify it to ourselves as a weak moment. When someone else makes the very same mistake, why, they’ve just damned themselves to hell! The brazen hussy! The drunken bum! The nit-wit!

    It never ceases to amaze me, how people who are quite guilty of a criminal offense; tried, judged, convicted and paid their debt to society, believe it is their right to sit in judgement of another. Somehow they justify, I suppose, that because they were caught and made to pay the piper, that all others should be equally brought to judgement in this life.

    News flash: life isn’t fair, people are not equal, and they never will be. Things will continue to remain disparate, regardless of all of the best of intentions by well meaning but misguided do-gooders. Justice is not always fair. So, should justice be withheld? Please note I said justice, not judgement. This is important, because as Christians we are commanded not to judge others. Yet, if I read the Bible correctly, justice is required when it can be conducted in a fair and impartial manner. Sometimes life is not fair and impartial, so should all justice be suspended? I suspect civilization by rule of law would collapse, and I cannot see how the alternative would be any better.

    Equally amazing to me is the people who believe themselves faultless, who have never even gotten a parking ticket, who shriek in rabid judgment of those they believe are not living up to their “righteous” standard. I can relate to these people, I counted myself in their ranks at one time. But something kept gnawing at me, something about judgment, about not judging others lest we be judged, about with what measure we mete shall be measured against us.

    Something about the woman at the well, who had had six husbands. The one she was with, the seventh, was not even married to her! The audacity, the fornicating bitch, to dare even speak to the Christian Messiah! And the woman taken in the act of adultery, a capital offense! Stone her! Stone her for her indiscretions!!! Seems to me, if Jesus acted as we do, judging people by their actions, demanding our own personal satisfaction of what we deem as justice (which is hardly ever fair or impartial), He would have cast the first stone. Our Christian role model was able to look beyond these ladies’ faults and find something worth salvaging in their hearts.

    Salvation---Salvaging, hmmm. I found a very important lesson in this.

    We are told we will one day stand before the Great White Throne judgment. On that day God and His assigns will hold each of us accountable for our actions and deeds in this, and potentially any other, existences.

    Until that time, we are to work towards redemption, both our own and to assist others. We are to hold the person to be of greater value over the actions that person performs. We are our brother’s, and sister’s, keepers. We are not to judge others, but to look beyond and do what we can to guide them in the proper direction. Presuming of course, that we actually know what that proper direction is. I believe this direction is ingrained, we know right from wrong, even if we sometimes justify to ourselves ways around this reality. We are not talking about pointing directions to Peoria from Grand Rapids via Cucamonga, we want what is best for those we care about. We are supposed to care about everybody.

    As it seems to be with all great truths, there is paradox. We will bear the scars of our sins. This is not my judgment, this is reality. Sins can be, and to great extent should be, forgiven. But the penalty for the sin does not “just go away.” An easy example is that of the alcoholic, who because of excess of indulgence destroys his liver. It is not, necessarily, the alcohol that is the sin, it is the lack of moderation in its use. This is relatively easy to see and apply with things and attitudes. What about a crime such as murder?

    The wage of sin will be paid. It is seldom ours, as mere humans, to presume judgment, unless we are specifically employed by society as a judge. Even for these people, presuming sincerity, it is a challenge to remain aloof, fair-handed and disconnected. Blind and balanced. If a person is fairly and rightly judged for a crime they have committed, then they are subject to the laws of the land. If that means capital punishment, then that society as a whole deems that an appropriate penalty. To have life taken from the one who has taken a life.

    Is this correct, proper and righteous? Fair question. There are societies who have deemed that they do not want the collective guilt of unfair conviction, of wrongly carrying out sentence on an innocent person. These societies deem lifetime incarceration as preferable to what they consider state-sanctioned murder. All’s fair in love and war, I suppose. Given the choice, if I were wrongly convicted of a capital offense, I would prefer death to life in a prison. But that’s just me.

    In the end, God will sort it out anyway. Whether Karma brings the unrepentant perp back as a slug or cockroach, or whether the one who was falsely accused and executed receives a greater inheritance for his unwilling sacrifice, remains for the next life to be seen. I have faith it will all come out in the wash.

    I have heard it said that no good deed goes unpunished. Of course, it is also said that every bad deed will be rewarded. Verily! :D
     
  2. seattlegal

    seattlegal Why do cows say mu?

