Exclusive Psalmody

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ian:

[quote:ecdef815bc]John,

You are saying that the burden of proof is on the EPers without providing an argument that this is so. You are stating your conclusion in other words. I maintain that the burden of proof is on non-EPers to prove that uninspired songs are sanctioned acts of worship. I have my explicit command in the scriptures, whereas the non-EPer does not.
[/quote:ecdef815bc]
Who said anything about uninspired songs? Not me.

If you have your expicit command then why not show that explicit command to the rest of us? The burden of proof is always on the tenet to be necessarily proven from Scripture, to show that it is a directive from God. That has not been done. If it is not explicit it has to be necessarily implicit, not just implicit.

There is mucy more to this than meets the eye. Just as we use analogy in the use of the OT laws, rather than just implementing all OT case laws, so we need to use analogy, not selectively but with proper judgment. Opposition to EP is not tacit licence for rock bands, nor even for uninspired songs. But again, even here, we need to apply ourselves not to make the fallacy of equivocation on the term 'uninspired'.

I am not against the RPW; I am not against the liberal use of the Psalms in worship; I am not in favour of a careless use of hymns; and I do not stand opposed to those who wish to impose an EP in their worship. All I am saying is that it goes against fundamental principles in the WCF to impose something that is not of necessity imposed by Scripture.

That word 'necessity' is so important. It cannot just be that we can derive an EP from Scripture; it cannot just be that some people are convinced of it from Scripture; it has to be that it is the only conclusion that we can come to from Scripture, and that it is can be no other way.

So we have to establish the OT formality of worship, in distinction from informal worship, for the NT church; we have to establish that the use of Psalms in formal worship was strictly from the 150 Psalms; we have to explain the use of songs in worship of God which are not from the Psalter, recorded in the NT; we have to be very proficient understanding of music itself, not just of the cultually oriented methodology we're used to; we have to..., well we have a lot of ground to cover.

If we take Girardeau as an example, then we can see how there are more questions made than answered. And in the end, EP still has not been edstablished by necessity. Until that 'necessity' is satisfied, the burden remains on EP.
 
[quote:4aad42058a="fredtgreco"]

No, I would argue that they hear: "psalms, hymns and songs" exactly what the text says. To make it say otherwise is, as you pointed out, very convoluted and difficult.

I realize that you are not treating the issue in detail; I don't have time for it either. I know a good case can be made for EP - most of the puritans (if not all) held to it. All I was trying to point out, is that a good RPW case can be made for hymnody. So often the EP position tries to end the discussion with "if you really believed in the RPW, you would have to have EP..." That is not the case. Stephen Pribble has made an excellemnt case for hymnody, as well as the majority OPC report (see their website for the Report on Song).[/quote:4aad42058a]

All I was trying to point out, along with the Webmaster and you (originally) is that Col 3:16 & Eph 5:19 is a very bad argument for hymns of human composition in worship. I never said, "if you really believed in the RPW, you would have to have EP..." I realize one may embrace a broad principle yet reject its implications. I met Stephen Pribble's son Jeff, I know he is committed to RPW. I'm sure Stephen also upholds the divine prerogative of instituting worship.

[quote:4aad42058a="Ianterrell"]I maintain that the burden of proof is on non-EPers to prove that uninspired songs are sanctioned acts of worship. I have my explicit command in the scriptures, whereas the non-EPer does not.
[/quote:4aad42058a]

This ought to be emphasized. We are commanded to sing in worship (Psa 95:1,2; Col 3:16). We are provided with a hymnal (the book of Psalms). Therefore we must sing Psalms. The EPer is justified in his practice. The advocate for uninspired hymnody must produce a command for the creation uninspired hymns, if he wishes to remain true to the RPW.
 
I honestly see that question as parallel to asking if the preacher is really preaching from God's word, since it's in English. And again, though I'm not convinced of EP, I don't think the fact that the Psalms are in English creates any more problems for EP than does the meter argument, for the reasons I gave in my above post.
 
[quote:65414666b4="pastorway"]Is your song inspired if you are singing the words in English?

Just asking.

Phillip[/quote:65414666b4]

Your bible is translated into English. Isn't it inspired.
 
[quote:930342807a="pastorway"]Is your song inspired if you are singing the words in English?

