Beaverton Grace Bible Church, BGBC Google Reviews, BGBC Lawsuit, CARM, Christian Love, Grace Community Church, It's All About the Image, John MacArthur, Phil Johnson, Shunning, Spiritual Abuse, Spiritual Bullies

Strange Fire Conference: John MacArthur, “Reformed Theology is not a Haven for False Teachers”

Julie Anne

*     *     *

I apologize in advance for the length of this post.  Please read the Facebook status slowly and let it sink in, would you?

*     *     *

Screen Shot 2013-10-17 at 7.35.54 PM
Source

H/T to Meaghan Varela, my dear friend (aka the other Woman of Mass Destruction) and former defendant in the Beaverton Grace Bible Church lawsuit who alerted me to this Facebook status from Grace to You, John MacArthur’s organization.  She had no idea what my post was going to be on today and boy, the irony!

*     *     *

John MacArthur’s church, Grace Community Church has been hosting the Strange Fire Conference.  I was reading notes from the first day of the conference and these words spoke out to me:

*     *     *

The Contrast of Reformed Theology

By contrast, Reformed theology, sound doctrine, is not a haven for false teachers. It’s not where false teachers reside. Reformed theology, sound doctrine, faithful biblical exposition among the long line of godly men, is not a place for false teachers, where frauds, deceivers, liars, and misrepresenters of the truth go. You’re not going to go to a Reformed church and find false miracles, false visions, false prophecies, false anointing, bizarre mindless pandemonium breaking out, shaking, rolling over, and falling down, saying false things about the Holy Spirit. That’s not going to happen in that environment, because they’re anchored to the truth. Once experience and emotion [and not truth] become the definition of what is true, then all hell breaks loose. (Source)

*     *     *

The context of this quote is from the Strange Fire conference in which John MacArthur and others are discussing the dangers of the charismatic movement.  I do not deny there are abuses in the charismatic movement.  However, this comment in particular, by John MacArthur, upset me.

Does MacArthur really believe there are no False Teachers among the Reformed doctrine?  I find this appalling and arrogant and completely unbiblical.

Take a guess who is at the conference right now.  Any guesses?  I’ll spill it – – my former pastor, Chuck O’Neal, the Reformed pastor who went against scripture and sued me and four others for $500,000 in a defamation lawsuit, is likely sitting in the audience with his wife and other members of Beaverton Grace Bible Church right now.

Here’s O’Neal’s recent tweet indicating where he is:

*     *     *

Read this again:

Oh YEA???????  Take a look at what John MacArthur has to say about False Teachers:

I had been following MacArthur’s teachings on False Teachers at the time I reached out to Grace Community for help regarding my former pastor, Chuck O’Neal.  If you recall, in a Google review, Chuck O’Neal publicly stated that a pastor from Grace Community encouraged him to file a lawsuit against me and other former members and so I called Grace Community in February of 2012 to see if they had any record of a pastor recommending that O’Neal sue me.  Here is a copy of the original Google review by O’Neal:

*     *     *

“After seeking counsel from a pastor on staff with Grace Community Church (under Pastor John MacArthur) and reading him several excerpts from JulieAnne’s endless defamation, he recommended that we FILE A LAWSUIT in an appeal to Caesar as the Apostle Paul did when falsely accused of crimes against God and the state.”  (Source)

*     *     *

Those who have followed my story may recall that I had conversations with a volunteer “pastor-of-the-day,” and the following week, a couple of conversations with Bill Shannon and then later, an hour-long conversation with Phil Johnson, John MacArthur’s right-hand man, regarding the impending lawsuit.

The Bible is very clear on lawsuits and here are John MacArthur’s words on lawsuits.

In the conversations with the pastor of the day, Bill, and Phil, I reported to them that Chuck O’Neal was a spiritual abuser and also a false teacher.  I mentioned some of his practices.  I recall mentioning this common unbiblical practice of Chuck O’Neal’s:  False Teachers Who Mark and Avoid Church Members.

After getting sued and with the media attention, people started asking question about Grace Community’s involvement in this case.  Did a pastor from Grace Community really encourage O’Neal to sue us?  Phil Johnson contacted my friend, Dee, of The Wartburg Watch blog, who had covered my story, to let her know that a statement was forthcoming.   During that time, I requested to communicate with Phil and we made contact.

