 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Reading, decisionism and the Gospel
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Have we had a thread on the so-called Reading Outpouring yet?
I've only just come across this and have to say from the blogs and accounts I've read, I'm less than impressed.
What seems to be happening is that people are going out onto the streets with a highly prescriptive script that takes people through a few steps that culminates in 'a prayer of commitment to Christ.'
Some 1200 or so conversions have been claimed.
I am highly sceptical. I could take a script out onto the street taking people through steps to acknowledge the existence of The Flying Spaghetti Monster and if I were persistent enough I'm sure I could collect a few 'response cards.'
I don't doubt that people can and do come to faith through the 'sinner's prayer' and so on, but this seems to be systematising it to the nth degree.
Of course, many Calvinistic evangelicals would have an issue with this approach too.
It'll be yet another of these fleeting 'outpourings'. It could also inoculate some of the respondents to further engagement with the faith because they've prayed the magic prayer and think that's sufficient.
Not impressed.
What do others think?
[ 05. December 2016, 00:48: Message edited by: Gwai ]
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Link?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
I saw some stuff linked from Twitter, IIRC. Unsurprisingly a lot of concern and essentially saying "I call bullshit" even from often uncritical sources. I believe the 1200 claim includes re-commitments and from events not just street work.
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
Will re-post what I said on the manipulation thread:
Being fairly familiar with the area and a number of the churches named in the article I'm rather similarly dubious about the whole thing.
Reading in some ways is a very odd town - it has a particularly varied set of churches, and in addition a large population of students - many international - due to the university.
It's very easy to see - given this context - how one could get large numbers of 'conversions' by talking to cafeteria Christians/passers by and getting some indication of greater 'commitment'.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I'll dig out some links when I have more time.
To me, 're-commitments' is a term that is just as meaningless as the term 'commitment'.
You can get people to parrot any old thing. I know loads of instances of people being 'led' through a 'Prayer of 'Commitment' who hadn't the foggiest idea what they were supposed to be doing. You could get anyone to read something off a card and then claim this was some kind of life-changing experience.
It's twaddle.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
As chris stiles mentions, we discussed this quite a bit, with links, from about here onwards. I was thinking it deserved its own thread, though.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
An utter travesty.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Back in 1970s America, there was the "I Found It!" campaign. (It = "new life in Jesus Christ".) Lots of publicity. There was probably some one-on-one work, but I don't remember it.
There were some interesting responses, like the Jewish "We Never Lost It!", etc. Probably some examples online.
I think I and other fundies had a mixed reaction to it.
I'm not fond of the kind of wholesale witnessing described in the OP. I did some, back in the day (though in a different style and venue, and mostly with kids), and feel bad about some of it.
*But* I don't necessarily agree with what was said upthread that it's all for nothing. I know that sometimes I've bumped into the right thing at the right time, or some idea I picked up long ago finally clicked.
So it's slightly possible that something good, however small, sometimes comes from this kind of witnessing--whether or not it specifically results in becoming a Christian (or whatever other belief system does it).
I think this kind of Christian witnessing makes more sense to people who believe you MUST make a specific decision for Christ, or go to hell. (No longer my belief--and never completely was.)
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
Sure, it is healthy to distrust slick formulas for facilitating personal evanglelism (decades ago it was The Four Spiritual Laws:"God loves you, and has a wonderful plan for your life...."), and reports of alleged mass conversions thereby.
OTOH, given Christianity's universal claims, and inherent imperative to proselytise (as Brunner famously wrote, "the church exists by mission, just as a fire exists by burning"), and given the abject laziness and cowardice of 99% of Christians in doing anything about it (I have tried street evangelism, and it sucks), ISTM that it ill-behoves us to prioritise the dissection and condemnation of the methods of those who at least have the guts to try it.
And let's face it, there is no silver bullet when it comes to cross-cultural mission.
Any first attempts to communicate Christianity to pagans, in 2!st century Britain or any other time and place, are going to come across as simplistic and inadequate.
It's good clean healthy fun, of course, to diss bright-eyed and bushy-tailed young evangelicals "witnessing" in Reading, but church history is full of failures of communication and comprehension by all traditions as a result of the clash of incompatible cultures.
