Closed Thread
Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: (Paedos Only) Infants of Believers Dying in Infancy

  1. #1
    A.J.'s Avatar
    A.J. is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,903
    Thanks
    809
    Thanked 591 Times in 405 Posts

    (Paedos Only) Infants of Believers Dying in Infancy

    Here's a short explanation/defense of Canons of Dort 1:17 by Pastor Wes White.

    Johannes Weslianus: Infants of Believers Dying in Infancy
    Albert, The Republic of the Philippines
    Pasig Covenant Reformed Church (a confessional Reformed church plant)
    United Covenant Reformed Churches in the Philippines
    Three Forms of Unity and Westminster Confession of Faith

    Psalm 27:1a (AV) The LORD is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear?
    “Perseverance is the badge of true saints. The Christian life is not a beginning only in the ways of God, but also a continuance in the same as long as life lasts.” -
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  2. #2
    A.J.'s Avatar
    A.J. is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,903
    Thanks
    809
    Thanked 591 Times in 405 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by blhowes View Post
    n the case of children dying in infancy, all we have is the judgment of charity. All we know are the promises of the covenant of grace, "I will be a God to you and to your seed." And this is the way we ought to proceed. We should go by the judgment of charity in the case of the child and have every confidence that this child who has died is in heaven.
    This promise gives hope for believing parents who have children who die in infancy. Does the promise also apply to children of parents who died in infancy before the parents believed?
    Honestly, I haven't considered that question yet. The ministers in the forums might be of help to your question.

    -----Added 8/18/2009 at 01:05:41 EST-----

    And thanks for asking.
    Albert, The Republic of the Philippines
    Pasig Covenant Reformed Church (a confessional Reformed church plant)
    United Covenant Reformed Churches in the Philippines
    Three Forms of Unity and Westminster Confession of Faith

    Psalm 27:1a (AV) The LORD is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear?
    “Perseverance is the badge of true saints. The Christian life is not a beginning only in the ways of God, but also a continuance in the same as long as life lasts.” -
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  3. #3
    Edward's Avatar
    Edward is offline. Puritanboard Senior
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,802
    Thanks
    903
    Thanked 924 Times in 630 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by blhowes View Post
    n the case of children dying in infancy, all we have is the judgment of charity. All we know are the promises of the covenant of grace, "I will be a God to you and to your seed." And this is the way we ought to proceed. We should go by the judgment of charity in the case of the child and have every confidence that this child who has died is in heaven.
    This promise gives hope for believing parents who have children who die in infancy. Does the promise also apply to children of parents who died in infancy before the parents believed?
    It depends on whether the child is elect.

    WCF X.III - Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth. So also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.
    Edward
    Deacon
    PCA
    Texas
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Edward For This Useful Post:

    TimV (08-18-2009)

  5. #4
    TimV's Avatar
    TimV is offline. Puritanboard Botanist
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    6,695
    Thanks
    2,345
    Thanked 3,160 Times in 1,493 Posts
    God is loving and just and merciful, and under no obligation whatsoever to defend or explain His loving kindness and justice and mercy to anyone. Gotta love the WCF on this subject. The authors were content to let the Deity be the Deity.
    Tim Vaughan
    Member, Redeemer Presbyterian, OPC,
    Santa Maria
    California
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TimV For This Useful Post:

    Backwoods Presbyterian (08-18-2009), Grillsy (08-18-2009), Quickened (08-18-2009)

  7. #5
    Scott1's Avatar
    Scott1 is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    6,843
    Thanks
    2,694
    Thanked 2,563 Times in 1,554 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by blhowes View Post
    n the case of children dying in infancy, all we have is the judgment of charity. All we know are the promises of the covenant of grace, "I will be a God to you and to your seed." And this is the way we ought to proceed. We should go by the judgment of charity in the case of the child and have every confidence that this child who has died is in heaven.
    This promise gives hope for believing parents who have children who die in infancy. Does the promise also apply to children of parents who died in infancy before the parents believed?
    Very difficult area that needs great care.