I had an hour-long conversation with Phil Johnson and I thought it went well.  However, the next day, he posted a link from Carl Trueman on his Facebook page in which my case was discussed.  At the bottom of the comments, Phil offers this comment:

*     *     *

Screen Shot 2013-10-17 at 9.35.28 AM

 

*     *     *

Let me reiterate my intention of my original Google reviews and blog:  it was to warn people of a FALSE TEACHER.  I was very clear and concise with Grace Community pastors:  Chuck O’Neal was a “control freak” and a spiritual abuser.  Even Johnson stated on his Facebook that conservatives should speak out against control freaks in church leadership.

Keep in mind my former pastor has been a long-time Shepherds Conference attender.  He idolizes John MacArthur.  After arriving at Beaverton Grace Community Church, the Bible of choice among BGBC members was the John MacArthur Study Bible (NKJV).  We heard story after story about O’Neal being asked to sit at the right hand of MacArthur during a time when O’Neal when to some pastor’s expositor’s seminar.

So, picture this.  Right now, while pastors are CALLING OUT charismatics as false teachers, my former pastor is sitting in the seats at the #StrangeFire conference, as a legitimate shepherd and pastor.  Keep in mind, this same pastor, Chuck O’Neal, has lost his minister’s license and was put in church discipline by the Grace Brethren board.  He has never repented of filing a lawsuit against the 5 of us, he has never repented of the abuses occurring over 15 years of his being on staff at BGBC, or of the false teaching.

Remember the screen shot above about leaders of sheep associating with wolves?  Over the past year, a year after losing the lawsuit, Chuck O’Neal has found himself a niche among street evangelists, one in particular, Tony Miano, has bent his ear towards O’Neal.  It is my understanding that they met at an evangelism conference in the Portland area last spring put on by Christian Apologetics and Research Ministries (CARM).  In the evenings after the conference, groups went out street evangelizing and I believe that is when Miano and the people at CARM (Matt Slick and Ken Cook) “discovered” Chuck O’Neal’s street preaching “talent.”

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.  When there is a church leader who seems to have the right stuff (doctrine, preaching style), it’s very interesting that patterns of behavior and actions are ignored.  Ie, as long as Chuck O’Neal can do a good job street preaching, it really shouldn’t matter much if there’s some spiritual abuse in his background.  It’s just a minor bump in the road that he sued 5 former church members and lost over $60,000 of the church’s money for the defendants’ attorney fees alone – – – this was God’s money, right?  ::::::blatant sarcasm:::::

Yea, it’s easy to overlook those “minor” discrepancies when you find someone who is charismatic (not that kind of charismatic, you know the other kind), who preaches the gospel that you preach, ya know, the Reformed doctrine on which you hang your hat.

So, guess who O’Neal invited to his own evangelism conference held late summer 2013?  Yup, Tony Miano and Ken Cook of CARM.

*     *     *

Look what Chuck O’Neal’s wife brought to the #StrangeFire conference:

*     *     *

Screen Shot 2013-10-17 at 10.01.44 AM

Tonya with her new favorite book “Should She Preach” at the #StrangeFire conference. Thank you @TonyMiano. pic.twitter.com/OPOjbn4sNf

— Chuck O’Neal (@ChuckONeal_) October 17, 2013

*     *     *

You probably can’t see it in the photo, but you can see it here.  If you look closely at the front of the book, you will see “Pastor Chuck O’Neal” on the front because my former pastor, the pastor who sued me and four others, wasting most likely close to $100,000 of the church’s money to cover his attorney fees and our attorney fees, wrote the foreword to this book.  Yes, the suing pastor is now is credible.

How is this man credible?  Based on what?  Just because he can do open air preaching well?  What about his church and scores and scores of personal testimonies of spiritual abuse, stalking, shunning, recording and playing private conversations, etc?  Why does that not factor in anywhere?

Edited to add:   I failed to mention that interviews from both Phil Johnson and Steve Lawson are included in Tony Miano’s book, Should She Preach – – – the same book in which false teacher, Chuck O’Neal, who:

  • lost his license
  • filed a lawsuit against us  – against Grace Community pastors’ advice (Phil tried to talk him out of it)
  • wrongly accused Grace  Community pastor of encouraging him to file a lawsuit
  • is currently in church discipline by board who licensed him

And they are okay with this?  How can they be okay with this?