In mid-16th century India the RC Portugese baptised 10,000 illiterate Tamil fisherman, then left them for years without any Christian teaching until Francis Xavier tried to sort them out.
For all their good intentions, and long-term contributions to literacy, it is difficult to imagine that even Cyril and Methodius established instantaneous theological rapport with ninth century illiterate Slavs, either.
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
It's good clean healthy fun, of course, to diss bright-eyed and bushy-tailed young evangelicals "witnessing" in Reading
I have long sought to live in line with Paul's approach, "the Gospel is preached, and in this I rejoice"... coupled with his acknowledgements in the very same passage and elsewhere that some do so in inappropriate ways and/or from wrong motives.
As far as I'm concerned this is inappropriate: the decisionism is highly questionable and the credentials of the instigating evangelist Tommie Zito are not well-established (there is basically no biographical information about him whatsoever on his site). Mistakes in centuries past are no justification for repeating them.
I think there's absolutely no reason why a critical look should not be taken at what people are doing in the name of the Gospel. A degree of mutual accountability within the church at large is a healthy thing. I know from experience that evangelical institutions can be absolutely spineless when it comes to addressing this sort of thing, and the evangelical media often little better.
So for as long as this Ship sails, this is precisely the kind of thing we should be discussing.
[ 22. August 2016, 05:29: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by me, here:Uh-oh. What is it about the summer months (and or places named Redding? ![[Biased]](wink.gif) ).
Guess what. The church runs (or has run) a School of Supernatural Ministry and previously hosted a healing and prophetic conference by Chris Gore from our old friends at Bethel, Redding, California.
Also posted by me, here: quote:
Just look back at places like Cwmbran and Dudley. They have basically morphed into hosting pentecostal/charismatic conferences.
I am very suspicious of this new "succession of conferences plus courses" model. It's much easier for hit-and-run speakers to turn a fast buck (with all the merchandising spinoffs) and create media hype, draining resources from a local church and surrounding ones, than to actually establish a long-term, meaningful presence in the community.
Courses also cost money and take people away from their local churches to exclusivist settings with no local oversight or accountability.
When a locality runs out of steam, the brand just moves on to some other venue and starts all over again.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Guess what. The church runs (or has run) a School of Supernatural Ministry and previously hosted a healing and prophetic conference by Chris Gore from our old friends at Bethel, Redding, California.
ISTR someone I know mentioned that Bill Johnson had also spoken at the same church (within the last year or so - he also visited back in 2009).
quote:
I am very suspicious of this new "succession of conferences plus courses" model. It's much easier for hit-and-run speakers to turn a fast buck (with all the merchandising spinoffs) and create media hype
I hadn't really thought about this before - that's a good observation. In 'fairness' to Bethel their model seems to move from succession of conference->associated church, along the lines of the Willow Creek model (though maybe a much tighter integration because of the way in which they establish schools of prophecy, which then serve as the hub of activity).
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
The Bethelized church nearest to me consists largely of a succession of special events and courses that draw on charismatic junkies from a much broader swath of churches. In my observation these courses are essentially a charismatic variation on personal development.
Some of the younger participants end up going to Redding and joining their Supernatural School of Ministry - for one or more years. I know several such people.
"Conference to associated church" is right. Can anyone point to a church Bethel has actually planted? In my observation, it siphons off people and resources from newly "associated" churches.
In this scenario, a local church is little more than a target market ready to be sucked into a branded pipeline, structured on an entirely worldly marketing basis, with no local accountability. Oh, with the promise of "anointing" ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Have we had a thread on the so-called Reading Outpouring yet?
I've only just come across this and have to say from the blogs and accounts I've read, I'm less than impressed.
What seems to be happening is that people are going out onto the streets with a highly prescriptive script that takes people through a few steps that culminates in 'a prayer of commitment to Christ.'
Some 1200 or so conversions have been claimed.
Last week on another thread I placed this link from our denominational website and expressed - shall we say? - a certain amount of caution. Others may have more up-to-date information. I'm afraid I've became very sceptical in my old age.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
The test of evangelism is in the number of people who follow through on a confession of faith (wherever given) and join a Christian community. So I'd be interested to know by the end of the year how many people are going to churches who previously weren't. Anecdotally (from people I've spoken to who have visited Reading) a number of churches have reported a significant increase in people coming to church to enquire about the Christian faith.