Just asking.

Phillip[/quote:930342807a]

Is the Word inspired if it is read and preached in English? :puzzled:
 
The far better analogy is prayer. We are commanded to pray, we are given many, many prayers in the Scripture - from a far greater range of redemptive history, I might add - and no one advocates taht we only pray Scripture.
 
[quote:0b331d2c58="JohnV"]
I am not against the RPW; I am not against the liberal use of the Psalms in worship; I am not in favour of a careless use of hymns; and I do not stand opposed to those who wish to impose an EP in their worship. All I am saying is that it goes against fundamental principles in the WCF to impose something that is not of necessity imposed by Scripture.

That word 'necessity' is so important. It cannot just be that we can derive an EP from Scripture; it cannot just be that some people are convinced of it from Scripture; it has to be that it is the only conclusion that we can come to from Scripture, and that it is can be no other way.
[/quote:0b331d2c58]
John, the WCF does impose EP though. It imposes it because the Divines believed that this is what the Scriptures explicitly taught, not implicitly. Notice the Scripture references they use are the same in debate today. But they took them to mean the Psalms. At least that much is clear historically. Those holding to EP do believe that EP is explicitly taught in those debated passages. Whether you agree with their argument is another thing.
 
[quote:bf958c0020="fredtgreco"]The far better analogy is prayer. We are commanded to pray, we are given many, many prayers in the Scripture - from a far greater range of redemptive history, I might add - and no one advocates that we only pray Scripture.[/quote:bf958c0020]

Prayer and song are not the same. They are seperate commands and seperate elements of worship. This is where I think the OPC's argument in the majority report is flawed. We have guidlines for prayer which indicate to us that strict forms (like the book of common prayer) are not to be imposed because that is completely contrary to the nature of prayer. But whenever commands to sing are given, it's in the context of songs which already exist, i.e. the Psalms, or divinely inspired compositions for the moment like the song of Moses.
 
[quote:de2532b50a]All I was trying to point out, along with the Webmaster and you (originally) is that Col 3:16 & Eph 5:19 is a very bad argument for hymns of human composition in worship.[/quote:de2532b50a]

I agree. But that does not mean God gave 150 Psalms exclusively to sing, excluding any other form of music or song.

Would it be OK, for instacne, to apply the Psalms to speed metal if "necessity" dictates we have music? That would be interesting wroship! We are then taking the dictates of what men think Psalsm should sound like and giving them substacne as to how they should be sung. I find that difficult to swallow. Many of the Psalms tell us exactly what tune they were sung to. Do we have those? If we do not (and we don't) then God is pressing us to consider the hermeneutical shift from song to inspired writ rather than from song to inspired song to sing.

I think, in all EP argumentation, that it is the least persausive to say that the actual notes we sing, and langugae we sing it in are "necessary" so we get to choose them ourselves. IF God wanted us to sing the Psalms only, He would not have given us a Psalter without notes. To place the actual tune we sing sacred Scripture in with such a rigid view and liken that to "non-essentials" is really to beg the question of what we should be SINGING in church.

As Edwards said, why would you WANT to go behind the veil and sing mainly about OT typology??
 
[quote:6af93046f4="puritansailor"][quote:6af93046f4="fredtgreco"]The far better analogy is prayer. We are commanded to pray, we are given many, many prayers in the Scripture - from a far greater range of redemptive history, I might add - and no one advocates that we only pray Scripture.[/quote:6af93046f4]

Prayer and song are not the same. They are seperate commands and seperate elements of worship. This is where I think the OPC's argument in the majority report is flawed. We have guidlines for prayer which indicate to us that strict forms (like the book of common prayer) are not to be imposed because that is completely contrary to the nature of prayer. But whenever commands to sing are given, it's in the context of songs which already exist, i.e. the Psalms, or divinely inspired compositions for the moment like the song of Moses.[/quote:6af93046f4]

Ahh, but we are not to sing the song of Moses, or any other divinely inspired song, according to EP. The Magnificat is out. So is the Nunc Demittis. And where are we given guidelines that uninspired prayer is permitted?
 