Oh, maybe because that gets put on the back burner because of this:

*     *     *

Screen Shot 2013-10-17 at 10.38.32 AM

(Source)

*     *     *

Yea, you don’t ever want to bite the hand that feeds you.  When you are getting a paycheck coming to you each month to help you stay financially afloat in “ministry,” it’s a little difficult to see the glaring warning signs.  Let’s see, which one does a righteous Christian leader choose, warning signs or dollar signs?

*     *     *

*     *     *

Justin Peters called it, fo sure:

“It makes it very hard for us to warn people about the wolves when the leaders of the sheep are associating with the wolves.” –Justin Peters at #StrangeFire

*     *     * 

138 thoughts on “Strange Fire Conference: John MacArthur, “Reformed Theology is not a Haven for False Teachers””

  2. Jeff Brown,

    You ask me: ” “Holy Spirit”? Where did that name come from? So this “Holy Spirit” told you it’s/his name, and told you that someone named “Jesus” is “Lord” and “Savior”? And how do you know what those words mean?”

    I’m not sure what you’re driving at, but yes, I agree that this “Holy Spirit” told me it’s/his name, and it/he told us that someone named “Jesus” is “Lord” and “Savior”? At least I take this to be an application of the proposition, that is claimed to be inerrant, that all Scripture is God breathed.

    The trouble is, having read that all Scripture is God breathed only gives me a knowledge of what is CLAIMED to be true. You are asking me how I KNOW a particular thing. Well, I don’t KNOW anything to be true until I have actually LIVED it. I can read a biography about, say, Winston Churchill, but that doesn’t mean that I come to KNOW him. That privilege was reserved for his wife — or in Churchill’s case maybe the privilege was also extended to his valet.

    As an aside, I find it interesting that you allow as how it may be appropriate to refer to the Holy Spirit as “it.” What’s with that?

    Like

  4. Gary W – I asked those questions because you wrote: “If I trust in Jesus as Lord and Savior, I can be saved without thinking all the right things. I can reject both the virgin birth and the doctrine of the Trinity and still be saved, so long as I have trusting faith in Jesus.”

    My point Is: If you can think the right things about Jesus being Lord and Savior (which are in the Bible), why can’t you think the right things about the virgin birth and the Trinity (also in the Bible), *which are so intimately connected with Who Jesus is?*

    Yes, knowledge is not all of faith, but it’s a necessary part of faith.

    I wrote “it” because I was putting myself in the pov of someone who never looked in the Bible and got all his info from his own thoughts, which may or not be from the Holy Spirit. So – I guess you *don’t* reject the Trinity?

    Like

  5. A whole lot of Texans believe in the Trinity (river, that is)! Just a joke or poke.

    I believe that one can believe in Jesus Christ as God, accept and understand his gift of grace and forgiveness, and be a Christian, without ever considering or believing in the virgin birth or agreeing with the doctrine of the Trinity (which, btw is NOT in the Bible, but readily deducible from the text if one chooses). The preaching of the first century was, “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved”. The mention of the virgin birth disappears after the first few verses of Matthew and Luke. And there is no mention of a “trinity”, per se, in the NT writings. So if Peter, Paul, John, etc. were not teaching those doctrines, why are they necessary to be a Christian???

    Like

  6. Julie Anne – I’ll have to do more research on Brown to back up my “understanding” of him. On the positive side, I can say that he’s a brilliant scholar on the subject of the Jewish roots of the Christian faith.

    My other point was that decades have gone by while millions have been fleeced and deceived by charlatans, while “cautious charismatics” like Brown keep saying that they have been critical of them. Why haven’t they even once held a very public conference in order to call them out? Finally, someone outside of their camp does this, and he is attacked, by Brown and others, as soon as the conference is announced. Why not, instead, say that they’ll join JMac, and offer their expertise on the subject, right from the start? If they did this, I stand corrected.

    Like

  7. I know I’m not Julie Anne, however, why do we need to have ‘conferences’ to call out anybody? Any conference to call out anyone will only cause the same issue the Strange Fire conference did. All it did was cause more division. How about being humble and asking those we are concerned about to sit down and discuss it or write them letters? Seemed to work in the Bible when Paul was addressing similar issues.