The advantage of working to a script is that it makes it easy for people to get involved - some 400 Christians from a variety of mainline Christian churches have been sharing their faith on the streets of Reading.
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I could take a script out onto the street taking people through steps to acknowledge the existence of The Flying Spaghetti Monster and if I were persistent enough I'm sure I could collect a few 'response cards.'
If going out with a script gave you the chance to start some conversations about Christ with people who don't currently follow Him, is that better or worse than having no conversations at all?
--------------------
'
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
If going out with a script gave you the chance to start some conversations about Christ with people who don't currently follow Him, is that better or worse than having no conversations at all?
It could well be worse, when you consider how many people you have potentially turned right off by making them think that becoming a Christian is so mechanistic.
The script in question is decidedly and unashamedly decisionist, and if you look at his website, so is Zito. His site is full of pictures of cities with an alleged tally of souls beneath each one after each of his crusades (his word, scroll down the page for the tallies).
From the other thread: quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
The crib sheet is not really my cup of tea, but I'm assuming that it acted as a spur to conversation. Individuals would've had to open up about themselves and talk about faith.
That's precisely what it's not designed to do. (For the avoidance of doubt, here it is again (part 1, part 2) quote:
If they do not say "I have Jesus in my heart/I am born again" go with the script
It's designed to elicit a decision and nothing else.
As Martin says, this is a travesty of what coming to faith means, and a way of generating impressive numbers easily. There are plenty of equally effective ways of starting conversations about Christ that are much more respectful both of the hearer and of the message; they just don't make for such attractive and misleading headlines.
[ 22. August 2016, 10:56: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Can anyone point to a church Bethel has actually planted? In my observation, it siphons off people and resources from newly "associated" churches.
Just for info on that, Bethel don't plant churches - they make resources available for churches to use.
--------------------
'
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
For my take on what that actually means, see here.
[ 22. August 2016, 11:04: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
If going out with a script gave you the chance to start some conversations about Christ with people who don't currently follow Him, is that better or worse than having no conversations at all?
It could well be worse, when you consider how many people you have potentially turned right off by making them think that becoming a Christian is so mechanistic.
.
Any evidence that anyone has been "turned off?" Or is the evidence to the contrary?
I know of at least one of the local church leaders involved who has said that filling in a decision card doesn't make you a Christian. The people on the ground are more sensible than that.
The headline that interest me is that 100s of Christians are having 100s of conversations about Christ on the streets of Reading. Time will tell what comes of this and what we can learn from it.
--------------------
'
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
"Conference to associated church" is right. Can anyone point to a church Bethel has actually planted? In my observation, it siphons off people and resources from newly "associated" churches.
In this scenario, a local church is little more than a target market ready to be sucked into a branded pipeline, structured on an entirely worldly marketing basis, with no local accountability. Oh, with the promise of "anointing"
So I suppose the question that would then arise would be to what extent this differs from a traditional denomination.
To which I suppose the answer would be that a centralised denomination at least takes some modicum of responsibility for the outcome of the work of each church, whereas the way Bethel operates is more like a franchise. You pay the pledge, get put on a list of Bethelized churches, and get a set of courses/schools/events that you can plug into, with the possibility of one or two annual junkets to the mothership.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
"Conference to associated church" is right. Can anyone point to a church Bethel has actually planted? In my observation, it siphons off people and resources from newly "associated" churches.
In this scenario, a local church is little more than a target market ready to be sucked into a branded pipeline, structured on an entirely worldly marketing basis, with no local accountability. Oh, with the promise of "anointing"
So I suppose the question that would then arise would be to what extent this differs from a traditional denomination.
To which I suppose the answer would be that a centralised denomination at least takes some modicum of responsibility for the outcome of the work of each church, whereas the way Bethel operates is more like a franchise. You pay the pledge, get put on a list of Bethelized churches, and get a set of courses/schools/events that you can plug into, with the possibility of one or two annual junkets to the mothership.
Bit of a tangent, but whilst we're on it. There's no exclusive "Bethel network." So take the example of the latest UK conference at which Bill Johnson was the main speaker. Attendees came from a wide variety of churches. Some of these people also meet together because they share a common interest in Bethel teaching. They are also actively invovled in their own denominations or streams.
