Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Alan McDougall

Rationalise a benevolent God with Numbers 31

125 posts in this topic

Numbers Chapter 31?

I have great difficulty in rationalizing this chapter with a concept of a good loving God as depicted by the lord Jesus Christ. !

The bible states that God is the same, yesterday, tomorrow and forever. This does not seem to be the case if one analyses and compares the awful chapter 31 of the book on Numbers, in relation to the loving, forgiving God,

1) Verse: 2 the Lord said to Moses take vengeance on the Midianites.

In direct contrast, Jesus said, forgive those who hate you and despitefully use you. It is easy to love those that love you, but I say love those that hate you.

Vengeance is mine said the lord I will recompense. However, here God appears to go against his own word and commands Moses to take vengeance.

2) Verses: 3- 6 Make war and kill said the lord. This is a direct contradiction to Gods own commandment. Thou shalt not kill.

Jesus said if a man strikes you on the one cheek turn and offer him the other and not to violence.

3) Verses: 6-13 here the armies of Israel go out and destroy, spoil, burn and steal and plunder on Gods command. In addition, they slaughter all the adult males however; this is not sufficient bloodletting slaughter to please Moses or God as we read from verse 14.

In contrast, Jesus said he that lives by the sword would die by the sword. The soldiers apparently somewhat kinder and merciful than Moses spared the woman and children much to Mosses disappointment and anger

4) Verse: 14 Moses was wroth (angry) with the officers. Why? Because they had not slaughtered THE WHOLE LOT, WOMAN, CHILDREN, like they had done to the adult males. So what is sweet kind merciful Moses proposal? Verse: 15, He says now murder all the "little boys". In ABSOLUTE contrast Jesus said blessed are the little children for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

For goodness sake is this the same merciful loving God depicted by Jesus. No this horrific story does not end yet. Moses goes on saying." Kill all the woman" except those that have "not had sex with a man".

How on earth in those remote primitive days were the soldiers to know which woman was a virgin and which were not. There was definitely no gynecologist way back in 3000 B.C. WERE THERE? So to me they must on Moses command raped all the woman first and then murdered those who were not virgins.

Why was it necessary to rape them all? Because a woman's age does not necessarily indicate whether a woman is a virgin or not.

5) Now if any learned rational bible scholar can tell me that this is the same father God Jesus that is the same yesterday tomorrow and forever, I am all eyes and ears waiting for a logical explanation. You know if one takes out the title God and Moses and replaces them with Hitler and Hermann Goring or Adolf Eichmann, no one would question that it was the work of the evil Hitler regime. Would they?

Am I blaspheming or sacrilegious?? I hope not help me if you can!

Alan McDougall 13/7/2007

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jesus said he that lives by the sword would die by the sword.

I think that applies well to the tale of the Israelites as told in the Old Testament. They are a warlike nation and are defeated by greater warlike nations. When you consider the fact that Jesus was originally talking to his fellow Jews a lot of his sayings can be viewed as social commentary aimed at the Jewish community at the time.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that applies well to the tale of the Israelites as told in the Old Testament. They are a warlike nation and are defeated by greater warlike nations. When you consider the fact that Jesus was originally talking to his fellow Jews a lot of his sayings can be viewed as social commentary aimed at the Jewish community at the time.

However, do you believe it was God who told Moses to do these acts of killing/murder!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The deity featured in the Bible is far from benevolent and one hopes it is a purely human invention!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Numbers Chapter 31?

I have great difficulty in rationalizing this chapter with a concept of a good loving God as depicted by the lord Jesus Christ. !

The bible states that God is the same, yesterday, tomorrow and forever. This does not seem to be the case if one analyses and compares the awful chapter 31 of the book on Numbers, in relation to the loving, forgiving God,

1) Verse: 2 the Lord said to Moses take vengeance on the Midianites.

In direct contrast, Jesus said, forgive those who hate you and despitefully use you. It is easy to love those that love you, but I say love those that hate you.

