• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

What's on your mind?

Today I was pondering how would Christians define sacrifice as opposed to the non-believers/unsaved/lost/pagan/the world's version of sacrifice. We all have to make sacrifices, so there must be a difference
Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me? John 14:9
Upvote 0

Must watch video--Former Israeli diplomat calls Trump 'a man of his word' amid Israel-Hamas peace deal

Hilliary supporting Trump!? Maybe it is the end of the world. :D
  • Like
Reactions: Vambram
Upvote 0

Things none of ya'll have ever read about Revelation.

Well, maybe you have a little different take, but most people who throw in those 10 tribes try to say the RCC took Rome's place. This is not what happen. Rome was the Wounded Head. God took a Beast and turned it into a conveyor belt for the Gospel of Jesus Christ, thus the Church via its blood, which could not be overcome by the gates of hell, wounded the Beast. Only after the Rapture can the Beast come back to life or be healed, this happens when this 7 Headed Beast gets a NEW HEAD (The Little Horn/AC). All this trying to make Rome continue on is just very bad eschatology imho. 95% who go down this line say its the RCC that took the place of Rome.


NO....This just shows you need to listen and study more brother.
Well, Herod the Great and Octavian fulfilled that prophecy exactly as stated following the end of the Syrian section of the Greek Empire. Are people are just supposed to throw that fact out to fit folks end of the world prognostications?
Upvote 0

Where Do TLM Devotees Go When Their Liturgy Gets Banned?

Members of Charlotte’s Latin Mass community are torn between the liturgy they love and the parishes they belong to

What does a Catholic do when the liturgy he or she has attended — in some cases, for more than a decade — is banned from their parish church?

That’s a question that is being answered in different ways by the roughly 1,500 Catholics in the Diocese of Charlotte, North Carolina, who, until last week, regularly attended the traditional Latin Mass (TLM) at one of four parish churches.

The practice came to an end on Oct. 2, when Bishop Michael Martin, Charlotte’s leader for less than a year and a half, restricted celebrations of the form of the Mass used before the reforms of the Second Vatican Council to a single chapel just over 30 miles north of Charlotte.

Bishop Martin said the move was about bringing the diocese into compliance with Traditionis Custodes, a 2021 apostolic letter from Pope Francis that called for severely restricting the TLM for the sake of Church unity.

Continued below.
I guess I would think it appropriate if all 1500 of them, and well wishers too, went to that tiny little remote chapel on a given Sunday. With media in tow to report on how the bishop failed to provide for these people in his fake solicitude.

Actually they are between a rock and a hard place. The bishop won. But then again that bishop will face a judgment some day. Their obedience to this bad bishop will be rewarded. His hatred of his sheep might not be rewarded.
Upvote 0

Curious as to what precisely makes Full-Preterism considered an non orthodox heresy?

Here's why, and your question proves that the following is the case to this very day.

The Nicene Creed becomes state law.
The Roman Emperor Theodosius I's Edict of Thessalonica in 380 CE did not make all forms of Christian practice illegal, but it condemned and outlawed all forms of Christianity that did not conform to Nicene Christianity. This had severe consequences for Christian groups considered heretical, particularly Arianism.
Background: The Arian controversy
The Edict of Thessalonica came during decades of intense theological dispute in the Roman Empire known as the Arian controversy.
Arianism: Led by Arius, a priest from Alexandria, this school of thought argued that Jesus Christ was not co-eternal with God the Father but was a created being, subordinate to him.
Nicene Christianity: This orthodox position held that Christ was consubstantial, or of the same divine substance, as the Father. This was first established at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 CE.
The controversy was deeply political and religious, with different emperors and regions supporting opposing viewpoints. Emperor Theodosius's predecessor, Valens, was an Arian, which had allowed Arianism to flourish in the East.
The Edict's prohibitions
With the Edict of Thessalonica, Emperor Theodosius I formally mandated adherence to Nicene Christianity throughout the Roman Empire and designated all other Christian interpretations as heresy.
Specifically, the edict declared:
Marginalization of heretics: The law branded non-Nicene Christians as "foolish madmen" and decreed that their places of worship could not be called "churches".
Exclusion from cities:
Later decrees, beginning in 381 CE, forbade heretics from meeting for worship within city walls, effectively banishing them from urban centers and their social and religious life.
Confiscation of property: The state began seizing the property of heretical Christian groups, including their churches, and turned them over to Nicene bishops.
State-sanctioned punishment: Theodosius's edicts authorized imperial authority to punish those who deviated from Nicene doctrine. While early punishments were non-lethal, the legal basis was established for later, more severe persecution. In 385, the bishop Priscillian became the first Christian to be judicially executed for heresy, though the sentence was condemned by some prominent bishops.
The aftermath
The Edict of Thessalonica effectively ended the Arian controversy by using imperial power to crush theological dissent. Theodosius's actions, and the subsequent First Council of Constantinople in 381 CE, ensured that the state and church would enforce a single, orthodox interpretation of Christianity. All other Christian groups, no matter how large their following, were cast as illegal and dangerous enemies of both the church and the state.