If you think Bethel is just about hype and marketing you need to give the people who buy into this stuff a bit more credit. Some of their stuff is quite culture specific and doesn't translate to the UK, but a wide variety of churches continue to find aspects of Bethel ministry highly beneficial. There are few "Bethel junkie" churches (I am very familiar with one) but most of the people I know (and that's a lot of people) who draw on resources from Bethel also enrich their ministry and spirituality from other places.
--------------------
'
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
Bit of a tangent, but whilst we're on it. There's no exclusive "Bethel network."
Yes, I understand that - the comments were not indicative of an exclusivist approach - though some of the examples I'm thinking of have led to churches growing their connections with other Bethel-influenced churches at the expense of their other contacts.
quote:
If you think Bethel is just about hype and marketing you need to give the people who buy into this stuff a bit more credit. Some of their stuff is quite culture specific and doesn't translate to the UK, but a wide variety of churches continue to find aspects of Bethel ministry highly beneficial.
I don't think it's all hype and marketing, but would largely agree with Eutychus that much of it is just 'personal development' teaching dressed up in spiritual language. You and I will have to disagree on how much value this provides.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Ok - let's back up a bit ...
Firstly, Kaplan is right to remind us that the evangelical tradition isn't the only one to have yielded facile or shallow 'conversions'.
It's questionable how much some of the RC converts in the Far East and in Latin America actually understood about the faith - at least in the first instance.
As far as Cyrill and Methodius go, I don't think anyone is claiming instant and over-night success in their case. The Orthodox I know see their work as providing a base for gradual, longer term Christianisation of the Slavic peoples.
Both the RCs and the Orthodox think in centuries.
That said, both those traditions can go in for short-term equivalents of 'decisionism' too. I remember reading about a visit Archbishop Makarios made to Kenya during which he baptised thousands of Kenyans. He acknowledged himself that many of these knew absolutely diddly-squat about the Christian faith but simply wanted to be baptised by a 'celebrity' figure known for his anti-colonial political activism.
Some Kenyans, Ugandans and other Africans have gravitated towards the Orthodox Church because it wasn't associated with the colonial authorities in their part of the world - unlike Anglicanism and other Western churches.
All that said, I don't think that any of that offers an excuse or a 'get out of jail free' card for what we're seeing in Reading. However, if 'mainstream' churches do get on board and have 'conversations' as Ramarius puts it then yes, some good could come out of it.
The Gospel is a glorious thing and cannot be reduced to a series of sound-bites on some kind of crass questionnaire or scripted card.
Of course, such a thing could help to focus effort and the trajectory of the conversation, but that's as far as it goes.
I well remember going out with Campus Crusade in my university days armed with the 'Four Spiritual Laws'. I used to hate doing it but I did it.
On one occasion, a more mature student asked me to put away the script and explain to her directly why I was a Christian and why I was doing what I was doing that day.
So I put away the awful tracts and scripts and tried to explain to her as well as I could how I'd come to faith and what it meant to me.
She listened, thanked me and said as we parted that she'd gained a lot from what I'd said and how much better the conversation had flowed once I'd put the script in my pocket.
Would I have gone out there without the script in the first place? Probably not. What the script did do was give me a reason and purpose to go up to complete strangers and try to 'witness' to them.
Having meaningful conversations about Christ is one thing, engaging in a tick-box exercise about so-called 'decisions' is something else again.
I don't see anyone here dismissing efforts at evangelism - many of those advising caution and questioning the approach here are themselves evangelicals.
No, the issue isn't evangelism, it's 'decisionism'.
There's also a distinction to be made between evangelism and evangelisation - the later is a longer term process that involves the steady enculturation of the Gospel in any given society - which, of course, brings its own risks in terms of nominalism, cultural or folk religion and so on - so yes, there are both/ands and pros and cons on all sides.
However, the bottom-line for me in all of this is that I firmly believe that there is a toxicity at the heart of the whole Bethel (and related) forms of high-octane charismania.