Vengeance is mine said the lord I will recompense. However, here God appears to go against his own word and commands Moses to take vengeance.

2) Verses: 3- 6 Make war and kill said the lord. This is a direct contradiction to Gods own commandment. Thou shalt not kill.

Jesus said if a man strikes you on the one cheek turn and offer him the other and not to violence.

3) Verses: 6-13 here the armies of Israel go out and destroy, spoil, burn and steal and plunder on Gods command. In addition, they slaughter all the adult males however; this is not sufficient bloodletting slaughter to please Moses or God as we read from verse 14.

In contrast, Jesus said he that lives by the sword would die by the sword. The soldiers apparently somewhat kinder and merciful than Moses spared the woman and children much to Mosses disappointment and anger

4) Verse: 14 Moses was wroth (angry) with the officers. Why? Because they had not slaughtered THE WHOLE LOT, WOMAN, CHILDREN, like they had done to the adult males. So what is sweet kind merciful Moses proposal? Verse: 15, He says now murder all the "little boys". In ABSOLUTE contrast Jesus said blessed are the little children for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

For goodness sake is this the same merciful loving God depicted by Jesus. No this horrific story does not end yet. Moses goes on saying." Kill all the woman" except those that have "not had sex with a man".

How on earth in those remote primitive days were the soldiers to know which woman was a virgin and which were not. There was definitely no gynecologist way back in 3000 B.C. WERE THERE? So to me they must on Moses command raped all the woman first and then murdered those who were not virgins.

Why was it necessary to rape them all? Because a woman's age does not necessarily indicate whether a woman is a virgin or not.

5) Now if any learned rational bible scholar can tell me that this is the same father God Jesus that is the same yesterday tomorrow and forever, I am all eyes and ears waiting for a logical explanation. You know if one takes out the title God and Moses and replaces them with Hitler and Hermann Goring or Adolf Eichmann, no one would question that it was the work of the evil Hitler regime. Would they?

Am I blaspheming or sacrilegious?? I hope not help me if you can!

Alan McDougall 13/7/2007

Moses was probably skizophrenic...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses was probably skizophrenic...

I think of him as the most nacissistic madman to was, is and ever will be.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I blaspheming or sacrilegious?? I hope not help me if you can!

Alan McDougall 13/7/2007

The best I can do is point you to this link: http://carm.org/god-...ament-a-monster

I hope it helps you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're looking at it all wrong, God is good because he says so.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best I can do is point you to this link: http://carm.org/god-...ament-a-monster

I hope it helps you.

Who ever wrote that thinks genocide only applies when the Israelites are the targets.
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

25 The Lord said to Moses, 26 “You and Eleazar the priest and the family heads of the community are to count all the people and animals that were captured. 27 Divide the spoils equally between the soldiers who took part in the battle and the rest of the community. 28 From the soldiers who fought in the battle, set apart as tribute for the Lord one out of every five hundred, whether people, cattle, donkeys or sheep. 29 Take this tribute from their half share and give it to Eleazar the priest as the Lord’s part. 30 From the Israelites’ half, select one out of every fifty, whether people, cattle, donkeys, sheep or other animals. Give them to the Levites, who are responsible for the care of the Lord’s tabernacle.” 31 So Moses and Eleazar the priest did as the Lord commanded Moses.

So who was actually there to witness and write down this conversation with God?

Edited by redhen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

25 The Lord said to Moses, 26 “You and Eleazar the priest and the family heads of the community are to count all the people and animals that were captured. 27 Divide the spoils equally between the soldiers who took part in the battle and the rest of the community. 28 From the soldiers who fought in the battle, set apart as tribute for the Lord one out of every five hundred, whether people, cattle, donkeys or sheep. 29 Take this tribute from their half share and give it to Eleazar the priest as the Lord’s part. 30 From the Israelites’ half, select one out of every fifty, whether people, cattle, donkeys, sheep or other animals. Give them to the Levites, who are responsible for the care of the Lord’s tabernacle.” 31 So Moses and Eleazar the priest did as the Lord commanded Moses.