Whereas, all the prophecies, all the promises and all the grammar point to a first century fulfillment, futurism has it narrowed down to eternity.
Jesus said in the book of Revelation He was coming quickly using the present tense 4 times. I guess believing Him is considered a damnable heresy. Well, I'm going to believe Him anyways.
Seems beside the point. But I think we can agree on the state not having authority to determine truth.
Upvote 0

Vatican appoints judges to decide Rupnik sexual abuse case

The Vatican’s doctrine office announced Monday that a panel of five judges has been nominated to decide the disciplinary case against Father Marko Rupnik, accused of the sexual and psychological abuse of consecrated women under his spiritual care.

The judges, appointed Oct. 9, do not hold any position in the Roman Curia — the Vatican’s governing body — to ensure their autonomy and independence in the penal judicial procedure, according to an Oct. 13 press release from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF).

Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández, the head of the DDF, told journalists in July that the judges for the Rupnik case had been selected. The panel of judges includes both women and clerics.

Fernández had said in an interview at the end of January that the dicastery had finished gathering information in the disciplinary case, had conducted a first review, and was working to put together an independent tribunal for the penal judicial procedure.

Rupnik — a well-known artist with mosaics and paintings in hundreds of Catholic shrines and churches around the world — is accused of having committed sexual, psychological, and spiritual abuse against dozens of women religious in the 1980s and early 1990s.

In May 2019, the then-Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith launched a criminal administrative process against Rupnik after the Society of Jesus reported credible complaints of abuse by the priest to the Vatican.

Continued below.
Overdue.
Upvote 0

Stranger Things

I agree with placing a spotlight on the role of Radical Feminism in the destruction of the black family. The "welfare state" played a minor supporting role, but black women had been receiving welfare for years while still aspiring to be wives. It was Radical Feminism (capitalized because it's a specific feminist ideology) that injected the idea that women were better off without men in their lives ("A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle."

There’s a lot of cuts planned for public assistance. Including the programs I mentioned and others related to food, housing and health care. The fallout will be ugly. Not only for minorities but others that fall outside of their ideal.

~bella
Upvote 0

Trump's reputation will age like fine wine

It's not centrist apologetics for the far right...
Apologetics, distractions, whatever you you want to call it. Perhaps I should have said the authoritarian right.
it's simply an acknowledgment that he's not "Hitler" when his position on the various issues aren't all that far off from that of establishment politicians from the mid-90's (in fact, some are even more progressive).
Of course he's not Hitler. Hitler is dead.
I am a centrist. In the Overton Window that is "the US body Politic", my positions are "closer to the middle". The key difference is, there's one faction that is more likely than the other to say that "the middle" is an unacceptable position.

If I went to a pro-2A rally, but said "Hey, I'm cool with gay marriage, I have a nuanced position on abortion, I'm an atheist...but hey, I feel like people should have the right to defend themselves with the most effective tool possible", they'd be cool with me. If I showed up at a left-wing rally and said "I'm a fan of giving people equal marriage rights, I'm a big fan of separation of church and state, but I'm a capitalist, and think you guys need to tone it down on the various 'critical theories' and that borders are still important", I'd get a urine bottle whipped at my head and told that I'm a fascist.

This shows how intolerant of contrasting viewpoints "team left" has become in the past 15 years.
This isn't about the position of your politics. It's what you give cover to. Do you ever challenge any of the Trumpists here?
Upvote 0

God Worshiper or Law Worshiper?

God's law was never given as a way of earning our salvation even as the result of having perfect obedience, but rather God graciously teaching to obey His law is the way that He is giving us His gift of salvation (Titus 2:11-13). It is contradictory to think that salvation is found in God's Word made flesh, but not in following his example of embodying God's Word. Jesus saves us from our sin (Matthew 1:21) and sin is the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4), so Jesus graciously teaching us to be a embody it is intrinsically the way that he is giving us his gift of saving us from not embodying it, but if Jesus fulfilled the law for us, then he would be removing his of salvation from us, so thankfully he did not do that. In 1 John 2:6, those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked, so only those who are following his example of walking in obedience to God's law are in Christ, which is how his righteousness produces the fruit of obedience.