    Like

  8. The belief in Jesus as God is, I think, the important thing. I have found that people who have trouble with the virgin birth and the Trinity have trouble with Jesus’ deity. If someone has never heard about either one – a deathbed conversion, say – that’s a different story.

    The Apostle’s certainly believed in His deity. And their Creed mentions the virgin birth and strongly implies a belief in the Trinity.

    Like

  9. lynetteduquette71 –

    Because those ways haven’t worked. I know of one ministry leader who sat down with Benny Hinn, who agreed that he was in error. It wasn’t long before Hinn was back to his old ways – there was just too much money in it.

    A big spotlight has to be shown on false teaching, which Paul and others did in their letters. Of course, the false teachers and their appeasers will be upset. The truth always divides. But some may, in the process, leave the false teachers.

    Like

  10. Jeff said:

    Why haven’t they even once held a very public conference in order to call them out? Finally, someone outside of their camp does this, and he is attacked, by Brown and others, as soon as the conference is announced. Why not, instead, say that they’ll join JMac, and offer their expertise on the subject, right from the start? If they did this, I stand corrected.

    Jeff -As far as I can see, he was attacked because he used a broad brush. Maybe the reason why they don’t join jMac is because they don’t agree with other aspects that JMac is touting.

    Another thing: calling someone out does not often yield any positive results.
    Case in point: Chuck O’Neal.

    Since paying $60,000, without a minister’s license, while on discipline by his licensing board, he has written the foreward to Miano’s book, held an evangelism conference in which respected evangelists spoke, went to Strange Fire conference and others. MacArthur signed his daughter’s bible, etc.

    I’m not convinced calling out does a thing.

    Like

  11. Julie Anne – You might be right about the “broad brush” aspect. On the other hand, the so-called “cautious charismatics” like Piper, Grudem, Brown seem to believe that the Holy Spirit is bringing in new revelation beyond Scripture, and that opens a Pandora’s Box, imo. I’ll have to research it.

    Concerning “calling out”: I don’t think the charlatans and false teachers will change their ways, whether they are called out or spoken to nicely, as long as they can retain money and power. I’m thinking of their vast numbers of followers. A conference like JMac’s might be the one time they hear another side of the issue argued strongly, and start to think seriously about no longer following them. JMac is giving away tens of thousands of copies of his new book for this purpose.

    Of course, this tactic can make a lot of them dig in even harder. But I think that if any come out of it, it’s worth it.

    Like

  16. No, the point Jeff is making the exact same one JMAC was making. If you are not a cessationist then you are sliding toward Benny Hinn’s tribe.

    Like

  17. “i wrote “it” because I was putting myself in the pov of someone who never looked in the Bible and got all his info from his own thoughts, which may or not be from the Holy Spirit. So – I guess you *don’t* reject the Trinity?”

    And there is another problem unless you think the translators were “inspired”. If you think they were “inspired” then we really have nothing to discuss.

    The real problem is control. Some want control over what others think/believe. This makes them feel puffed up and they couch it as saving people with truth. It is also a way to build movements, gain followers, etc.

    The other problem is that Christianity is a “relationship” not a religion. Hard to control such a relationship. People are too independent when they know Christ and are guided by the indwelling Holy spirit.

    Like

  18. Lydia said-“No, the point Jeff is making the exact same one JMAC was making. If you are not a cessationist then you are sliding toward Benny Hinn’s tribe.”
    I wouldn’t go near Hinn with a ten foot pole. I know many charismatics who want nothing to do with him. I am pentacostal and I am not sliding towards anyone. That’s just another broad brush statement “If you do A you must also be doing B”. That’s just not the case at all.

    Like

  19. “And there is another problem unless you think the translators were “inspired”.”

    Actually, the English translations relating to the Holy Spirit are not adequate to convey the fact that in the Greek the words we translate “Holy Spirit” are neuter, not masculine. When we refer to the Holy Spirit in the masculine we are applying theology to change the plain meaning of the Greek text. Maybe the Spirit is masculine, but translators ought not to impose that understanding on us. Their job is to translate, not theologize.

    To my mind, if we are going to theologize the Spirit’s gender, there are good grounds for using the feminine. After all the Spirit is the Paraclete, i.e. the Comforter, the Helper, the One who consoles, encourages, uplifts.

    Like

  20. “If you are not a cessationist then you are sliding toward Benny Hinn’s tribe.”