So who was actually there to witness and write down this conversation with God?

The traditional view is that Moses wrote the first five books.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, do you believe it was God who told Moses to do these acts of killing/murder!

No, and I will just leave it at that.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some things are just over some people's heads...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses was probably skizophrenic...

quiXilver probably never learned how spell..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who ever wrote that thinks genocide only applies when the Israelites are the targets.

Reminds me of this psychological survey done to Israelite children back in last century...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you steal someones land and murders everything on it, when scribe asks why you did that, God is as good answer as any I suppose. The Bible is really horribly written history. I want y'all to notice these folks have gone through three religions, each one trying to stamp out the previous one. They are still doing most stuff they been doing for 10s of thousands of years and everybody runs in with God on their side. The only ones really making anything off it are they guys making the chariots, swords and real estate. I see a pattern.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, Numbers 31. Spends a year or two in silence before someone decides to throw it out there as an attack against Yahweh and his supposed benevolence. That God would sanction not only the genocide of an entire race but then condemn its virgin women into being sex slaves is abhorrent. Or... is there a matter of historical and cultural context to take into consideration? I'd argue this to be the case. And it hails back to Genesis 12.

In this chapter, God makes a covenant with Abraham. In this covenant (or contract, if you like the term better), God promises several things - that he would be Abraham's God and Abraham would be God's chosen people, that he will make Abraham's descendants "as numerous as the stars", that he will bless those who bless him and curse those who curse him. The final promise Abraham is given is that he will be a blessing to the nations. This final covenantal agreement is later explained to take the form of a person, a descendant of Abraham who would be a blessing to all the world, and this is the first promise of a Messiah to come (Christians believe this Messiah has come already, the Jews are still waiting). However, what I'd like to look at is the third of these promises in the covenant. That God would bless those who bless Abraham (and his descendants) and he would curse those who curse Abraham (and his descendants). God has already fulfilled the first two of the promises (that he would be Abraham's God is obvious, the second is that his descendants would be numerous, that has also taken place).

Focusing on this event in Numbers 31, I'd like to head back a few chapters to Numbers 25. In this chapter, the Midianites entice the Jews away from Yahweh-worship and into worship of the Midianite gods (most likely including rituals of sex and other obscenely non-Jewish rites). This is in direct contradiction to the covenant, that they would be God's people. As a result, a plague is sent on Israel. This is God's punishment on Israel, and Israel repents. In Numbers 31, it is the Midianites time of judgement. God tells Moses to take vengeance, and that is what they do. This is the punishment of God on the Midiantes for turning Israel away from him.

As to the women and children, this is simply a cultural matter. First, the children are not Hebrews. They represent a threat to their tribe. Two options exist - let them go, and they may grow up and then try vengeance of their own on the Hebrews, or kill them. In a nomadic tribal society competing for limited resources this is entirely consistent with survival. What is of note, however, is that God played no part in this decision. It was Moses' commands, God had only told Israel to attack the Midianites.

On the matter of specifically women, I applaud the imagination of the OP in interpolating that all the women were raped to ensure none were virgins and then executed, but there are far more realistic answers. Of particular note, the Israelites had a set of laws dealing with marriage of prisoners of war. Rape was not allowed by the law of Yahweh, but marriage was. Women were an important commodity to nomadic tribal life - more women means more babies, more babies means larger tribe, larger tribe means greater chance of survival. In Hebrew culture, lineage is patriarchal so a foreign woman birthing a child from a Hebrew father is no problem to the racial purity of the Hebrews. This is far more likely than the wanton rape and execution of women. And again, this was Moses, not God who ordered such.

But whatever the case, this was entirely consistent with a nomadic, tribal society. By the time of the New Testament society had changed. They weren't nomads fighting constant wars. And if you believe the New Testament Jesus is the final promise of the covenant in Genesis 12. Jesus then issues a new covenant that supersedes the covenant of Abraham. This new covenant is a promise not only to the people of Abraham but to all people who choose to accept it.