    There is more reason to have hope for the children of believers, more to have faith toward. But even a child of a nonbeliever can be elect.

    Biblically, we do not have warrant to clearly say how many or how few elect infants there are.

    This is where reformed theology is careful and consistent- salvation is 100% a sovereign work of God, it is not dependent on anything in man (or infant), but on the good pleasure of His will, agreed in eternity past.
    Scott
    PCA
    North Carolina


    "And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever." - Revelation 11:15
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Scott1 For This Useful Post:

    Gesetveemet (08-19-2009)

  9. #6
    bookslover's Avatar
    bookslover is offline. Puritanboard Graduate
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,308
    Thanks
    27
    Thanked 612 Times in 351 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward View Post
    It depends on whether the child is elect.

    WCF X.III - Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth. So also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.
    Yes, this is true. We all know examples from both Scripture and our own experience of believers who had children who were non-elect. If those children had died in infancy, they would not have gone to heaven.
    Richard T. Zuelch, M.Div
    Ruling Elder, OPC (not currently serving)
    Westminster Presbyterian Church, CA (OPC)
    www.alexandermaclaren.wordpress.com
    www.lovedtowrite.wordpress.com
    www.peoplescribbling.wordpress.com
    www.reiterations.wordpress.com
    www.spurgeonswords.wordpress.com

    We must feel ourselves sick before we can duly prize the Great Physician, and feel a sentence of death in ourselves before we can effectually trust in God, who raiseth the dead. - John Newton (1725-1807), in a letter to the Rev. Mr. S. (September 6, 1775).
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  10. #7
    PilgrimPastor's Avatar
    PilgrimPastor is offline. Puritanboard Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    78
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts
    What a difficult task to counsel on this subject. I have a couple in my parish who will be mourning the third anniversary of the loss of a child born with a genetic condition who died after 23 days of life. My wife and I mourn with them, grieve with them, love them as dear friends, I have offered thoughts, but let me tell you brothers and sisters, it is our genuine sorrow and love with them in the midst of their pain which ministers most effectively.
    "Gentle words, quiet words, are after all, the most powerful words. They are more convincing, more compelling, more prevailing." - Washington Gladden
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  11. #8
    Herald's Avatar
    Herald is offline. No posts for you!
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,937
    Blog Entries
    13
    Thanks
    2,406
    Thanked 4,459 Times in 2,167 Posts
    MODERATOR NOTE:

    This forum is for paedo answers only. If you are a credo-baptist, please refrain from responding. If you find the topic of interest, start another thread.
    Bill Brown
    Elder
    Grace Baptist Church
    Maryland

    Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?
    Visit my BLOG Theology for the Rest of Us
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  12. #9
    Edward's Avatar
    Edward is offline. Puritanboard Senior
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,802
    Thanks
    903
    Thanked 924 Times in 630 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Herald View Post
    MODERATOR NOTE:

    This forum is for paedo answers only. If you are a credo-baptist, please refrain from responding. If you find the topic of interest, start another thread.
    I wondered about the placement. Certainly there should be no suggestion that baptism has anything to do with whether the infant is saved or not.

    I've quoted from Westminster above, and Dort is along the same lines (although it seems to convey a bit more assurance than is warranted.)

    "Article 17: The Salvation of the Infants of Believers

    Since we must make judgments about God's will from his Word, which testifies that the children of believers are holy, not by nature but by virtue of the gracious covenant in which they together with their parents are included, godly parents ought not to doubt the election and salvation of their children whom God calls out of this life in infancy.
    Edward
    Deacon
    PCA
    Texas
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  13. #10
    PilgrimPastor's Avatar
    PilgrimPastor is offline. Puritanboard Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    78
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Herald View Post
    MODERATOR NOTE:

    This forum is for paedo answers only. If you are a credo-baptist, please refrain from responding. If you find the topic of interest, start another thread.
    My practice is primarily that of paedobaptism, though I affirm the validity of both based on the Scriptures and an argument from Church History and the emphasis of grace with regard to salvation.