I'm sorry, but I really believe there is. At its worst it leads to a kind of carcinogenic, fast-food Christianity where all the nutrients have been squeezed out by the hype, the over-egged (and over-hyped) expectations and flakey theology that these people promulgate.
I know I annoy people with my attempts at balance and equivocation - both/and not either/or and so on but I'm afraid I am not in the least bit balanced or tolerant when it comes to Bethel or anything veering towards that kind of approach.
I have zero-tolerance for it. Zero-tolerance.
I don't care what its apologists say, it is wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.
I would no more invite a Bethelite to a conference or an event than I would a Mormon or a JW.
Ok, that's hyperbolic but it ain't far from where I find myself on this one.
Bethel is wrong. Completely and utterly wrong. I would have nothing whatsoever to do with it in any way, shape or form.
I am unequivocal about that.
As far as street evangelism goes, well, wait and see - but my suspicion is that some of the techniques in Reading are counter-productive. 'I've prayed that prayer thing on the card, I don't need to do anything else.'
Yes, Ramarius, I don't doubt that many of those on the ground are smarter than we might give them credit for - but there are times when the commonsense gives way to the hype and the flannel. I've seen it happen.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Yes, Ramarius, I don't doubt that many of those on the ground are smarter than we might give them credit for - but there are times when the commonsense gives way to the hype and the flannel. I've seen it happen.
And you think these people haven't? Found your other comments on mass conversion interesting. Conversely, I was hearing about someone this last weekend who grudgingly "prayed the prayer" (to shut someone up who was witnessing to them) had a powerful encounter with Christ, became a committed Christian and is now a minister in a denominational church.
So as I say, rather than superimposing personal past experience onto someone else's current experience, maybe we should take the advice of the feller you derived your monica from and see how this pans out.
@Chris - thanks for the clarification.
--------------------
'
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sure, I'm not saying they haven't seen it before, Ramarius. They may well have seen it before a lot more than I have.
But please don't patronise me otherwise I will be forced to take you to Hell.
Let me state in the most unequivocal terms possible. Bethel is wrong. I don't think you've clocked how bad it is.
Please don't misunderstand me, I am not against evangelicals nor evangelicalism per se.
But there's something very toxic that is entering the bloodstream of even the most sensible forms of charismatic evangelicalism.
We can live with poison in our system for a while but eventually it will get the better of us.
Better to remove it while there's still time.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
The advantage of working to a script is that it makes it easy for people to get involved - some 400 Christians from a variety of mainline Christian churches have been sharing their faith on the streets of Reading.
Or making complete and utter pains in the arse of themselves, depending on your perspective.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Yes, Ramarius, I don't doubt that many of those on the ground are smarter than we might give them credit for - but there are times when the commonsense gives way to the hype and the flannel. I've seen it happen.
And you think these people haven't? Found your other comments on mass conversion interesting. Conversely, I was hearing about someone this last weekend who grudgingly "prayed the prayer" (to shut someone up who was witnessing to them) had a powerful encounter with Christ, became a committed Christian and is now a minister in a denominational church.
Doing evil once actually resulted in good, so we should continue doing evil? What's a good ratio? If we drive 1000 people away from Christ and 1 person gets saved, is that a good ratio?
(ps it's "moniker")
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Back in 1970s America, there was the "I Found It!" campaign. (It = "new life in Jesus Christ".) Lots of publicity. There was probably some one-on-one work, but I don't remember it.
I remember this. Lots of bumper stickers. Followed with an "I lost it" bumper sticker parody.
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
The test of evangelism is in the number of people who follow through on a confession of faith (wherever given) and join a Christian community.
Why they must join a church?
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Ramarius, if you had read my posts properly (and I apologise for the length), you will have seen that I firmly believe that people can and do have genuine conversions through praying 'the sinner's prayer' and so on.
I have never said otherwise.
Something that Dr Andrew Walker the sociologist wrote in one of his books struck a chord with me and has remained with me since I first read it.
He observed that for all its strengths, one of the weaknesses of evangelicalism was that it was inclined to be overly pragmatic - if something was seen to 'work' it would be taken on board and systematised regardless of whatever weaknesses there might be in the approach.
So, a whole raft of things - altar-calls, decision-cards and so on have become part and parcel of evangelical outreach activity regardless of how some of the consequences of these approaches can be harmful.