So what we have here is not a God who has changed from Numbers 31 through to the New Testament, but a God who is still exactly the same but is working under a new covenant with a new people of his own.

I know this won't prove to you that this is true. You probably don't even believe in God and are simply trying to prove to us God-believers that we're worshipping a monster. I'm not writing this to prove it to you, simply to show you why I don't see a theological problem with a God of love who is said to have ordered the destruction of a neighbouring tribe who had caused Israel to sin and grievously depart from God's covenant. Best wishes,

~ Regards, PA

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Ah, Numbers 31. Spends a year or two in silence before someone decides to throw it out there as an attack against Yahweh and his supposed benevolence. That God would sanction not only the genocide of an entire race but then condemn its virgin women into being sex slaves is abhorrent. Or... is there a matter of historical and cultural context to take into consideration? I'd argue this to be the case. And it hails back to Genesis 12.

In this chapter, God makes a covenant with Abraham. In this covenant (or contract, if you like the term better), God promises several things - that he would be Abraham's God and Abraham would be God's chosen people, that he will make Abraham's descendants "as numerous as the stars", that he will bless those who bless him and curse those who curse him. The final promise Abraham is given is that he will be a blessing to the nations. This final covenantal agreement is later explained to take the form of a person, a descendant of Abraham who would be a blessing to all the world, and this is the first promise of a Messiah to come (Christians believe this Messiah has come already, the Jews are still waiting). However, what I'd like to look at is the third of these promises in the covenant. That God would bless those who bless Abraham (and his descendants) and he would curse those who curse Abraham (and his descendants). God has already fulfilled the first two of the promises (that he would be Abraham's God is obvious, the second is that his descendants would be numerous, that has also taken place).

Focusing on this event in Numbers 31, I'd like to head back a few chapters to Numbers 25. In this chapter, the Midianites entice the Jews away from Yahweh-worship and into worship of the Midianite gods (most likely including rituals of sex and other obscenely non-Jewish rites). This is in direct contradiction to the covenant, that they would be God's people. As a result, a plague is sent on Israel. This is God's punishment on Israel, and Israel repents. In Numbers 31, it is the Midianites time of judgement. God tells Moses to take vengeance, and that is what they do. This is the punishment of God on the Midiantes for turning Israel away from him.

As to the women and children, this is simply a cultural matter. First, the children are not Hebrews. They represent a threat to their tribe. Two options exist - let them go, and they may grow up and then try vengeance of their own on the Hebrews, or kill them. In a nomadic tribal society competing for limited resources this is entirely consistent with survival. What is of note, however, is that God played no part in this decision. It was Moses' commands, God had only told Israel to attack the Midianites.

On the matter of specifically women, I applaud the imagination of the OP in interpolating that all the women were raped to ensure none were virgins and then executed, but there are far more realistic answers. Of particular note, the Israelites had a set of laws dealing with marriage of prisoners of war. Rape was not allowed by the law of Yahweh, but marriage was. Women were an important commodity to nomadic tribal life - more women means more babies, more babies means larger tribe, larger tribe means greater chance of survival. In Hebrew culture, lineage is patriarchal so a foreign woman birthing a child from a Hebrew father is no problem to the racial purity of the Hebrews. This is far more likely than the wanton rape and execution of women. And again, this was Moses, not God who ordered such.

But whatever the case, this was entirely consistent with a nomadic, tribal society. By the time of the New Testament society had changed. They weren't nomads fighting constant wars. And if you believe the New Testament Jesus is the final promise of the covenant in Genesis 12. Jesus then issues a new covenant that supersedes the covenant of Abraham. This new covenant is a promise not only to the people of Abraham but to all people who choose to accept it.

So what we have here is not a God who has changed from Numbers 31 through to the New Testament, but a God who is still exactly the same but is working under a new covenant with a new people of his own.