For example, if someone gives money to charity, then they succeeding at embodying the righteousness of God, so that is not beyond our ability. In Romans 10:5-8, Paul referred to Deuteronomy 30 as the word of faith that we proclaim in regard to proclaiming that God's law is not too difficult for us to obey and that obedience to it brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life! So it was presented as a possibility and as a choice, not as something that we will all fail at. The way to submit to God is by obeying His commandments through faith.


Character traits are not earned as the result of our works but other they are embodied through our works, so God's law was never given as a way to make us righteous, but as instructions for how to embody His righteousness. The only way for someone to attain a character trait is by faith apart from being required to have first done enough works in order to earn it as the result, but what it means to have a character trait is to be a doer of works that embody that trait, so while we become righteous by faith apart from works, it would be contradictory for someone to become righteous apart from becoming a doer of righteous works. What it means for God to make us righteous is for Him to make us into a doer of righteous works and the way that He does that is by graciously teaching us to be a doer of His law.

You say:

“God graciously teaching us to obey His law is the way that He is giving us His gift of salvation (Titus 2:11-13).”
Answer:
Titus 2:11–13 does not say grace = law-teaching saves us.
It says grace saves us first, and then that same grace trains us to live godly lives.

Titus 2:11–12

“For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions…”
Notice the order:

  1. Grace appearsbrings salvation.
  2. Then grace trains the saved → to obey.
The teaching comes after salvation, not as the vehicle of salvation.
Grace produces obedience; obedience does not produce grace.

Ephesians 2:8–10

“For by grace you have been saved through faith… not of works… For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works.”
We’re not saved by good works, but saved for them.


You say:

“It is contradictory to think salvation is found in God’s Word made flesh but not in following His example of embodying God’s Word.”
Answer:
We are indeed called to follow Christ’s example (1 John 2:6), but imitation follows impartation.
We can only walk as He walked after we have been born again and indwelt by His Spirit (Romans 8:9).

Christ’s example shows what righteousness looks like, but only His cross gives it to us.

Romans 5:19

“By one man’s obedience many will be made righteous.”
It is His obedience — not ours — that makes us righteous before God.
Our obedience follows because we are new creations (2 Cor. 5:17).


You say

“If Jesus fulfilled the law for us, then He would be removing His gift of salvation from us, so thankfully He did not do that.”
Answer:
This directly contradicts Scripture.
Christ had to fulfill the law for us because we could not.

Romans 8:3–4

“For what the law could not do… God did, by sending His own Son… in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.”
Jesus’ fulfillment doesn’t remove salvation — it secures it.
He didn’t abolish righteousness; He fulfilled it on our behalf and now produces it in us by the Spirit (Philippians 2:13).


You say:

“Only those who are following His example of walking in obedience to God’s law are in Christ.”
Answer:
Scripture says the opposite:
Only those who are in Christ by faith are capable of true obedience.

Galatians 3:2–3

“Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law, or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?”
Faith unites us to Christ; that union produces obedience (John 15:5).
Obedience is the fruit of being in the vine, not the condition for being grafted into it.


You say:

“Obedience brings life and blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life!”
Answer:
That was the Mosaic covenant (Deuteronomy 30).
But Paul cites that passage in Romans 10:6-8 to make the opposite point — that now Christ is the end of the law for righteousness (Romans 10:4).

In Christ, life comes not through law-keeping but through faith in the risen Lord:

Romans 10:9-10

“If you confess with your mouth ‘Jesus is Lord’ and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.”
The “word of faith” Paul preaches is not “obey the law,” but “believe the gospel.”

You say:

“The only way for God to make us righteous is by teaching us to do righteous works.”
Answer:
God makes us righteous by imputing Christ’s righteousness to us, not by instructing us until we achieve it.

Romans 4:5

“To the one who does not work but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness.”
After justification, He then imparts righteousness through the Spirit’s transforming work (Romans 6:17–18).
That’s sanctification, not justification.


The Biblical Order (Romans 6:22)​

“But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life.”
  1. Set free from sin — salvation by grace.
  2. Become servants of God — new identity.
  3. Fruit of obedience — sanctification.
  4. End result — eternal life.
Obedience follows deliverance; it does not cause it.
Upvote 0

Why we Christians still have to struggle with sins?