It can become Machiavellian at the extremes.
Of course, sitting back on our backsides and doing nothing isn't the way forward either.
Nor is a slavish observance of tradition or Tradition without attempting to engage properly with the surrounding culture.
I'm not singling evangelicalism out for criticism. I could give equal and opposite examples of bad practice elsewhere.
But to advocate particular practices simply because they seem to 'work' with some people isn't a good strategy in my view.
It leads to short-cuts and a lack of critical thinking and reflection to a certain extent.
Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying that everyone involved in the Reading thing is some kind of dork.
Far from it.
But at the extreme end of it they'll find it turning round and biting them on the backside before too long if it hasn't begun to do so already.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
Any evidence that anyone has been "turned off?" Or is the evidence to the contrary?
Go on any non-christian discussion site and read threads where Christianity comes up, and you find frequent gifs like this one.
quote:
I know of at least one of the local church leaders involved who has said that filling in a decision card doesn't make you a Christian. The people on the ground are more sensible than that.
Then you should be first in the queue of people complaining when the Christian media use headlines like "Unprecedented" openness to the gospel reported in Reading as 1,200 make commitments to Christ.
Tommie Zito's site in the "crusades" section refers to 53000 "souls" in Wisconsin, 19000 in Miami, and so on. Do you really think he's implying "conversations" there, or conversions?
"Having conversations" is clearly not a position adopted in the material used, nor by the evangelist at the origins of all this. People are being encouraged to nurture double standards and cognitive dissonance; count me out.
quote:
The headline that interest me is that 100s of Christians are having 100s of conversations about Christ on the streets of Reading. Time will tell what comes of this and what we can learn from it.
I disagree. If we think bad methodology, bad reporting and bad teaching are present, then we have every interest in saying so.
I have had first-hand contact with Christians whose argument in defence of their favourite evangelist, whose testimony was incontrovertibly proven to be false, up to and including fabricating entire evangelistic events and the associated conversions, was to continue to trot out "but just look at the good his ministry is doing".
This kind of thinking is overwhelmingly damaging to the integrity of the Gospel message. The fact that God used Balaam's ass once is absolutely zero justification for giving a free pass to rotten evangelistic methods.
[ 22. August 2016, 16:14: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
most of the people I know (and that's a lot of people) who draw on resources from Bethel also enrich their ministry and spirituality from other places.
Yes, and while I'm in a root-and-bough frame of mind, I'd chuck 90% of those "other places" in the bin too.
Not so much because of specific theological deficiencies (although I think these thrive in such contexts), but because of their business model (and it is a business model no matter what you say).
This involves drawing on a captive population (churchgoers) established together at no cost to the organisation - a population which it then bombards with advertising and marketing, and builds loyalty with through the usual range of products and bonding events, sucking resources from local churches.
They allow far too much scope for self-promotion and profit-making without any local accountabilty whatsoever. Unlike a local church, they are results-driven by nature (to justify their existence) with an attendant creep to systematisation (such as decisionism) and the temptation to inflate, exaggerate, and brush over failures - all in the name of the Gospel.
They over-complexify and over-monetise Christianity, tie up resources and man-hours, and pass off utterly worldly practices as holy.
And before you think this is borne merely out of my experience, I've been thinking more or less along these lines ever since reading the 1975 book Cinderella with Amnesia by Michael Griffiths some time in the early 80s (IIRC).
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
guthrum
Shipmate
# 8446
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
I have had first-hand contact with Christians whose argument in defence of their favourite evangelist, whose testimony was incontrovertibly proven to be false, up to and including fabricating entire evangelistic events and the associated conversions, was to continue to trot out "but just look at the good his ministry is doing".
And worse than that there is a willingness in some circles to consciously suspend disbelief whilst enjoying the high of the latest thing before moving on to the next with little thought of the damage left behind. There will without doubt be people in the churches in Reading questioning what is happening who will be subject of all kinds of pressures to conform or keep quiet. Been there, been on the receiving end of bullying and mind games over that kind of thing and it isn't pretty, but strangely when people's faith is destroyed it doesn't seem to have any weight in the balance against the claimed conversions.
Posts: 62 | From: SW England | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
Any evidence that anyone has been "turned off?" Or is the evidence to the contrary?