I know this won't prove to you that this is true. You probably don't even believe in God and are simply trying to prove to us God-believers that we're worshipping a monster. I'm not writing this to prove it to you, simply to show you why I don't see a theological problem with a God of love who is said to have ordered the destruction of a neighbouring tribe who had caused Israel to sin and grievously depart from God's covenant. Best wishes,

~ Regards, PA

Number 31:21

"And Eleazar the priest said unto the men of war which went to the battle, This is the ordinance of the law which the LORD commanded Moses;"

And so, your argument that these orders - to kill the non-virgin women already captive and to kill the captive male children, and then to take the virgin women and children as sex-slaves - came from Moses and was not the will or command of God, is contradicted in scripture. Yes, Numbers 31:2 is very brief when relaying what God spoke to Moses, but in context with later verses this brevity should be seen as a matter of convenience - not accuracy.

Edited by Leonardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Focusing on this event in Numbers 31, I'd like to head back a few chapters to Numbers 25. In this chapter, the Midianites entice the Jews away from Yahweh-worship and into worship of the Midianite gods (most likely including rituals of sex and other obscenely non-Jewish rites). This is in direct contradiction to the covenant, that they would be God's people. As a result, a plague is sent on Israel. This is God's punishment on Israel, and Israel repents. In Numbers 31, it is the Midianites time of judgement. God tells Moses to take vengeance, and that is what they do. This is the punishment of God on the Midiantes for turning Israel away from him.

~ Regards, PA

That is a very lame excuse for genocide. It was a land grab pure and simple.

Midianite, in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), member of a group of nomadic tribes related to theIsraelites and most likely living east of the Gulf of Aqaba in the northwestern regions of the Arabian Desert. They engaged in pastoral pursuits, caravan trading, and banditry, and their main contacts with the Israelites were from the period of the Exodus (13th century bce) through the period of the judges (12th–11th century bce). According to the Book of Judges, the Israelite chieftain Gideon drove the Midianites into western Palestine, after which they largely disappeared from the biblical narrative.

According to the Book of Genesis, the Midianites were descended from Midian, who was the son of the Hebrew patriarch Abraham by the latter’s second wife, Keturah. Jethro, priest-leader of the Midianite subtribe known as the Kenites, and his daughter Zipporah, a wife of Moses, influenced early Hebrew thought: it was Yahweh, the lord of the Midianites, who was revealed to Moses as the God of the Hebrews. Circumcision was practiced by the Midianites before it was adopted by the Israelites.

The Midianites traditionally have been identified as Ishmaelites, in part because of an unclear passage in Genesis (37:28) that refers to the traders to whom Joseph was sold by his brothers as both Midianites and Ishmaelites. In addition, the story of Gideon in Judges contains a verse (8:24) that includes an apparent interpolation identifying the Midianites as Ishmaelites.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/381574/Midianite

There appears to be a discrepancy in the history from someone here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On the matter of specifically women, I applaud the imagination of the OP in interpolating that all the women were raped to ensure none were virgins and then executed, but there are far more realistic answers. Of particular note, the Israelites had a set of laws dealing with marriage of prisoners of war. Rape was not allowed by the law of Yahweh, but marriage was. Women were an important commodity to nomadic tribal life - more women means more babies, more babies means larger tribe, larger tribe means greater chance of survival. In Hebrew culture, lineage is patriarchal so a foreign woman birthing a child from a Hebrew father is no problem to the racial purity of the Hebrews. This is far more likely than the wanton rape and execution of women. And again, this was Moses, not God who ordered such.

What do you think sex slavery was? I get it, it wasn't considered rape if you owned them. Still your explanation completely ignores concubinage. Edited by Rlyeh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Number 31:21

"And Eleazar the priest said unto the men of war which went to the battle, This is the ordinance of the law which the LORD commanded Moses;"

And so, your argument that these orders - to kill the non-virgin women already captive and to kill the captive male children, and then to take the virgin women and children as sex-slaves - came from Moses and was not the will or command of God, is contradicted in scripture. Yes, Numbers 31:2 is very brief when relaying what God spoke to Moses, but in context with later verses this brevity should be seen as a matter of convenience - not accuracy.