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,590
    Likes Received:
    62
    :)
     
  3. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,502
    Likes Received:
    147
    Kindest Regards, Seattlegal!

    Thanks!
     
  4. Ciel

    Ciel in essence

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Messages:
    926
    Likes Received:
    0
    Likewise there is a balance and a time for all things.

    Somethings cannot come into accord until there is a balance within the self, and the inner and the outer.
     
  5. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,502
    Likes Received:
    147
    Kindest Regards, Ciel!

    Thank you! For those of us just a little on the dense side ( like me :) ), would you mind expanding on your thought?
     
  6. Ciel

    Ciel in essence

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Messages:
    926
    Likes Received:
    0
    This for your own perception, juantoo 3, :)

    When there are few words, they can be read whatever way pleases you.
     
  7. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    43
    Namaste juan,


    is there a deed without a doer? an action without an actor?

    it seems from a rather cursory overview, that most religious traditions have an emphasis on the invidividaul, which can be demonstrated through their actions.

    to paraphrase James; faith without works is dead faith.

    it seems rather difficult to know any particular beings motivation or intent outside of the actions, words and so forth which these beings engage in.

    interesting responses thus far :)

    metta,

    ~v
     
  8. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,502
    Likes Received:
    147
    Kindest Regards, Vajradhara!

    Thank you very much for your response!

    Good point. Perhaps it is my lack of skill with words in trying to convey what I intend.

    Well, OK. Is this to say that in most religious traditions the laity gain the next level by deeds? In some way I see this in Christianity, yet there is a very vocal percentage in Christianity that denies this gain by deeds, that "heaven is reached by faith and belief, alone, regardless of law and deeds (lest any should boast)." Now, I do not agree, but I do know this attitude to dominate certain denominations in the Christian faith. Is this attitude unique to certain sects of Christianity?

    Indeed. However, in my experience, most Christians of my acquaintance tend to overlook James, in part because this very teaching conflicts with that of Paul, as mentioned just above. In other words; to many Christians heaven is not gained by deeds. "All you've got to do is believe!" Whew, talk about paradox! If deeds do not gain a person entry to heaven, then why are these same Christians concerned with the petty deeds of those around them? (rhetorical question, I don't expect an answer)

    True, good point. Yet, how imperative is it for a person to "judge" another's intent? Ah, I think I may have an answer to my own question...it is a matter of degree. It is vital to my self-preservation to understand what another person's motives are towards me in any given moment, I suppose this could be called in Christian terms "righteous judgment." But that motive and judgment are apt to change, even in the next moment. If we keep ourself blinded by a previous judgment, that judgment may be in error under new circumstances. Which underscores the necessity for forgiveness.

    Thank you, Vajradhara. As always, you provide a wise counter-balance.

    This does still leave me with questions. It would seem the individual is more important than their actions, yet there is a great deal of focus on actions instead of the individual. For example, I know of many people who will not associate with certain others because of their actions. I suppose in some sense we all do this. How can a person relate with, oh, a child molester for example? WWJD? How do we seek to salvage the good in such a person, without immediately judging and looking for the first and biggest stones nearby to throw?
     
  9. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,502
    Likes Received:
    147
    Kindest Regards, Ciel!

    Very well.

    Edification and understanding are what please me now, on this subject. Just another effort to reach out to what I understand as God. ;)
     
  10. Bandit

    Bandit New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    3,172
    Likes Received:
    0
    i dont know. i dont know if i want to be around someone who never does anything & i would not want to be caught with someone who likes to shop lift or rob banks because i dont want to be tried as a companion to that.
    then again, i dont want to run with someone who does good deeds all the time just to be put on the good doer list.

    so, i have learned to just keep the few friends i have & when someone comes along that i really like & feel i can trust then i go with that & try to make a new friend.
    i think it comes down to intent & motive (which you already stated).
    lawyers would be good to answer this question.

    i cant say i 'value' every single person in the world because i know good & well that if i get too close to some of them, i will surely be bringing harm to myself (because of what they 'do' which is based on what they believe).
    Religious titles dont prove anything about a person.
    i think sometimes we justify our own mistakes or wrongs, but dont leave room for others to make mistakes.
    you have some good questions here Juan that i will be thinking on some more.
    i think this says it best>>>

     
  11. lunamoth

    lunamoth Episcopalian

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2004
    Messages:
    3,915
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Juantoo3, interesting piece. Raised a lot of thoughts and questions in me as I read it.