Go on any non-christian discussion site and read threads where Christianity comes up, and you find frequent gifs like this one.
Evidence of people being turned off in Reading? (since that's the subject of the thread). You'll always get some people turned off by Christianity - that we have martyrs.
The substance of what is or isn't happening in Reading will emerge in time. I'm not prejudging that by the way some people are reporting it, or the way others are commending on the reporting.
--------------------
'
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, all of that Eutychus.
Back in the day, I was involved in a 'tent crusade' that purportedly saw almost 1,000 'conversions' - and this was touted in a boastful way as being more than those recorded at a similar crusade the previous year which featured an internationally known evangelist and input from a wide range of evangelical churches across the city.
The implication was that we, as a church, were really at the cutting-edge of what 'God was doing' because, single-handedly, we'd seen more conversions than the others ...
How many people did we see in church after the 'crusade' and how many remained after all the excitement had died down?
Less than half a dozen.
Sure, I know people who were genuinely converted through both these events - but in all cases they were people with a nominally Christian background who'd found or become more fervent in their faith as they became more involved with the various churches which took part.
One could argue that the tent crusades themselves simply acted as a catalyst - the real difference with these people was a gradual one as they became 'socialised' into the various churches involved.
I'm not one for counting heads or quantifying 'results' in spiritual terms ... but of all those who 'raised their hands' or 'came down the front', how many were really engaging in any meaningful way with the Gospel?
One could say the same, of course, in historic or traditional churches where many people don't darken the doors of church from one Easter or Christmas to the next.
I'm not singling out any one particular tradition for criticism.
But, it seems to me, by their very nature some of these revivalist methods lend themselves to manipulation, hype and over-exaggerated claims.
On the 'manipulation thread' we've had instances of how this stuff works - we have a sliding scale from 'conversions' to 'recommitments' (whatever that means) to 'conversations' ...
What on earth are we talking about here?
Is someone going to an Easter vigil in a high-ish Anglican parish and renewing their baptismal vows making a 'recommitment'?
Is someone raising their hand or 'going forward' in an evangelistic rally to 'rededicate' themselves to Christ doing so for genuine reasons or out of peer-pressure?
Who knows?
How can we tell?
'By their fruits ye shall know them ...'
Being a pietistic pain in the arse isn't necessarily 'good fruit' any more than being a censorious Puritan or an obsessive, anally-retentive 'Spike' who can tell you everything - and more - than you need to know about the eastward-position or the contents of the thurible ...
There are better, and more biblical, measures available.
You can have as many 'good conversations' with people in Reading as you can shake a stick at, but if it involves a dumbed-down presentation of the Gospel and a skewed form of evaluation then yes, count me out too.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Sure, I'm not saying they haven't seen it before, Ramarius. They may well have seen it before a lot more than I have.
But please don't patronise me otherwise I will be forced to take you to Hell.
Which, incidentally, is itself a patronising remark.
To move the discussion into more productive territory, what examples of street evangelism have you seen/heard/been part of that constitute some kind of good practice?
--------------------
'
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
[/qb][/QUOTE]
The substance of what is or isn't happening in Reading will emerge in time. I'm not prejudging that by the way some people are reporting it, or the way others are commending on the reporting. [/QB][/QUOTE]
I'd suggest that's a cop-out.
I think we can judge what's happening in Reading because it's happened elsewhere and we have plenty of precedents, both in our own collective experiences and from church history.
Based on that, I think we can say that some of the 'conversations' that are happening will, in some cases, encourage a genuine interest in the Christian faith.
And to that extent, we can rejoice.
But to claim that it's an 'unprecedented' event or involves previously unknown levels of interest is clearly over-optimistic.
We don't have to be cynical old farts to recognise that.
We've seen all of this before. It's not the first time over-exaggerated claims of mass conversions - or even mass conversations - have been made.
Nor will it be the last.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
Evidence of people being turned off in Reading? (since that's the subject of the thread).
quote:
People were open to talking. People were open to being prayed for. People were happy to pray a prayer of commitment to Christ. Not everybody. But when we all got back together 74 had done! One of our guys Adam Clewer prayed for 17 people to make response to Christ.