    Well, O.K. But if that’s true then here’s a really, really scary thought:

    If you are a cessationist then you are sliding toward John MacArthur’s tribe.

    Like

  21. Actually, the English translations relating to the Holy Spirit are not adequate to convey the fact that in the Greek the words we translate “Holy Spirit” are neuter, not masculine. When we refer to the Holy Spirit in the masculine we are applying theology to change the plain meaning of the Greek text. Maybe the Spirit is masculine, but translators ought not to impose that understanding on us. Their job is to translate, not theologize.”

    I read some interesting pieces on this when it comes to translating. They simply assume since God is referred to as “Father” in the NT and Jesus came as a male, then the Holy Spirit is male.

    They need to take Isaiah 9 more seriously.

    Like

  22. Lydia – “No, the point Jeff is making the exact same one JMAC was making. If you are not a cessationist then you are sliding toward Benny Hinn’s tribe.”

    Nope. Merely using him as an example of the enormous influence of people like Hinn. His site says he’s preached to over a billion people in almost 200 countries. Even if it’s half that much, that’s a lot. And, judging by his extraordinary wealth, a lot of those people like him.

    Gary W – In John 16:13-14, Jesus refers to the Holy Spirit as “He.”

    Like

  23. Jeff,

    Thank you for pointing out a passage where it appears, from the English translation at least, that the male gender is ascribed to the Holy Spirit. It turns out, however, that this is another example where the translators are inserting a word, in this instance “he,” that does not actually appear in the Greek text. They convert one word, ἐκεῖνος, ekeinos, meaning “that one” into “he.” Other instances of “he” are assumed from verbs where the third person is specific, but not the gender. My translation, noting the Greek gender in parentheses, along with pronoun ambiguities inherent in the Greek verbs, would be along the following lines:

    And when that one (masculine), the spirit (neuter) of truth (feminine), comes, he/she/it will guide you into all the truth (feminine); for he/she/it will not speak from himself/itself (but not herself), but whatever he/she/it hears he/she/it will speak, and he/she/it will declare to you the things that are to come. That one (masculine), he/she/it will glorify me, for he/she/it will take what is mine and declare it to you.

    A good argument can be made that the masculine gender of the general term “that one” should control over the neuter gender of the specific term “spirit,” but I contend that the specific term should control the general term. The translators may have a right understanding of Trinitarian theology. My gripe is that they shouldn’t be writing their theology into what is supposed to be a translation. Their substitution of “he” for “that one” is particularly egregious. What is even more egregious in this particular instance is that the translation cum interpretation carries a strong connotation of Holy Spirit’s personhood. Again, this may be good theology, but no such connotation is derivable from the Greek text.

    Like

  25. Jeff,

    I am going to fess up. I have begun to have some problems with the standard formulations of the doctrine of the Trinity. Specifically, it seems quite difficult to reconcile the emphasis on three separate persons with Deuteronomy 6:4, ““Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. (ESV)

    Why is it not sufficient to simply acknowledge that the Lord or God, Who is one, manifests himself as Father, Son and Holy Spirit? That’s difficult enough to comprehend. Why get wrapped up in trying to defend something Scripture doesn’t specifically teach, which is that there are three different persons in the so called Godhead?

    Why create unnecessary obstacles for Jews and Muslims?

    For now I’m not taking a position. But I am asking the questions.

    Like

  26. One group that I would highly recommend is the Society for Pentecostal Studies.

    This is a scholarly group from all sectors of Pentecostal and Charismatic streams. They are keen to elevate understanding of Scriptures and to expose error and things that do not measure up to the biblical text. There are books and studies available in so many topic areas.

    There is a wealth of knowledge regarding the history of the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements. I particularly like the research being continually done on the many women who were leaders in these movements. Their contributions are now being recognized!

    For those who are seeking answers to questions related to NT practices for today or questions about history and/or personalities involved, maybe there are some suitable resources that you could find through this group.

    Like

  28. I believe that if we do not accurately understand all of particular functions that the offices of apostle and New Testament prophet fulfill in their part of building up the body of Christ, we will then be vulnerable to misjudging whether or not there is a continuing need for someone to fulfill these functions today.

    In other words if I misunderstand all that an officer is responsible for I will also be prone to misunderstand when these responsibilities have been fulfilled.

