Kendel's Messiah

A testimony unfolding


Hell

Over the years, I’ve spoken with certain atheists who were angry with the idea of God. They would usually present arguments of logic as their reasons to reject belief in God – but a deeply emotional reaction would often ensue as the weaknesses in their arguments were pointed out. Their moral scruples, they said, could never allow them to believe in a divine monster who would torture his creatures for all eternity. (And who can blame them for that!)

I came to realize that the real problem that such atheists have with belief in God and religion isn’t intellectual or driven by a concern for evidence, but rather a moral or ethical problem, and often as such centered on the religious idea of hell.

I’m a conditionalist. I’m grateful to be raised in a church that on a solid basis distances itself from the fundamentalist teaching of an eternal hell. If this weren’t the case, I’m not sure that I would be a Christian. The Seventh-day Adventist Church teaches conditionalism and annihilationism—that no created being possesses natural immortality, that immortality is a gift given on the condition of faith in Christ, and that the wicked will finally be annihilated and cease to exist, not live eternally in torment. But how can such a view be defended by the Bible alone, as Protestants seek to do? Doesn’t the Bible say that the wicked will suffer eternal punishment and burn forever? Isn’t the Bible clear on the issue?

The Hebrew context. The Bible is written in an ancient Hebrew culture. It’s mostly written in Hebrew and Koiné Greek by Jewish writers. Sadly, fundamentalists often ignore this fact in their interpretations of Scripture. Fundamentalists often insinuate that since the Bible is inspired by God, it’s easy to understand for everyone who reads it. But even the Bible itself tells a story that demonstrates that this is not true. An Ethiopian convert tried to read the Scriptures on his own in the days of the early Christian church, but he couldn’t understand what he read (Acts 8:29-31). He needed the guidance from someone more acquainted with Scripture than himself. There’s no reason to assume that it’s any easier for us to understand the Bible 2,000 years later without the guidance from more knowledgeable people.

Keeping this in mind, let’s delve into the Bible’s internal logic of hell as interpreted by annihilationists.

The myth of the immortal soul. The main fundamentalist teaching that powers the idea of eternal torment for the wicked is the doctrine of the immortality of the soul. The idea that the soul cannot die (that is, cannot cease to exist) is the battery that powers the popular conceptions of an eternal hell. If the souls of the wicked are immortal, logically they’ll have to live and suffer for all eternity in hell.

Firstly, there’s not one scripture that states or infers that human beings by nature have an immortal soul. On the contrary, the apostle Paul explicitly writes that God is the only one who is immortal, and that man is mortal (1 Timothy 6:16; 1 Timothy 1:17; Romans 1:23). There’s no reason to assume that these texts only speak of the physical body and not the soul. Quite the contrary. According to the creation account in Genesis 2, the soul and body are inseparable.

The holistic human soul. Genesis 2 explains how human beings were created: God first made Adam’s body from dust, then breathed into it the breath of life – then the man became a living nefesh, which is Hebrew for “soul” (Genesis 2:7). This text does not suggest that the soul is a separate entity inside the body, but rather that the body and breath of life together comprise the soul. (The pervasive idea the soul is an entity “trapped” inside the body is mind-body dualism and stems from Greek philosophical thought.) In other words, the soul is an irreducible combination of God’s breath of life and the physical body. If the body is destroyed, the soul is gone. The ruah, which is Hebrew for “breath” or “spirit”, then “returns to God who gave it” (Ecclesiastes 12:7, ESV). The breath or spirit referred to here is not the conscious mind of a person; it’s the breath or life energy that comes from God.

The soul is an irreducible combination of God’s breath of life and the physical body.

The analogy of the computer. An analogy I like to use of the biblical notion of the human soul is the computer. The computer’s hardware corresponds to the human body. The computer software corresponds to the soul—that is, the conscious mind and emotions of person. The electricity that powers the computer and generates the software, corresponds to the breath of life or spirit that comes from God.

The computer is a fitting modern analogy of the holistic human nature as described in the Bible – how the soul and body are inseparable, just like the software and hardware in a computer. If the body (“hardware”) is destroyed, the soul (“software”) ceases to function and cannot exist.