    No simple answer, Juan. At first I would quickly have said that we can only value what we can discern, and unless we are psychic (and I most certainly am not) that would only include words and deeds. How can we really know what is in a person's heart? Even if we see a person 'gone wrong' but then say well, she has a kind heart, most likely we could only know this based upon other deeds or words by this person (somewhere in my youth, or childhood...). And this knowing itself is judging--no wonder it was the tree of knowledge we were not supposed to eat of...

    But, we do value life itself. This comes into play whenever we hold power over someone's life, i.e., abortion, capital punishment, suicide, euthanasia, war...

    We often end up playing some kind of balance game, weighing the innocence of the life, the cost of continuing the life, the quality of the life. Tricky business. I'm not ready to charge in and say we can come up with some set of guidelines that will always be appropriate for making such decisons. Yet, as a society we must. But we must also remember that we are dealing with people, not pieces in a game.

    And this is where the difference between judgement and justice lies. As individuals we do judge; we must judge because as Bandit said we have to decide if an action is appropriate or desirable or necessary for our own life and contribution to society. But as indviduals these judgements can be interior. We don't need to spout off about them--thoughts, but no words or deeds. However, justice does not usually rest in the hands of the individual, but in our courts. Systems of law and order with judges. Most importantly, distance between the victim and the person who mets out justice. If the victim or the victim's family responds what you more often get is vengence. I know there are a lot of problems and institutionalized injustices in our system of law (one reason to strongly question capital punishment), but it's better than no law or what passes for justice in some other societies.

    Or, to put a positive spin on it, perhaps it is the amount of love we share that is measured, rather than our sins. Just a thought.

    peace,
    lunamoth
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2006
  12. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    There is a point in time when the value of the person is sufficient, to when the value of what they do is of great importance...and back again (there are exceptions to the rule). Though generally, we place (or are supposed to) value on an individual as they are, up front. That is we assume inherent trust upon first meeting, for what ever expectations we have of them (call it the benefit of a doubt).

    For example: I hear a voice "I beg your pardon, sir." To me (and my own value system), that has an appealing affect on my psyche. I turn only to find a homeless person who could use a wash with Clorox Bleach. However, first impressions are rather lasting. This person respectfully addressed me, thus catching my attention. Even though a second impression is developing, the first impression is still there, so I am willing to listen, engage, converse...and deep inside, I hope it is an encounter that will bear "good fruit".

    Next example: I hear the cry of a newborn child. To me again, that is appealing. New life, fresh start, no bad habits. Lots of hope for this life that has yet to do anything.

    Next example: After a year or two of working with a novice, they begin to show promise in their capacity and capability, hence my expectations begin to grow for them. Still the value of their and my initial meeting is alive, but has been superceded by the new expectations I have of them.

    Final example: After time and life has worn one down, they are no longer capable of achieving what they once did. In fact they can't take care of themselves. But they were great once, or for a long time. And a debt of gratitude is owed them. What they can do for us is no longer an issue. The issue becomes, what can we do for them. How can we show our appreciation, how can we honor them for what they gave us?

    See? Individual/expectation and action/individual. One is never really elliminated by the other. Just prioritised...(in a perfect world). It isn't what we value more, but rather what values are in higher esteem, when...

    my thoughts.

    v/r

    Q
     
  13. seattlegal

    seattlegal Why do cows say mu?

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,590
    Likes Received:
    62
    Regarding the love part, that would go back to the faith without works is dead scripture in James. Also compare Luke 7:36-50, especially verse 47. ;)

    Regarding the sins part: please check out the verses immediately following The Lord's Prayer:
    Love, repentance, and forgiveness are all related. If you don't repent from the hurt you cause to others, you demonstrate a lack of love for others. In the same manner, if you don't forgive others who hurt you, but are repentant, you also demonstrate a lack of love. Where a lack of love is evident, there is the law, to serve as a back-up. Compare Matt 24:12-13
     
  14. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    43
    Namaste Juan,

    thank you for the post and the kind words.

    i would tend to agree that it is through ones actions that they save themselves or damn themselves, to use some common terms.

    i also agree that, especially amongst the Evangelical sects of Christianity there is an, in my view, over-reliance upon faith statements.

    iirc, Jesus says something along the lines of "that which you do for the least of men, you do for me". i seem to recall a theology class wherein it was stated that, in the Christian sense, "loving ones neighbor" is the only commandment. this, too, would seem to be an active sort of thing. Matthew in Chapter 7 seems to indicate that "by their fruits shall you know them", which to my mind is also speaking of works.