    The greatest trouble I have found is with regard to the practical matter of people having their infants baptized as though the efficacy for salvation was contained in the sacrament. I run into a lot of folks (many former Catholics) who are convinced, by no Scriptural grounds, purely on the basis of their own religious experience, that an infant must be baptized to ensure salvation.

    I find it very difficult to accept the eternal loss of an infant, though almost completely on emotional and intuitive grounds. My heart wants to look for (at the very least) the salvation of all children of believers. A sort of "family covenant" view along the lines of what is mentioned above seems entirely valid, but I have not searched the Scriptures on this and am not certain that I can adequately argue this point at present.
    Last edited by PilgrimPastor; 08-18-2009 at 11:09 PM.
    "Gentle words, quiet words, are after all, the most powerful words. They are more convincing, more compelling, more prevailing." - Washington Gladden
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  14. #11
    Poimen's Avatar
    Poimen is offline. Puritanboard Graduate
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    3,712
    Thanks
    262
    Thanked 1,146 Times in 557 Posts
    For clarification's sake, please note that the Canons point us to God's promises concerning believer's children which would exclude those children who were not born into a covenant home.

    Furthermore the purpose is to comfort parents not to give us an exhaustive knowledge of God's decree. What parents know of their children is what God has told them: they are holy to Him (1 Corinthians 7:14). We thus rest on what God has said not what we think He might or might not have decreed. A godly, believing parent therefore has no reason not to believe their child is with the Lord since there is no evidence of their rejection of God's promise.

    And really is there a difference between our assurance concerning an adult who dies or an infant? Is it, in the final analysis, only their profession of faith and godly life that determines whether we know for sure that they are with the Lord? We make fallible judgments all time and may be wrong about this individual's or that individual's salvation. That doesn't matter; what matters is what God has said and trusting in what He has promised to do.
    Last edited by Poimen; 08-19-2009 at 11:06 AM.
    Rev. Daniel Kok
    Pastor of Grace Reformed Church (URCNA)
    Leduc, Alberta CANADA

    "What sort of pledge and how great is this of love towards us! Christ lives for us not for himself!"
    John Calvin, Commentary on the Hebrews (7:25)
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Poimen For This Useful Post:

    A.J. (08-19-2009), PilgrimPastor (08-19-2009)

  16. #12
    dannyhyde's Avatar
    dannyhyde is offline. Puritanboard Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    708
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 605 Times in 232 Posts
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  17. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to dannyhyde For This Useful Post:

    A.J. (08-19-2009), PilgrimPastor (08-19-2009), R. Scott Clark (08-19-2009)

  18. #13
    KMK's Avatar
    KMK
    KMK is offline. Rot a Redom
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    9,934
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    4,080
    Thanked 1,643 Times in 953 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Poimen View Post
    A godly, believing parent therefore has no reason not to believe their child is with the Lord since there is no evidence of their rejection of God's promise.
    Thank you for this helpful post. But, just to clarify, the Canons say, "godly parents ought not to doubt", but you say, "A godly, believing parent therefore has no reason not to believe." Is 'not doubting' the same thing as 'should believe'? And if so, is this the historical understanding of Canons 1:17?


    http://www.villagecommunitychurch.org/


    "Preparing a sermon is like cooking a meal. You need pots and pans and utensils, but you don't bring them out to the table where people are eating." Derek Thomas


    Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  19. #14
    MMasztal's Avatar
    MMasztal is offline. Puritanboard Sophomore
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    768
    Thanks
    272
    Thanked 203 Times in 144 Posts
    Spurgeon said something to the effect that where Scripture is scant, it is for no one to speak dogmatically.