Just as there is no computer software without a computer hardware, likewise there is no soul or mind without a body. The electricity in a computer is not itself the software—rather, the electricity is the power that generates the software. Likewise, the breath of life (or spirit) in a person that returns to God at death is not itself the conscious soul, but is the life energy that generates the soul/mind.

If the computer hardware is destroyed, the electrical power cannot run through it and generate software. Hence, the software cannot exist without the computer hardware. This demonstrates the holistic and irreducible nature of the human soul as taught in the Bible—that there is no human consciousness, emotion or thought without a functioning body. (Also God, who is spirit, is described in the Bible as having a bodily form (Exodus 33:18-23; John 5:37).)

Some Christians have the idea that people in the afterlife will be immaterial spirits floating about in an immaterial world. This is also unbiblical. In the afterlife, humans will be resurrected in a physical body—the just will be resurrected in an immortal human body just as Christ was resurrected in an immortal human body (1 Corinthians 15:35-53). The wicked will be resurrected in their mortal body to receive their judgment (John 5:28-29). The outcome is conditional and depends on the faith and moral virtue of the person (Ephesians 2:8-10; Romans 6:23; Romans 2:6).

Conditional immortality since the beginning. When Adam and Eve sinned, they were expelled from the Garden of Eden in order that they might not eat of the Tree of Life and live forever.

Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever—” therefore the Lord God sent him out from the garden of Eden to work the ground from which he was taken. He drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the tree of life.

Genesis 3:22-24, ESV

This is a strong piece of evidence that God did not make humans immortal upon creating them—or else the Tree of Life would be redundant and this verse wouldn’t make sense. This verse also implies that God would not allow sin and suffering to exist for all eternity if sin happened to enter the world. While God allowed the couple to use their free will and eat of the forbidden fruit and thus commit sin, he did not let the couple eat of the Tree of Life and live forever after they sinned. This shows that eternal life in biblical thought is conditional and a gift that God only grants to those who trust God and obey (Romans 6:23); it’s not a natural, inborn quality that all humans possess. Eternal life was always conditional. “If you eat of the forbidden fruit you will die,” was God’s warning to Adam. But what does it really mean to die? Is it only a spiritual death? How does the Bible actually describe death?

The oblivion of death. Death is explicitly and repeatedly described as a state of oblivion and unconsciousness in both the Old and New Testament. Logically, if the soul/mind cannot exist or operate without the body (as the creation account implies), being dead must be a state of complete unconsciousness. The book of Ecclesiastes describes death as a place without any knowledge, wisdom or emotion, stating explicitly that “the dead know nothing” (Ecclesiastes 9:5-10, ESV). Multiple texts in the Old Testament speak of death as a sleep (such as Deuteronomy 31:16; 2 Samuel 7:12; Job 7:21; 14:12; Psalm 13:3; 76:5; 1 Kings 2:10; 2 Kings 24:6; Daniel 12:2). As believers in the Hebrew Bible, Jesus and the writers of the New Testament naturally also spoke of death as a sleep (John 11:11-15; Matthew 27:52; Acts 7:60; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-16).

The Bible repeatedly refers to death as unconscious sleep. Yet many fundamentalist Christians point to a couple of allegorical passages, claiming that these texts prove otherwise.

It’s important to note that the Bible mentions certain exceptions where dead people were immediately resurrected and taken to heaven. The Bible mentions certain people who are in heaven already now, such as Enoch, Moses, Elijah, and other resurrected saints (Matthew 17:3-4; Matthew 27:52-23; Hebrews 12:23). But these are exceptions to the rule that the dead remain dead and unconscious until the future resurrection.

One other seeming exception to this trend is found in the book of Samuel in the Old Testament, where a medium upon the request of king Saul summons what appears to be the spirit of the dead prophet Samuel (1 Samuel 28). The apparition is described as “a god coming up out of the earth” and looks like “an old man rapped in a robe” (verses 13-14). Based on the appearance of this spirit entity, Saul concludes that this is the dead prophet Samuel. However, necromancy was strictly forbidden by God and associated with idolatry and the worship of evil spirits (Deuteronomy 18:10). The apostle Paul warned the early Christians that Satan transforms himself into an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14). The biblical evidence indicates that the spiritual entity that was summoned by the medium in this story was not really the dead prophet Samuel, but an evil spirit impersonating him.