[quote:93e3f83817="fredtgreco"]The far better analogy is prayer. We are commanded to pray, we are given many, many prayers in the Scripture - from a far greater range of redemptive history, I might add - and no one advocates that we only pray Scripture.[/quote:93e3f83817]

The analogy of prayer is a bad one. Unless you have a Romanist doctrine of prayer, ie mindlessly praying forms. I believe that prayer should be extemporaneous. Singing is actually analogous to reading. The similitude is much closer. Singing is just reading with modulation. Who sings extemporaneously? No one advocates replacing something for Scripture when we're supposed to read the word?
 
[quote:0aac3b7b81="fredtgreco"]
Ahh, but we are not to sing the song of Moses, or any other divinely inspired song, according to EP. The Magnificat is out. So is the Nunc Demittis. And where are we given guidelines that uninspired prayer is permitted?[/quote:0aac3b7b81]

That's right. We are not to sing those otehr songs. Those songs were for particular occasions in redemptive history, not for congregational worship (and I would not call the Mag. a song but rather prose "and Mary said" not "sang", the same with Zacharias and Simeon). The Psalms were written specifically for congregational worship.

As for prayer, the nature of prayer requires application to present needs and we are given directions as to how we are to pray.
"Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, make your requests known to God" Phil. 4:6. "Therefore I exhort forst of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men..." 1 Tim. 2:1. NOt only are we commanded to pray but we are told how.

We are not given this flexibility with the commands to sing psalms.
 
[quote:eb06799e01="webmaster"]
Would it be OK, for instance, to apply the Psalms to speed metal if "necessity" dictates we have music? That would be interesting wroship! We are then taking the dictates of what men think Psalsm should sound like and giving them substacne as to how they should be sung. I find that difficult to swallow. Many of the Psalms tell us exactly what tune they were sung to. Do we have those? If we do not (and we don't) then God is pressing us to consider the hermeneutical shift from song to inspired writ rather than from song to inspired song to sing.
[/quote:eb06799e01]

As the Directory for Public Worship says: "the voice is to be tunable and gravely ordered [b:eb06799e01] but [/b:eb06799e01] the chief care must be, to sing with understanding, and Grace in the heart making melody unto the Lord." The important thing isn't the tune but the words. As long as the tune doesn't distract from the Psalm and become a burden to singing with understanding, and Grace in the heart making melody unto the Lord.

Some of the Psalms tell us what the names of the tunes they were sung to are and some have references to musical terms but neither are intelligible to us. What this should tell us, rather than they are merely inspired prose, is that they are inspired song intended to be sung. The settings are not substantial to singing. We don't claim the setting has any sort of religious significance, theyre just what we give the words to make them tunable.

[quote:eb06799e01]As Edwards said, why would you WANT to go behind the veil and sing mainly about OT typology??[/quote:eb06799e01]

(1) Because God has commanded us to and my WANTs should be conformed to His (2) Because they are God's infallible word and they illustrate the antitype infallibly with perfect clarity on this side of the veil, b/c as Luther said [i:eb06799e01]"might well be called a little Bible. In it is comprehended most beautifully and briefly everything that is in the entire Bible. It is really a fine enchiridion or handbook. In fact I guess that the Holy Spirit wanted to take the trouble personally to compile a short Bible and a book of examples of all Christendom or all saints, so that anyone who could not read the whole Bible would here have anyway almost an entire summary of it, comprised in one little book" [/i:eb06799e01]
 
I read the earlier threads that Patrick referenced as well as this one. It seems that Exclusive Psalmody has already been well-debated on this board. I have only a little to add humbly for consideration.

There are many different critiques of singing the psalms only in God's worship. If you can have extemporaneous preaching and praying, why not singing? A la Isaac Watts, let's Christianize the Psalms of David by writing hymns. Jonathan Edwards based his critique on the fact that Jesus is no where mentioned by name in the Psalter. Early hymn fragments were recorded in the NT, and Moses sang something that was outside the psalter. Calvin and other Reformers may have sung the Lord's Prayer. Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs delineate three different types of music, not the LXX Psalter. Where are the inspired tunes? Where is the inspired translation, metrical or otherwise? How can you reject "Amazing Grace" and "A Mighty Fortress is our God"? What about the talents that composers have? What about the psalms which tell us to use musical instruments? Where is the specific RPW command which prohibits us from writing hymns? Yes, the WCF lists the elements of religious worship and one is singing psalms, but the Assembly was just plain wrong on their strict application of the RPW, right? Hmmmm......