    This is one of those cases.
    Michael Masztal
    Ruling Elder, Chapel By The Sea, ARP
    Melbourne Beach, FL
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  20. #15
    Poimen's Avatar
    Poimen is offline. Puritanboard Graduate
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    3,712
    Thanks
    262
    Thanked 1,146 Times in 557 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KMK View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Poimen View Post
    A godly, believing parent therefore has no reason not to believe their child is with the Lord since there is no evidence of their rejection of God's promise.
    Thank you for this helpful post. But, just to clarify, the Canons say, "godly parents ought not to doubt", but you say, "A godly, believing parent therefore has no reason not to believe." Is 'not doubting' the same thing as 'should believe'? And if so, is this the historical understanding of Canons 1:17?
    Yes I would say that they are the same: one is stating it in a positive way, the other in a negative way. I believe the pastoral nature of the statement accounts for the negative manner in which it was originally phrased. In grief it is 'natural' to doubt; parents need the comfort now to point them to what God has said.

    There are some differences amongst those who adhere to the Canons in the manner in which they interpret it. I cannot speak to the issue of 'historical understanding' but I think the resources that Rev. Hyde listed above would aid you in answering the latter question.
    Rev. Daniel Kok
    Pastor of Grace Reformed Church (URCNA)
    Leduc, Alberta CANADA

    "What sort of pledge and how great is this of love towards us! Christ lives for us not for himself!"
    John Calvin, Commentary on the Hebrews (7:25)
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to Poimen For This Useful Post:

    KMK (08-19-2009)

  22. #16
    Michael Turner's Avatar
    Michael Turner is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,983
    Thanks
    518
    Thanked 559 Times in 328 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by MMasztal View Post
    Spurgeon said something to the effect that where Scripture is scant, it is for no one to speak dogmatically.

    This is one of those cases.
    The thread is for paedos only! Leave Spurgeon out of this!!

    Just kidding...
    · Michael Turner
    · Christ Reformed Church | Independent [WCF]
    · Georgia
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  23. #17
    KMK's Avatar
    KMK
    KMK is offline. Rot a Redom
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    9,934
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    4,080
    Thanked 1,643 Times in 953 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Poimen View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KMK View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Poimen View Post
    A godly, believing parent therefore has no reason not to believe their child is with the Lord since there is no evidence of their rejection of God's promise.
    Thank you for this helpful post. But, just to clarify, the Canons say, "godly parents ought not to doubt", but you say, "A godly, believing parent therefore has no reason not to believe." Is 'not doubting' the same thing as 'should believe'? And if so, is this the historical understanding of Canons 1:17?
    Yes I would say that they are the same: one is stating it in a positive way, the other in a negative way. I believe the pastoral nature of the statement accounts for the negative manner in which it was originally phrased. In grief it is 'natural' to doubt; parents need the comfort now to point them to what God has said.

    There are some differences amongst those who adhere to the Canons in the manner in which they interpret it. I cannot speak to the issue of 'historical understanding' but I think the resources that Rev. Hyde listed above would aid you in answering the latter question.
    This is very helpful, thanks.


    http://www.villagecommunitychurch.org/


    "Preparing a sermon is like cooking a meal. You need pots and pans and utensils, but you don't bring them out to the table where people are eating." Derek Thomas


    Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  24. #18
    KMK's Avatar
    KMK
    KMK is offline. Rot a Redom
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    9,934
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    4,080
    Thanked 1,643 Times in 953 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by ChariotsofFire View Post
    I have also struggled with this issue. How can an infant come to faith, if the means provided by Scripture is by grace through faith. How can an infant exercise faith? Young infants or children in the womb can not repent and believe because their minds are not capable of doing so. So it seems logical at first look, to say that these children who die in infancy were never apart of God's almighty plan of salvation.