A surprising amount of Protestant Christians seems to completely ignore the mass of biblical evidence, claiming that the dead are now in heaven looking down on us or down in hell and being tormented. Many point to allegorical passages in the Bible as proof that the dead are conscious and alive, contrary to the rest of the biblical evidence. One passage that Christians often point to in this regard is Jesus’ parable of the rich man and the beggar Lazarus found in the Gospel of Luke 16:19-31. Let’s explore it.

Building doctrine on one allegory. Firstly, this story is a parable, an allegory, which is a made up story that is meant to teach one single moral lesson. Reading the Bible faithfully means that we must take it for nothing more and nothing less than what it itself claims to be. There is plenty of allegory in the Bible, and when the allegorical passages are marked in various ways as being clearly allegorical, they should be read allegorically, not as historical and precise descriptions of reality. This is, however, the core mistake that many Christians make when reading this parable, not understanding the imagery or cultural context in which this parable was given.

In this parable, Jesus tells the story about a rich man who lives in selfish pleasure while ignoring the suffering of the beggar Lazarus lying outside his gate. The rich man eventually dies and wakes up in torment in hell. He then shouts to Abraham and the beggar Lazarus (who is now in Abraham’s warm embrace up in heaven), asking them to come down and cool his tongue with a drop of water. (Imagine – would some drops of water ease the torments of hell? This is an important cue as to the allegorical nature of this story.) When the rich man is denied his wish, he implores Abraham to send people from the dead to warn the living of being selfish as he had been. Abraham answers by telling him that the living have God’s word written in the Bible, and if they refuse to follow God’s word, they won’t be persuaded by miracles either. The moral point of the story is that miracles (such as raising people from the dead) won’t persuade people to be good if they refuse to listen to truth and reason.

Jesus told this parable to an audience who was waiting for the prophesied Messiah and was demanding some supernatural sign from him that he was the Messiah. They saw his unselfish life, his wisdom and power to heal, and yet they demanded a sign. Interestingly, Jesus did grant them a sign later by raising his friend Lazarus from the dead (John 11)—but as Jesus had predicted, the religious leaders refused to believe in him, and even plotted to kill both him and Lazarus!

Jesus’ parable of the rich man and the beggar is an allegory often cited by fundamentalist Christians in their defense of an eternal hell. But this goes far beyond what the allegory actually says and also goes against the mass of biblical evidence. Moreover, parables were made-up stories that Jesus told conveying a single moral point. Is it feasible to build a whole doctrine on one allegory?

The parable of the rich man and Lazarus plays on images of the afterlife that were prevalent in Jesus’ day. People imagined that the righteous dead were gathered to “Abraham’s bosom” in heaven and the wicked dead went down to hell and were tormented until the day of judgment. These popular ideas were not based on the teachings of the Hebrew Bible, but were the result of pagan influences, first during the Jewish exile and later from Greek philosophy. The idea that the soul lives on after death is fundamentally a pagan belief. If we consider the totality of Scripture, this parable is the odd one out in the Bible’s general descriptions of death and judgment. And since it’s a parable, a made-up allegorical story, annihilationists such as myself argue that it should not be interpreted literally in questions of Christian doctrine.

However, there are several texts in the Bible that are not allegorical and that describe the wicked as being punished with “eternal fire” or “unquenchable fire”. What do they mean? Let’s take a look.

The fire that no one can put out. The fire with which God will punish the wicked on judgment day is referred to by Jesus and prophets in the Old Testament as an “unquenchable fire” (Jeremiah 17:27; Isaiah 66:24; Matthew 3:12; Luke 3:17; Mark 9:43-35). Reading these texts in their immediate context makes it evidently clear that the fire is unquenchable in the sense that it burns and cannot be put out until the subject is completely destroyed. The goal is complete and unhindered destruction. The fundamentalist will take the term “unquenchable” and impose the biased and unreasonable idea that the subject is never fully destroyed by the fire, resulting in their endless torment. But this is nonsensical and goes against the rest of Scripture. In all instances in the Bible the “unquenchable fire” fully destroys (annihilates) whatever it burns. That is the whole point of the fire. One prime example of this is the story of the wicked city of Sodom.