Yeah...it's looks like you are stuck on Roman Christianity Doctrine and you are bringing destruction to yourself whether you understand this or not. In, (Is. 42:21) we find another prophecy concerning Christ and the law. It reads, (v.21) The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness' sake; he (Jesus) will magnify the law, and make it honourable. When you magnify something you enlarge it and bring it out more of its detail and richness. Jesus revealed the fulfillment of this prophecy when he explained, (Mat.5:27-28) (v.27) Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: (v.28) But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart

By magnifying the law and making it honorable, the spiritual intent of the law is now emphasized which goes far beyond the mere the physical intent. God has raised His standards, not lowered them! All God ever wanted was what was best for us! He designed us to be His children. We are happiest when we love and obey Him. He is a God who is totally righteous and holy. God cannot sin. And He wants us to follow in His footsteps. The person that says, (1John:2:6) “that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.”

Jesus says in (Mat.5:17-19) (v.17) Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (v.18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (v.19) Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus came to fulfill, to fill to the full (Gk. plereo). He fulfilled many prophecies - but not all. There are many in the Book of Revelation still to be fulfilled. There is still some in the Old Testament that hasn’t been fulfilled. Jesus at His first coming came to fulfilled that which was written for Him to fulfill at His first coming. He has NOT fulfilled everything that was written for Him to do. And He kept all of the Law that he could - but that was not all! He was not a Temple priest. He was not a woman. He could not keep the laws intended only for priests and women. No matter how you think about Jesus, there is still much to be fulfilled! So not even the smallest part has yet passed from God's Law!

Jesus made it quite clear that anyone who would break even the least commandment and teach people to do so would be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. The fact is, God did not find fault with His laws but rather with the people who did not obey them. (Heb.8:7-8) (v.7) For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.(v.8) For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: The writer of Hebrews then proceeds to quote Jeremiah 31:31-34, quoted above. Under the New Covenant we now have a living High Priest, Jesus Christ, who can make intercession for us. One who was tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin. He is an intercessor who understands our weaknesses because He lived as a human being.

Claim 2: The Law cannot pass until heaven and earth pass.

Response:
Jesus did not say the Law would never pass.
He said it would not pass “until all is fulfilled.”

Matthew 5:18


“…till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
And what did Jesus do?
He fulfilled it — completely.

Luke 24:44

“All things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.”
Romans 10:4

“For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth.”
The Law stood until its purpose was accomplished in Christ — to reveal sin and point to Him.
When the reality (Christ) came, the shadow (Law) was fulfilled (Colossians 2:16–17).

Claim 3: Jesus has not fulfilled everything, so the Law still stands.

Response: This confuses prophecy fulfillment (some yet to come) with Law fulfillment (already completed).
The Law and the Prophets are different categories — both foretold things, but the Law’s requirements were fully met in Christ’s life, death, and resurrection.

Hebrews 10:9–10

“He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.”
The “first” — the system of law and sacrifice — was taken away because its purpose was completed in Christ.

Claim 4: The Law wasn’t at fault, the people were — therefore the Law remains.

Response:
Hebrews 8:7–13 does say the fault was with the people, but the conclusion is that the old covenant was made obsolete and replaced with a new one.

Hebrews 8:13

“In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”
The new covenant doesn’t patch up the old system; it replaces it with a better one based on Christ’s blood (Luke 22:20).

The Law wasn’t evil — it was holy (Romans 7:12).
But it could not give life (Galatians 3:21), so God gave a new covenant where the law is written on the heart, not engraved on stone (Jeremiah 31:33; 2 Corinthians 3:3).

Claim 5: Whoever breaks even the least commandment is least in the kingdom.

Response:
This warning was given to those who thought they could enter the kingdom through law-keeping.
Jesus was contrasting self-righteousness with kingdom righteousness that comes only through Him.

Matthew 5:20

“Unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”
How can anyone’s righteousness exceed the Pharisees’?
Only by receiving Christ’s righteousness by faith.

Philippians 3:9

“…not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ…”
Those who teach justification by the Law are the ones breaking it, because they reject the very purpose of the Law — to drive us to Christ (Galatians 3:24–25).
Upvote 0

Why you can't debate unbelievers into the Kingdom of God

A great piece on how we go about conducting ourselves as Christians.
***************
In an age addicted to argument, Christians have become remarkably good at talking — and remarkably poor at listening. Scroll through social media or walk past a campus debate table, and you’ll see believers armed with microphones, cameras, and carefully memorized rebuttals. The object is not conversion but conquest. The applause line has replaced the altar call.