The comment that this was Moses and not God was rather incidental. Was Eleazar simply saying "this is what we think therefore this is what God commands"? Maybe you're right, and for the sake of argument let's say you are, and God did command this. Does anything change based on what God promised in Genesis 12?

That is a very lame excuse for genocide. It was a land grab pure and simple.

There appears to be a discrepancy in the history from someone here.

I was simply sharing the contextual consideration. I'm not "excusing" anything, simply explaining why genocide was acceptable within that cultural context but yet seen as abhorrent today, and (of more relevance to the thread) why a God of love is not disqualified simply by the events of one of these situations.

What do you think sex slavery was? I get it, it wasn't considered rape if you owned them. Still your explanation completely ignores concubinage.

Sex slavery is the intent of taking women for no other purpose than sex. Marriage is a covenant between God and the two individuals by which the two become one flesh. Many marriages in ancient times were not like today. And yes, "marital rape" was something that may have happened in these ancient socieites, I'm not disputing that. But marriage also carried with it a set of expectations that were to be followed, and simply saying that "they were concubines, prone to sex slavery" misunderstands everything that marriage was to the ancient Hebrews. I doubt my comments would change your opinion even if I were to share how this type of situation played out in ancient Hebrew civilisation, so I won't go out of my way to address them...
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The comment that this was Moses and not God was rather incidental. Was Eleazar simply saying "this is what we think therefore this is what God commands"? Maybe you're right, and for the sake of argument let's say you are, and God did command this. Does anything change based on what God promised in Genesis 12?

Which isn't really relevant to the question the OP asks, that being how to rationalise Numbers 31 with the Christian concept of a loving God. Unless you wish to argue that it is only the Israelites that God loves?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Sex slavery is the intent of taking women for no other purpose than sex. Marriage is a covenant between God and the two individuals by which the two become one flesh. Many marriages in ancient times were not like today. And yes, "marital rape" was something that may have happened in these ancient socieites, I'm not disputing that. But marriage also carried with it a set of expectations that were to be followed, and simply saying that "they were concubines, prone to sex slavery" misunderstands everything that marriage was to the ancient Hebrews. I doubt my comments would change your opinion even if I were to share how this type of situation played out in ancient Hebrew civilisation, so I won't go out of my way to address them...

What.. are we reading the same book? Mine says the Hebrews practiced concubinage, but you've dismissed that saying they only had sex with the women they married. Edited by Rlyeh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, do you believe it was God who told Moses to do these acts of killing/murder!

No, but based on the way the Israelites acted they certainly believed that he had.

I think the difference between the God of the OT and the NT is one of the reasons why Gnostic interpretations keep popping up. The original Gnostic Christianity vanished, but centuries later Catharism emerged with a very similar theology. Personally I'm more sympathetic to that interpretation than the orthodox one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Which isn't really relevant to the question the OP asks, that being how to rationalise Numbers 31 with the Christian concept of a loving God. Unless you wish to argue that it is only the Israelites that God loves?

I explained that in my first post. The promises of Genesis 12 show that God was Israel's God (the descendants of Abraham) and how that covnant is viewed as completed by Jesus, who initiated a new covenant with all humanity, not just the Hebrews. I also explained that I didn't expect the OP to agree, that I was simply sharing why I don't see it as a stumbling block to a God of Love, and I suppose that statement could be expanded to any non-believer, not just the OP.

What.. are we reading the same book? Mine says the Hebrews practiced concubinage, but you've dismissed that saying they only had sex with the women they married.

Concubines were a culturally accepted practice. As was polygamy (multiple wives). Neither, however, are endorsed by God. And certainly none of that goes to show that the Midianite women were used as "sex slaves", and certainly not the novel notion of the OP at the women were raped to ensure they weren't virgins, and then slaughtered along with the rest of the Midianites. These are fanciful interpolations of the events, not supported by how women of conquered tribes were married off to the tribe to make it stronger for the next generations. Edited by Paranoid Android

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.