A tangible example. The epistle of Jude describes the city of Sodom as being punished with “eternal fire”, serving as an example of the final judgment of all the wicked on judgment day (Jude 1:7). It’s evident that the city is not still burning to this day, but is in ruins and buried. This serves as a very tangible example indicating that the final judgment of the wicked will result in their annihilation. God’s final judgment of the wicked is also described in the books of Isaiah and Ezekiel. In Isaiah, the wicked on judgment day are described as dead bodies (not immortal souls) that are burned by “unquenchable fire” (Isaiah 66:24). According to Ezekiel, the wicked will be consumed by fire from heaven and their bones will be finally buried by the righteous (Ezekiel 38:22; 39:11-16). If these texts weren’t clear enough, the prophet Malachi writes explicitly that the wicked on judgment day will be turned to ashes (Malachi 4:1-3). These texts are strong evidence that the “unquenchable fire” is not an eternally burning place. The fire is unquenchable only in the sense that nothing can stop it from fully destroying the object set ablaze. When the object is finally destroyed and annihilated, the fire ceases.

In all instances in the Bible the “unquenchable fire” fully destroys (annihilates) whatever it burns.

In Isaiah, God’s judgment on the land of Edom results in the smoke of the land rising up “forever” (Isaiah 34:9-10). In the Bible, the terms “eternal” and “forever” can signify events that are irreversible. One example is Samuel the prophet who was to remain in the temple “forever”—that is, as long as he lived (1 Samuel 1:22). The smoke rising up from the land of Edom “forever” means that the land of Edom would be irreversibly destroyed and laid waste, as the text also says later. The same Hebrew mode of speech is also present in the New Testament (since it’s written by Jewish authors), and especially in the book of Revelation—another text that is often misused by fundamentalists.

The second death. In the book of Revelation, an evil trinity consisting of the Devil, “the beast”, and “the false prophet” are described as being tormented “day and night forever and ever” in the lake of fire (Revelation 20:10). Death and Hades are also thrown into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:14). Clearly, the lake of fire is an eternally burning hell tormenting sinners eternally, isn’t it?

Firstly, the book of Revelation as a God-inspired book cannot be taken to contradict what the rest of the Scripture says on the issue. If all the books in the Bible canon are inspired by God, which Christians affirm, all the books of the Bible must agree with each other. Secondly, it’s clear from the rich imagery employed in the entire book of Revelation that it’s allegory. The book of Revelation has been notoriously hard to understand because of its rich use of allegory and cryptic imagery, such as “the beast” and the number 666. The lake of fire is no different, but is part of the rich imagery and symbolism in this book.

Sometimes the book of Revelation explains the meaning of its own symbols. Twice it states that the lake of fire is the “second death” (Revelation 20:14 and 21:8). Now, what should we make of this term, the “second death”?

It’s evident that the book of Revelation is written by a Bible-reading Jew (the apostle John), because most of the symbolic imagery found in Revelation resembles that in the Hebrew Bible. This is crucial. Death in the book of Revelation must have the same meaning as death in the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament). As we have seen, death in the Old Testament (and the New) is described as unconscious sleep. The second death after God’s final judgment must therefore refer to a second and eternal sleep. When the Devil, the beast, and the false prophet are tormented in the lake of fire “forever and ever”, this signifies the irreversible outcome of their torment and death (which is total destruction) in line with the mode of speech found in the Hebrew Bible. It does not signify an eternal process of pain and dying; this we can know for certain by looking at an Old-Testament prophecy concerning the Devil’s final punishment.

The Devil will be turned to ashes. The prophet Ezekiel in the Old Testament describes God’s final judgment on the cherub who sinned (the Devil). The end result will be that the Devil is turned to ashes (Ezekiel 28:18). As mentioned earlier, the prophet Malachi describes the punishment of the wicked on judgment day and writes that they will be consumed and there will be left neither root nor branch (Malachi 4:1-3), meaning that no wicked entity, neither the Devil nor his followers, will remain. These texts emphatically convey that the Devil and evil will not exist forever, but will finally be annihilated by God. The apostle Paul writes plainly that the wicked will be eternally destroyed (2 Thessalonians 1:9). Eternal destruction is destruction that is irreversible—not an eternal process of being destroyed. (Just as eternal salvation is salvation that is irreversible, not an eternal process of being saved.)