    agreed.

    having read the Pauline Conspiracy hosted on this very site, however, my views regarding Paul have undergone a significant revision.

    to paraphrase Robert G. Ingersol.. that statement "All you've got to do is believe!" is the cross upon which Intellectual freedom was crucified.

    i agree with this paragraph without reservation :)

    one of the things which, it seems, is often the case... we tend to form "first impressions" which last for quite a while.. even when those impressions are incorrect cognitions regarding an individual being. it takes no small bit of courage to revisit our previously held views and overturn them where we find them mistaken, in my view.

    :eek: thank you, Juan!

    it is difficult to say, that is certain. in some cases, we have to associate with child molesters because they are family members and, as children, we have little opportunity to escape from them. this was the situation which i found myself in. it has not been easy, even now, to extricate those memories from the being who, like all sentient beings, was operating with a deluded mind under the sway of negative emotions.

    i suppose, in some sense, it is like being hit with a stick and being angry at the stick for causing the pain. it is more correct to be angry with the being using the stick to inflict harm, however, if we understand that they are operating under the influence of defiled emotional states, it is these which are more properly the target of our anger.

    not to be trite, but this is a very nuanced subject and i suspect there will be a variety of views to be found.

    metta,

    ~v
     
  15. Rouge47

    Rouge47 Follower of Christ

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    196
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just to make the answer to the question sweet and simple:

    The deeds and actions they perform.

    Ok I said it, do I get a cookie now?:D Just joking. The deeds of a person are (I think) always far greater than the person himself. Jesus could have done whatever he wanted to on earth. But he wanted to let the people know the light of world. Therefor he performed all of those good (and amazing) deeds and symbolized himself by sacrificing his body on the cross to forgive all men and women. That was far more defining than just going out and saying, "Hi, I'm Jesus now bow down to me mortals, ha ha ha ha ha!!"

    PJ

    PS- Now do I get the cookie?
     
  16. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,502
    Likes Received:
    147
    Kindest Regards, all!

    I must say, I am impressed with the high quality of responses. Thank you all, very much!

    Bandit:
    You raise some interesting points my friend. I don't know that I am prepared to take "value" all the way to the level of close friend for each and every person, surely there must be some steps or degrees. Yet, even those we "value" least we are still to have compassion for, are we not? I think I would add, that valuing a person does not mean agreeing with their actions, let alone participating in those actions you disagree with. And there is a social risk, of being deemed guilty by association: "birds of a feather flock together."

    LOL!

    Luna:
    Your response seems to me the most difficult to answer. I want to say something, but it is formed in disjointed thoughts. I want to say something about people living up to, or down to, our expectations of them. I think of adoptive parents that take in unruly kids that the system has given up on. Kids that are deemed hopeless, under the right circumstances, prove they do indeed have worth. The thought that all is not lost, until we give up and surrender to hopelessness. I don't know quite how to tie all of these things together into something that makes rational sense.

    Maybe I am thinking too hard, but wouldn't a set of guidelines almost equate with prejudging? I mean, guidelines would mean approaching every new individual with a set standard for measuring value, so to speak. Maybe this would be good, but I have a gut feeling it would not be flexible enough to allow for variables. I suppose part of the problem for me lies in trying to see people as basically good, occasionally making bad choices and doing bad things. Whereas, it seems in my experience, a lot of people write off an otherwise good person because of one or two bad things they have done in the past.

    Absolutely. This is why this question bothers me so deeply, as to why certain people almost instinctively pass judgment on others, particularly in light of the admonition by Jesus specifically not to.

    Agreed.

    What goes around, comes around.

    Quahom:
    This is an interesting consideration, and I think it ties in with what Vajradhara was trying to say earlier, there can be no action without an actor.

    Your examples are good ones, ones that demonstrate why we value, or should value, the good in people, and the good that people do.

    I want to believe all people are capable of doing good, and being good. What drives a person like Mother Theresa to work with the dregs of society? What drives certain people to look beyond what society at large agrees with, looking beyond the hopeless waste to find the human being buried inside? Likewise, what drives the rest to surrender hope towards certain others? If providing hope against the odds is what spiritual teachers and leaders instruct us to do, why do so few do this?