    But, if we look to the Scriptures, we do see that God does have a love for his people, and his love is covenantal:

    Psalm 103:17
    17 But from everlasting to everlasting
    the LORD's love is with those who fear him,
    and his righteousness with their children's children

    1 Corinthians 7:14
    14For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.

    The question that I first think of after reading these passages is this: Would God condemn covenant children to hell? We know that covenant children who reject their parent's faith are condemned to hell. We know that not all Israel is Israel. As far as infants go, we know that they are conceived and born into sin, but in God's providence infants who die in infancy do not have not the opportunity to confess with their mouths that Jesus is Lord. Does this mean that these covenant children are like the unbelieving pagan Native Americans (before the Europeans came) who never heard the gospel and lived in sin? I don't think so. Because God does call children of believers holy, I believe this means that God does elect infants who do not have the opportunity to confess with their mouths that Jesus is Lord. The means God uses is different, and not ordinary, but is still under the blood of Christ by means of the Covenant.
    Your post might be better served in this thread which is going on at the same time: Infants of believers dying in infancy


    http://www.villagecommunitychurch.org/


    "Preparing a sermon is like cooking a meal. You need pots and pans and utensils, but you don't bring them out to the table where people are eating." Derek Thomas


    Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  25. The Following User Says Thank You to KMK For This Useful Post:

    ChariotsofFire (08-19-2009)

  26. #19
    ChariotsofFire's Avatar
    ChariotsofFire is offline. Puritanboard Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    428
    Thanks
    246
    Thanked 86 Times in 54 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KMK View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ChariotsofFire View Post
    I have also struggled with this issue. How can an infant come to faith, if the means provided by Scripture is by grace through faith. How can an infant exercise faith? Young infants or children in the womb can not repent and believe because their minds are not capable of doing so. So it seems logical at first look, to say that these children who die in infancy were never apart of God's almighty plan of salvation.

    But, if we look to the Scriptures, we do see that God does have a love for his people, and his love is covenantal:

    Psalm 103:17
    17 But from everlasting to everlasting
    the LORD's love is with those who fear him,
    and his righteousness with their children's children

    1 Corinthians 7:14
    14For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.

    The question that I first think of after reading these passages is this: Would God condemn covenant children to hell? We know that covenant children who reject their parent's faith are condemned to hell. We know that not all Israel is Israel. As far as infants go, we know that they are conceived and born into sin, but in God's providence infants who die in infancy do not have not the opportunity to confess with their mouths that Jesus is Lord. Does this mean that these covenant children are like the unbelieving pagan Native Americans (before the Europeans came) who never heard the gospel and lived in sin? I don't think so. Because God does call children of believers holy, I believe this means that God does elect infants who do not have the opportunity to confess with their mouths that Jesus is Lord. The means God uses is different, and not ordinary, but is still under the blood of Christ by means of the Covenant.
    Your post might be better served in this thread which is going on at the same time: Infants of believers dying in infancy

    That was thread I intended on posting on. Thank you for pointing that out!
    Josh
    PCA
    Sioux Center, IA
    www.christianhomeschoolstore.com
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  27. #20
    R. Scott Clark's Avatar
    R. Scott Clark is offline. Puritanboard Senior
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,218
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 942 Times in 352 Posts
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  28. #21
    KMK's Avatar
    KMK
    KMK is offline. Rot a Redom
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    9,934
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    4,080
    Thanked 1,643 Times in 953 Posts
    What does Canons 1:17 have to say to godly parents who, before being regenerated, had children who died in infancy?


    http://www.villagecommunitychurch.org/


    "Preparing a sermon is like cooking a meal. You need pots and pans and utensils, but you don't bring them out to the table where people are eating." Derek Thomas


    Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  29. #22
    dannyhyde's Avatar
    dannyhyde is offline. Puritanboard Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    708
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 605 Times in 232 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KMK View Post
    What does Canons 1:17 have to say to godly parents who, before being regenerated, had children who died in infancy?
    Ken,

    The Canons do not address every situation. They are silent as to children of unbelievers.

    As well, since the Canons were a consensus document (see the Godfrey and Venema articles for the debates), every "camp" at Dort was able to agree, whether groups that said all children of godly parents are saved or that said not all children of godly parents were saved.
    Rev. Daniel R. Hyde, Th.M.
    Pastor, Oceanside United Reformed Church, Carlsbad/Oceanside, California
    http://www.meetthepuritans.com/
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  30. The Following User Says Thank You to dannyhyde For This Useful Post:

    KMK (08-19-2009)

Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69