The Bible ends with the promise that there will be no more pain or crying when all things are made new. Is this reconcilable with the teaching of eternal torment in hell?

The apostle Paul also wrote that death will be the last enemy that God will destroy (1 Corinthians 15:26), meaning that death will finally cease to exist. In the book of Revelation, Death and Hades are illustrated as being thrown into the lake of fire. After this, the book states that death shall be no more, nor mourning, nor crying, nor pain, since the former things shall pass away (Revelation 21:4). This verse doesn’t make sense with an eternally burning hell somewhere filled with people who are being endlessly tormented. This verse reinforces the understanding that all sin and evil will at last be annihilated and cease to exist. The lake of fire is a symbol of total and final destruction of evil.

A hell that makes sense. If we lay the Bible aside and look at the notion of hell from a common-sense perspective, the idea that God would choose to keep evil people alive and in existence for all eternity makes little sense. Just as a gardener wants to root out and get rid of the weeds from a garden, it seems evident that God in His wisdom and goodness is seeking to completely root out evil from the universe in order to preserve His creation. It is the superstitious belief that humans are born immortal that has led to the monstrous belief in eternal suffering for some people. The back-lash effect of this terrible belief is the trauma, bitterness, and cynicism found among certain atheists who cannot accept such deeply immoral and unjust teachings.

However, the biblical evidence shows that the idea of an eternal life in hell is foreign and does not have its roots in biblical teaching. Sadly, it’s spread through the ignorance about the Bible and the misuse thereof among Christian fundamentalists.

This is my testimony. What is yours? Feel free to share in the comment section below!


Posted

in

by

Comments

6 responses to “Hell”

  1. Steven Colborne Avatar

    Hello brother,

    I love your writing.

    I don’t think the entirety of creation started with Adam and Eve. You might be interested to read my book God’s Grand Game.

    Best wishes,

    Steven

    Like

    1. davidkendel Avatar
      davidkendel

      Hey, brother!

      Thanks for dropping by and sharing your book! I did a quick search and found Perennial Follower’s very helpful review of it. First of all, I love your passion and endeavor to make sense of the world and God. Keep it up!

      There are a few things that I find problematic with the ideas you present about God. May I share some initial thoughts? You are very welcome to give an answer to my points, I do love a good healthy conversation about God.

      You deny the existence of free will (i.e. our being free moral agents), attributing the existence of evil to God. This notion seems to be based on a “one-dimentional” (if I may call it that) definition of God’s omnipotence, sovereignty and omnipresence. Your basic assumption seems to go something like this: “God is omnipotent and sovereign. Hence, God controls everything. God is omnipresent. Hence, God is in everyone and everything.” Correct me if I’m wrong.

      My initial thoughts are as follows:

      If God is love, God must be willing to set boundaries for Himself in order to provide true moral freedom for His creatures. There is no real love without real moral freedom, the freedom to choose between good or bad. Otherwise, it’s not love, but merely manipulation and force.

      As I see it, God’s omnipotence also includes His ability to limit Himself at will. And this is what I believe is the case and what reconciles God’s omnipotence with His loving character and our free moral nature. God has the power to force our will and manipulate us, but He will not do it, thus loving us by giving us freedom and respect.

      Does this undermine God’s sovereignty? Well, it completely depends on what God’s overall purpose and plan actually is. If God’s overall purpose is to force everyone to obey and live eternally, then obviously His self-limitation would undermine His sovereignty. Then God would not be in control.

      My understanding is that God’s sovereign purpose is accomplished in our employing our free will. God’s plan is that that which is good shall remain and that which is evil shall disappear. Through the operation of His natural and spiritual laws God has ordained that good people (people who live in harmony with His laws) shall live and evil people (who break His laws) shall die. This is not an arbitrary decree, but the logic that protects the stability of the entire universe.

      This is why God through the chaos still is in control. The chaotic element is only temporary and is part of God’s purpose of universal evolution. We must learn our lesson through try and fail.

      God desires everyone to live in harmony with His laws and thereby have eternal life, but He does not desire to force anyone to live against their will. Life and existence is a gift that we can choose to decline. This ability to choose is what makes real love and virtue possible.