    Seattlegal:
    I am impressed with your grasp of the subject! Surely all of these; love, repentence and forgiveness, are multi-direction streets. Love ideally should be two-way, repentence is incomplete unless it is two-way, and forgiveness is inadequate unless it is two-way. I can love you, but if you do not love me in return there will grow a resentment between us on one side or the other. I can repent for myself, but if I do not repent to you for a specific wrong I have done to you, you are either not aware of my change of heart or feel it is insincere. If I forgive you and you do not forgive me, the issue remains unresolved.
    I like this. That would explain when Jesus said: "I have not come to do away with the law, but to fulfill it."

    Vajradhara:
    I do not know of Mr. Ingersol, but I came to much the same conclusion long ago.

    Yes. How often in my life it seems when I went along with the crowd concerning an individual, I was later to learn just how mistaken I truly was. This was most evident as a child, as we know children can be cruel, (even if that cruelty is an innocent one, of ignorance, not intent). When adults are cruel, it is much more calculated and efficient, and often well disguised. Yet, depending on our station in life, it can be a challenge to go against the crowd.

    I apologize if I opened any old wounds, that was not my intent. I like this analogy, of being angry at the stick instead of the source.

    I wasn't certain it would become a can of worms, but that can be enlightening too. It always seems to help to have a variety of views when looking at the greater issues in life.

    I think you nailed something important, it is far more difficult to view this philosophically, and charitibly, when you are staring the culprit in the face while "he" is doing bad. Sometimes forgiveness must be earned. That might not be written, but that is my experience in life.

    We tend to have a lot of philosophical discussions around the forum, about the benefits of this belief compared with the benefits of that belief. Sometimes I just like to get my fingers dirty, practical application, put these things to the test as it were. Not trying to show superiority of one over another, just trying to understand how they each relate when applied as they are meant to. Again, it all comes out in the wash.
     
  17. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,502
    Likes Received:
    147
    Kindest Regards, Paul James!

    Yes, you can have one cookie!
    Yours is an interesting take on the matter, one I did not forsee. If I am reading you correctly then, you would place more value on the deeds of the woman at the well? How does this relate to our salvation? How does this relate to our judging, or not, of others?
     
  18. Rouge47

    Rouge47 Follower of Christ

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    196
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for the cookie, yeah!:p

    As for your questions-

    1. Woman at the well: Yes I would place more value on her deeds because Jesus new exactly what she had done in the past. What he had said had described her as a...well...slut. Therefor she was defined by her actions (better word than deed in this situation) more than she was defined by just who she was as a person (if that makes one bit of sense-I'm trying here so bear with me).
    2. Salvation relation: Well...she had seen the salvation that Christ had brought to her by just telling her of past when she and He had never met. And she was astonished (I believe) when Jesus told her of the water of life.
    3. We usually judge others by the color of their skin or by the way they dress, or anything else that is external. Jesus saw the internal part of the woman. And He basically (without saying it, but describing it) labled her as a slut. He bothered not with how the woman dressed, or by the color of her skin, but of how her past life had been.

    I hope that answered your questions with at least something useful in there.

    PJ

    PS- Now how about a glass of milk for the cookie.
     
  19. Bandit

    Bandit New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    3,172
    Likes Received:
    0
    yah. something like that. i think some of us really want to trust & wish we could trust everyone. forgiveness & unconditional love seems to be easy as i have grown older. giving many chances depending on circmstance seems easy but TRUST it what is so difficult to gain & to gain back these days. i think there was a time in the U.S. when most everyone was instilled with trust but i kind of see that changing.

    there is a risk like you say to some of this also.

    then there are two sides there with forgiveness. sometimes we ask for forgiveness for our mistake & other times we are doing the forgiving. for me, people do not have to ask for that generally but i also think that we are supposed to go to each other sometimes & ask if there is anything we have done that was wrong & ask them to forgive us. we do that at church on new Years Eve.

    i guess someone can shoot me in the foot with a bullet on purpose, but how many times do i let them shoot me in the foot before I stop that? i say about one time. forget the 70X7 because i will not have a foot left.
    can i shoot them back in the foot with a bullet? well i just might & i will tell them how much i love them & forgive them as i do it...you know? :)

    there is another thread going here: How do you treat others? and... that is kind of like this one in the Islam board.:)
     
  20. Rouge47

    Rouge47 Follower of Christ

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    196
    Likes Received:
    0
    ...Ouch...;)
     

Share This Page