When I personally wrestled with this issue on my own some years ago, I thought of these and other objections. But what it boils down to for me is that God has ordained that we should have a Psalter in the middle of the Bible. The sufficiency of Scripture teaches us that He has given us what we need to praise him in song. His command to sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs refers to psalms found in the Psalter. We are to worship Him as He has commanded us, not according to our own devices and good intentions. It's a choice between will-worship and God-ordained worship. God has given us a command to sing psalms and the means to do it. The heart may generate objections but the path of obedience is clear. The Psalter is perfect. It covers the whole range of human emotions and experience. The Psalms of full of Christ. Singing them enables us to let the Word of Christ dwell in us richly. The Psalms give glory to God and have His stamp of approval. The Psalms changed my religion from broadly evangelical to Reformed. Historically, they helped transform Scotland, France, Geneva and elsewhere. We sing the Psalms today in our public worship and family worship, and we are greatly blessed. It is my prayers that all of God's people will take upon their lips the Psalms of David, indeed, the Psalms of Christ.
 
[quote:cb477c894e="puritansailor"][quote:cb477c894e="fredtgreco"]
Ahh, but we are not to sing the song of Moses, or any other divinely inspired song, according to EP. The Magnificat is out. So is the Nunc Demittis. And where are we given guidelines that uninspired prayer is permitted?[/quote:cb477c894e]

That's right. We are not to sing those otehr songs. Those songs were for particular occasions in redemptive history, not for congregational worship (and I would not call the Mag. a song but rather prose "and Mary said" not "sang", the same with Zacharias and Simeon). The Psalms were written specifically for congregational worship.

As for prayer, the nature of prayer requires application to present needs and we are given directions as to how we are to pray.
"Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, make your requests known to God" Phil. 4:6. "Therefore I exhort forst of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men..." 1 Tim. 2:1. NOt only are we commanded to pray but we are told how.

We are not given this flexibility with the commands to sing psalms.[/quote:cb477c894e]

Why not? We are given flexibility with prayer, and we are certainly given flexibility with preaching. You could also argue that the public reading of the Scriptures involved not simply the reading of the words of Scripture, but the "uninspired" rendering of the sense of it. So the Westminster Directory of Worship:

[quote:cb477c894e="Directory on the Public Reading of Scripture"]When the minister who readeth shall judge it necessary to expound any part of what is read, let it not be done until the whole chapter or psalm be ended; and regard is always to be had unto the time, that neither preaching, nor other ordinances be straitened, or rendered tedious. Which rule is to be observed in all other publick performances.[/quote:cb477c894e]

We do we have flexibility, frankly, with every aspect of the worship of God (I mean respecting the lawfulness of variance from the Word itself) and not singing. The Puritans were certainly not for "extemporaneous" prayer. They prayed "studied" prayers (which is distinct from "rote").

And how does song not "require application to present needs" ? We are told to teach and admonish each other by singing. So why, if the Reading of the Scriptures can be applied to the present situation by the reader, and if preaching is by definition the application of the Scriptures to the present situation, and if prayer is the application of petition to the present situation, must we NOT apply song to the present situation? Why musn't we compose a hymn from Hebrews or Ephesians to sing of the glory of God's grace in grafting in the Gentiles. You see the EP position is not simply that we must not use uninspired hymns. It is that we sin by singing other portions of Scripture in worship. That is a very tall order. I repeat - we SIN by setting any other portion of Scripture (whether OT or NT, whether used in a congregational context as the Song of Moses or teh Song of the Redeemed in Revelation or used in an individual context as the Magnificat). We are not to sing the hymnodic portions of the Pauline epistles. We may sing nothing but the Psalms.

At a bare minimum, unless the EP advocates are willing to concede that the singing of Scripture is permitted, then they cannot use the argument from the inspired nature of the text.
 
Matthew 6:9
[b:36a3cd59d8]After this manner therefore pray ye[/b:36a3cd59d8]: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.