    Like

  29. What a bunch of whiners….wrangling on about MacArthur this and MacArthur that. Shame on the pitiful wretch who launched this thread. I extend to him a virtual diaper. That said, I’d like to respond to two comments made on this board which reveal either an appauling ignorance, or intellectual dishonesty…probably a little of both. First, MacArthur didn’t say that no false teachers exist within the Reformed Movement….or that none have ever. What he said was that the Reformed Camp was not “a haven” for such, and he’s right. They police their movement, so a false teacher would be a maverick to that community. Secondly, MacArthur does not think all of Reformed doctrine is “perfect” as someone else stated. He advocates for a Reformed Soteriology, but rejects their ecclesiology and eschatology. Again, shame on the infantile tool who started this thread.

    Like

  30. I do not believe for one second that MacArthur was saying there are no false teachers in Reformed theology. It is not his fault the Chuck O’Neal was at his conference. It’s a free country. I know for a face MacArthur would have some strong words to say about Doug Phillips and Vision Forum.

    Like

  31. David said “What a bunch of whiners”; “Shame on the pitiful wretch who launched this thread. I extend to him a virtual diaper.” and “Again, shame on the infantile tool who started this thread.”
    Well, Ain’t you special!

    Like

  32. David said, “They police their movement, so a false teacher would be a maverick to that [reformed] community.” Most, if not all of the well known reformed leaders are false teachers (wolves in sheep’s clothes. Here’s just a partial list off the top of my head: John Calvin (a murderer and an extraordinarily evil tyrant), Al Mohler, Mark Dever, RC Sproul, L Duncan, J Piper, J Macarthur. These are all wolves and there are many more.

    Like

  33. Apparently, Bob Johnson prefers man-centered theology….”I’m a Christian…glory be to me…” <——Bob's mantra. Tell me, brainiac, how are any of the men you named "false teachers?" Tell me what they teach that is false…using Scripture to support your claim. If you're going to make such comments, be prepared to back them up. @ Dave A A, yes, actually – I am special…special enough for God to have chosen me from before the foundation of the world to be His child.

    Like

  34. Are you sure of that, David? I have to tell you, when I read this statement:

    Dave A A, yes, actually – I am special…special enough for God to have chosen me from before the foundation of the world to be His child.

    it did kind of come across as arrogant – – that you are a special one who was chosen, but too bad for anyone else who wasn’t. Maybe that’s not the way that you meant it, though.

    Like

  35. Julie Anne,

    The finest expose of John Macarthur ever written is at the following link.
    http://www.watch.pair.com/macarthur-1-mark-of-beast.html

    This most excellent 5-part expose proves that Macarthur is a liar and a fraud. And it shows much more. I think you’ll find it stunning. I’ve conducted extensive research on Macarthur and written much myself, but nothing I’ve written proves Macarthur is a fraud quite like this does.

    Please read this expose and please consider writing a post about it. We need publicity and we need to get the word out more in warning Christians about this dangerous wolf.

    Thanks for your time,

    Bob Johnson

    Like

  36. may Jesus bless you and your family for standing up to this abuse. my life was ruined in my early 20’s by spiritual bullies and i had no where to turn and no one would believe me.

    thankfully, i KNEW that my precious Lord Jesus would never leave me or forsake me, and i clung to Him despite being shunned and falsely accused. if more and more abused Christians speak out, at least others who are being hurt will know that they are not alone.

    it truly takes the “sting” out of it when you realize that “it’s not you”. it’s a pattern. some people are just drunk on power and as long as they live in a free country such as ours, they will continue to manipulate anyone they can. it is up to us who experience their abuse to stand up and call them on it.

    i think there are going to be a whole lot of surprises at the Bema seat judgment and a lot of these “spiritual leaders” are going to have a whole lot of wood, hay and stubble to clean up after their works are tried in the fire.

    Liked by 1 person

  37. “Does MacArthur really believe there are no False Teachers among the Reformed doctrine?”

    No, he does not. That isn’t what he said. This entire article is based on refuting something he did not say. What he say is reformed theology is not a “haven” for false teachers. That does not mean there is “no False Teachers among the Reformed doctrine”.

    Like

Thanks for participating in the SSB community. Please be sure to leave a name/pseudonym (not "Anonymous"). Thx :)