Somewhere along the way, we began to confuse winning debates with winning souls. Yet Scripture presents a very different picture of how truth changes hearts. The Gospel was never designed to be wielded like a sword in a duel of intellects; it was meant to be offered like bread to the hungry.

The problem with the debate mindset

Apologetics has its place. Reasoned defense of the faith can clarify misunderstandings and expose falsehoods. But when the believer’s primary instinct is to defeat rather than to disciple, something sacred is lost. Too many of today’s “discussions” look more like verbal brawls—complete with highlight reels and hashtags — than like Gospel witness.

Paul warned Timothy, “Have nothing to do with foolish, ignorant controversies; you know that they breed quarrels. And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness” (2 Tim. 2:23–25). Those words are as necessary in the digital age as they were in the first century. Debate can inform minds, but only the Spirit can transform hearts.

Why argument alone fails

Continued below.

Another thing I've noticed, too, is that there seem to be a number of Christians who think it's their God-given mandate to coral every other Christian into conformity with the specific teachings of their favored denomination, and you can't argue them into ceasing.
Upvote 0

Pinning Down a Date - Purely Personal

Purely personal but lately I've been wondering just when I first made my Christian confession.

I knew it was shortly after the Commonwealth Games in Brisbane in 1982, which ran from 30 September to 9 October 1982.

I had the flu at the time and I couldn't do anything except watch TV. I don't normally watch sport, but since there wasn't much else on I watched a fair bit of the games. Two names readily come to mind - Tracey WIckham who won medals in swimming and Robert de Castella ("Deek") who won the marathon. Some years later my then Presbyterian pastor said of Tracey Wickham that she would go through a terrible time, which she did.

It was not a good time in my life. I was out of work, going through a divorce, going to lose the home I was paying off etc.

But as I sat there a very persistent image of the "Newmarket Presbyterian Church" kept intruding into my mind. I'd had a bit of Sunday School when I was young at that church. It's a private home now, but at that time it was still going.

This image just didn't go away. It was persistent. Since I had nothing to lose and was thinking "There's got to be more to life than this!" I ended up going to the church after the Games finished and the flu was gone. A few weeks later I made a confession.

For some reason I've recently started trying to remember when I made my confession. I think it was probably in the early part of November. Using AI I got the following dates for Sunday in November 1982 - 7th, 14th, 21st and 28th.

I suspect it might have been November 14, 1982. I remember making my confession, half reluctantly, and then going home feeling as though I was "walking on air" (to quote another chap who had the same experience after he made his confession, years earlier than I did as he's nearly 20 years older).

In turn I met the pastor of that church (there were three churches in the parish, Wilston-Windsor-Newmarket). I soon gravitated to Wilston which was the main church and where he had his office. Of the three churches it is the only one still going as Newmarket was sold off, and while I think they may still have the property rights for Windsor, it is not being used.

The website for the Wilston Church follows and I can still recognise at least four people even though I haven't been there for 34 years - a former treasurer and his wife, an elder, and another lady who also did some organisation at the Masters Athletics.


In this scene, there is a door down towards the right hand end, which is the office where the pastor and I had a lot of dicussions. There was also a gym under the church. I enjoyed my time there, not because it was "Presbyterian" but due to the people.


Incidentally the Presbyterian Church of Queensland is in receivership, not because of parish churches themselves or pedophile court cases which have been a burden to a number of churches, but due to financial mishandling of their aged care facilities. Apparently the aged care function was not a separate business entity from the Presbyterian Church itself.


The night my father died (when I was still atheist) he predicted I'd become Christian and that as part of that I'd meet a certain pastor, who would "discourage (me) even more". That turned out to be the Presbyterian pastor as he admitted circa 1991 that "You needed encouragement, but all I've done is to discourage you even more!", quoting my deceased father back to me word for word.

But I learnt a lot from him and still hold him with a lot of respect. In turn he predicted I'd become Catholic, which I did circa 1996/97.

I received a Bible dated 7/12/96 as part of RCIA which was probably during the Rite of Welcome. This implies I was inducted into the Catholic Church during the Easter Vigil in 1997, which happened to be on 29 March, 1997.

So I think I've managed to pin those two dates down. Just a bit of useless information for forum readers.

Filter

Forum statistics

Threads
5,876,586
Messages
65,385,513
Members
276,278
Latest member
CursedChristian