The fact is praying is not singing. They are two separate elements of worship. For prayer we have a model and the command to pray in a similar manner, giving us the liberty alter it. For song we have no such. Arguments like these cannot prove hymnody, they can only further restrict our worship practices. If you were to convince me by them I wouldn't stop singing exclusively Psalms I'd just only pray Scripture. It may seem exteme but thats my commitment to not profaning God with corrupt worship.
 
Virginia Huguenot :amen:

Why would you WANT to sing the hymns of men when you can sing the hymns of God.
 
[quote:36dfd94bbd="fredtgreco"]The far better analogy is prayer. We are commanded to pray, we are given many, many prayers in the Scripture - from a far greater range of redemptive history, I might add - and no one advocates that we only pray Scripture.[/quote:36dfd94bbd]

We aren't commanded to pray scriptures. We are commanded to sing the psalms. We aren't commanded to preach the sermons of Paul, we are commanded to preach from the scriptures.
 
[quote:d8efc72e43="fredtgreco"][quote:d8efc72e43="puritansailor"][quote:d8efc72e43="fredtgreco"]The far better analogy is prayer. We are commanded to pray, we are given many, many prayers in the Scripture - from a far greater range of redemptive history, I might add - and no one advocates that we only pray Scripture.[/quote:d8efc72e43]

Prayer and song are not the same. They are seperate commands and seperate elements of worship. This is where I think the OPC's argument in the majority report is flawed. We have guidlines for prayer which indicate to us that strict forms (like the book of common prayer) are not to be imposed because that is completely contrary to the nature of prayer. But whenever commands to sing are given, it's in the context of songs which already exist, i.e. the Psalms, or divinely inspired compositions for the moment like the song of Moses.[/quote:d8efc72e43]

Ahh, but we are not to sing the song of Moses, or any other divinely inspired song, according to EP. The Magnificat is out. So is the Nunc Demittis. And where are we given guidelines that uninspired prayer is permitted?[/quote:d8efc72e43]

There are other songs in the bible not contained in the Psalms, therefore it must be okay for us to sing other uninspired songs and God could not have restricted our congregational singing to the 150 psalms found in the canon...? :thumbdown:

Sorry Fred that arguement just isn't very convincing.
 
[quote:4da31a9ea0="Peter"]Virginia Huguenot :amen:

Why would you WANT to sing the hymns of men when you can sing the hymns of God.[/quote:4da31a9ea0]

The same reason that I want to attend [i:4da31a9ea0]especially[/i:4da31a9ea0] on men preaching the the Word when I can also attend on God's Word itself read.
 
What I see is the fallacies of equivocation and antiquity in the arguments for EP so far. That means that appeal has been made via the use of words that have shifting meanings, and that appeal has been made to authority in the past without establishing the kind of authority required. I will go through these posts and point them out. I have to go and collect them all first.

Again, don't get me wrong. I would not want anyone to worship against his concsience. I think that is the point. For me it goes against the direct commands of God not to add to Scripture by invoking an EP policy on the same level as doctrine, instead of it being the choice of the individual congregation or denomination to do so. It has to be shown that it belongs there. Like all doctrine that is maintained by the churches, the burden of proof it always there for each generation to show it is the Scripture that says this, and not man, even if he has the best of intentions. And if EP is Scriptural, is should not be hard to show it.

But I give you EP-ers every credit that you hold to it because of your love for God's Word. For that you have my humble thanks and support.
 
[quote:f923a79ca5="Ianterrell"][quote:f923a79ca5="fredtgreco"][quote:f923a79ca5="puritansailor"][quote:f923a79ca5="fredtgreco"]The far better analogy is prayer. We are commanded to pray, we are given many, many prayers in the Scripture - from a far greater range of redemptive history, I might add - and no one advocates that we only pray Scripture.[/quote:f923a79ca5]

Prayer and song are not the same. They are separate commands and separate elements of worship. This is where I think the OPC's argument in the majority report is flawed. We have guidelines for prayer which indicate to us that strict forms (like the book of common prayer) are not to be imposed because that is completely contrary to the nature of prayer. But whenever commands to sing are given, it's in the context of songs which already exist, i.e. the Psalms, or divinely inspired compositions for the moment like the song of Moses.[/quote:f923a79ca5]

Ahh, but we are not to sing the song of Moses, or any other divinely inspired song, according to EP. The Magnificat is out. So is the Nunc Demittis. And where are we given guidelines that uninspired prayer is permitted?[/quote:f923a79ca5]

There are other songs in the bible not contained in the Psalms, therefore it must be okay for us to sing other uninspired songs and God could not have restricted our congregational singing to the 150 psalms found in the canon...? :thumbdown:

Sorry Fred that arguement just isn't very convincing.[/quote:f923a79ca5]

But Ian,

That is not the sum of my argument. My argument is that the EP position tells me I am sinning if I lead a congregation in a singing of Exodus 15. Not being unwise. Sinning.