      If we deny that we are morally free agents and deny our responsibility for our own destiny, then we ultimately deny that God is love and we deny our own divine similitude. Our moral freedom is what makes us resemble the divine. In this sense, we are gods, as the Bible says. This privilege of freedom also comes with its responsibility – that we reap the fruits of our choice.

      As to God’s omnipresence, I’ve written previously in a post that I see myself as a Christian panentheist (not pantheist) since the Bible clearly teaches that in God we all live, move, and have our being. Yet the Bible also teaches that some people receive God’s Spirit and some people do not. There is a sacred, inner part of our mind/heart where God may or may not dwell, depending on our own choice. Hence, there is a limit to God’s omnipresence, not because God doesn’t have the power to fill everyone, but because He will not invade our person against our own choice.

      Finally, your theology seems to erase or undermine the distinction between the Creator and the creature (?). If this is the case, it’s pantheistic. Pantheism is obviously foreign to biblical thought. Confusing the creature with the Creator is warned against in the Bible as idolatry leading naturally to moral corruption. All kinds of sin and evil committed by fallible humans is ultimately ascribed to God Himself through the teachings of pantheism and is thus justified and multiplied rather than condemned, limited and corrected. Pantheism celebrates and multiplies the chaotic element in nature. If we would protect what is good and true, protect life itself, this is not a good idea. I think we should be skeptical to teachings that in theory or practice put fallible, sinful, chaotic creatures in the seat of God. I’m not saying that this is what your theology does – again, I’m just sharing my initial reactions to the review I read. I think many people might think they are elevating the dignity of humanity by affirming pantheistic ideas, but I think it’s a kind of spiritual narcissism that undermines healthy self-criticism and thus also inhibits true, necessary growth.

      These were my initial thoughts upon reading the review of your book. Let me finally add to the point you made about Adam and Eve that I don’t think the entirety of creation started with Adam and Eve either. The Bible mentions that other beings were in existence before humans were created.

      Wishing you all the best, Steven!

      David

      Like

      1. Steven Colborne Avatar

        I agree entirely brother.

        Thank you!

        Steven

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Precepts Avatar
    Precepts

    I very much enjoyed your article. Good work!

    I call myself a “conditionalist” or believer in conditional immortality myself. I prefer this term for several reasons. First, because it helps separate me from two beliefs I do not agree with: 1. That we DO have immortal souls, but that God annihilates the immortal souls of the wicked in hell, and 2. That the wicked are destroyed in hell, but that believers go instantly to heaven without having to wait for resurrection. These also travel under the banner of “annihilationism,” but would not fit under the title conditionalism or conditional immortality. Then, calling myself a conditionalist, I don’t have to defend the word annihilation, which is hard to pin down just what it means, and which is never found in Scripture. I wouldn’t mind being called a destructionist, because that is Biblical. But what is annihilation anyway? But I think our beliefs are the same; we just use different terms.

    I agree that the Rich Man and Lazarus cannot be taken literally, but that does not mean I think it’s a parable. The idea that it is a parable breaks down if you try to apply it across the entire passage. The best explanation I’ve ever read of The Rich Man and Lazarus is that of Otis Q. Sellers, which can be found here (It is SS18 of the 35 articles listed):

    https://www.seedandbread.org/written-studies-otis-q-sellers/ss01-ss35/

    Mr. Sellers teaches that it is a satire of the unbiblical teaching of the Pharisees on this issue. Read the article and see what you think.

    Thanks for fighting the good fight, brother!

    Nathan

    Like

    1. davidkendel Avatar
      davidkendel

      Hey, brother!

      That’s a good point you’re making–I might just call myself a conditionalist from now on. Thanks for enlightening me! And thanks for the book suggestion!

      Regarding the question of whether the story of the rich man and Lazarus is a parable or not, I use the term “parable” as denoting a story told by Jesus teaching a moral lesson. This story appears together with other parables told by Jesus in Luke 16. I don’t see why it should not be called a parable when it is a story teaching a moral point (like other parables).

      God bless!

      Like

      1. Precepts Avatar
        Precepts

        God bless you as well! Hope you enjoy the article/book I suggested. I think you will find it helpful… I certainly did. I think it’s the best work I’ve ever read on the topic.

        Thanks again for writing.

        Nathan

        Like

Leave a reply to Steven Colborne Cancel reply