As I said before, I can't do that based on an uninspired translation of an extra-Scriptural superscription.
 
John,

you know the nt texts well enough they are 5:18,19; Col 3:16; James 5:13. That for me is sufficient as a command to obey. There is more of course but you seem to want an exhaustive argument. I've already provided a fine article by Mr. Williamson which begins what you are demanding. I'd invite you to invest time in it, its not tedious reading.

As to your claim that no one is dealing with the scriptures I really cannot agree. All along the scriptures have been appealed to! I think that we might be observing an all together different thread.

Fred,

I was only dealing with the argument you posted. That there are other songs in the scriptures (some of which I would dispute are not songs at all such as the Magnificat where no mention of a song or of singing is made but I digress...), and that the existence of other songs in the scriptures precludes the limiting of congregational worship to the book of the Psalms. Is that not what you were asserting?

If you are going to label the Septuagint to an uninspired translation with extra-biblical superscriptions I will not fault you, as long as you deny that the book was heavily used in the Greek Churches which we have much evidence of in our scriptures. Even Jesus used this uninspired fallible translation.
 
"As Edwards said, why would you WANT to go behind the veil and sing mainly about OT typology??"

Matt,

As Paul taught it is the JEWS not the Christians who go behind the veil when they approach the OT scriptures. We go into those hebrew scriptures and see pictures of Jesus, we sing the mysteries that have been revealed to us.

This is a dispensationalist dilemna. There has always been one church of God, set apart and redeemed. There are no commands from God indicating his church needs a new hymn book anywhere in the NT. Period. Exclusive Psalmody upholds the canonical hymn book. As G.I. Williamson says:

[quote:9365eeda8f]This argument contains one very dangerous assumption. It is the assumption that the Old Testament is inferior to the New Testament. It assumes that what was earlier was lower and what was later was higher. But the Bible teaches no such doctrine. It teaches, rather, that the whole scripture is equally high. The revelation of God is progressive. But it is progress from partial to complete, rather than from lower to higher. As Augustine said, "˜The New is in the Old concealed, and the Old is in the New revealed"(tm)[/quote:9365eeda8f]
 
I was wondering if anybody knew what was sung during the worship services before David and others wrote the Psalms? Were they limited to just the songs that are mentioned in the scriptures, which include (though probably not exhaustibly) the following scriptures?

Exo 15:1 Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the LORD, and spake, saying, I will sing unto the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea...

Num 21:17 Then Israel sang this song, Spring up, O well; sing ye unto it:...

Deu 31:19 Now therefore write ye this song for you, and teach it the children of Israel: put it in their mouths, that this song may be a witness for me against the children of Israel...

Jdg 5:1-3 Then sang Deborah and Barak the son of Abinoam on that day, saying, Praise ye the LORD for the avenging of Israel, when the people willingly offered themselves. Hear, O ye kings; give ear, O ye princes; I, even I, will sing unto the LORD; I will sing praise to the LORD God of Israel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Tyrese
  • Locked
Exclusive Psalmody
Replies
5
Views
2K
Tyrese
Tyrese
M
  • Locked
Exclusive Psalmody?
Replies
27
Views
6K
Afterthought
A
C. Matthew McMahon
  • Locked
Exclusive Psalmody
2 3
Replies
64
Views
11K
JohnV
JohnV
kceaster
  • Locked
Exclusive Psalmody...
2
Replies
38
Views
7K
Puritan Sailor
Puritan Sailor
panta dokimazete
  • Locked
Prescriptive Psalmody and Exclusive Psalmody
2
Replies
51
Views
10K
MW
M
Back
Top