That's from a generally favourable blogpost (note the figures!).
quote:
The substance of what is or isn't happening in Reading will emerge in time. I'm not prejudging that by the way some people are reporting it, or the way others are commending on the reporting.
There are links in this thread, not to reporting, but to actual materials used and the actual website of the originating evangelist.
And I think the reporting cited is misleading and overblown, and that deliberately or not, the fudging of "commitments" and "recommitments" is fundamentally dishonest. If it were a politician acting thus, we'd be all over them.
That's before we've even started on any discussion of the soundness or otherwise of decisionist evangelism, or whether one fortunate soul actually gets saved despite the crap methods and whether this justifies their use unchallenged.
As I have already posted, no doubt despite it all the "Gospel is preached and in this I rejoice".
But I think simply hunkering down and saying "well, we'll see how this turns out" is an abdication on the part of the body of Christ from holding each other mutually accountable for how we present the Gospel.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
[Doing evil once actually resulted in good, so we should continue doing evil? What's a good ratio? If we drive 1000 people away from Christ and 1 person gets saved, is that a good ratio?
(ps it's "moniker")
Reminds me of something Paul said.
Thanks for the spell check - send Monica my regards when you see her.
--------------------
'
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Ramarius, I am warning you ... you patronised me first. Hence my riposte.
I will not hesitate to call you to Hell if you patronise me again.
As for examples of street evangelism I've seen that exemplify good practice ...
I've given an example already. The time when I packed away the script and spoke to the maturer student about my faith with her permission and without trying to force the issue.
I've also seen 'beach missions' and conservative evangelical street missions with flip-boards and so on which - whilst not being exactly to my taste - were engaging and didn't stray into manipulative territory.
However, the vast majority of street witnessing I've seen or have engaged in have been pretty embarrassing or counter-productive in various ways.
I've done loads of door-knocking in my time. Once or twice I had a pretty good and 'natural' conversation about the Christian faith when engaged in that kind of activity.
Thinking about it, one particularly memorable example came when I was door-knocking in some student flats and met a girl who had grown up in the Elim Pentecostal church and rejected it, and her flat-mate whose parents were Orthodox.
'That's interesting,' I said, 'I've never met an Orthodox Christian before. Can you tell me about it?'
She said nothing but looked at me suspiciously. I have no idea whether she thought I was engaging in a ploy to get her to talk about her faith in order to contradict it or whether she wasn't really engaged in it ...
But I remember making a mental note to engage with an Orthodox Christian the next time I encountered one ...
Perhaps it was me who was being evangelised ... subliminally ...
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
More seriously, I do think there are ways of engaging with people in authentic ways through street evangelism of some kind - but for the life of me I can't think of many methods that resonate with me.
If pressed, I'd say that some forms of conservative evangelical 'street-work' strikes a chord - provided it's not too ranty.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
guthrum
Shipmate
# 8446
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
To move the discussion into more productive territory, what examples of street evangelism have you seen/heard/been part of that constitute some kind of good practice?
Hope this was a general good question and you don't mind me chipping in.
I recall being stopped in the street by two Mormon missionaries who asked for a recommendation for somewhere to eat. They asked about my faith and seemed willing to listen. They made themselves vulnerable, didn't start from the assumption that I was probably not a person of faith nor did they give the impression that my beliefs being different to theirs was a problem to be corrected. In fact they seemed pleased that I had something to say about what I believed. I was curious about their faith and their mission trip. We parted on good terms knowing a little more about each other. I was glad to have met them. I came away from the encounter with a good impression of them and their church, I felt we had some common grounds as human beings and that is helpful when it comes to loving our neighbour so I guess they helped me live my faith a little better too. Pretty good practice in my book.
Posts: 62 | From: SW England | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
Evidence of people being turned off in Reading? (since that's the subject of the thread).
quote:
People were open to talking. People were open to being prayed for. People were happy to pray a prayer of commitment to Christ. Not everybody. But when we all got back together 74 had done! One of our guys Adam Clewer prayed for 17 people to make response to Christ.
That's from a generally favourable blogpost (note the figures!).
That someone isn't happy to be prayed with doesn't mean they have been "put off" Christianity. They may simply be indifferent.
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
As I have already posted, no doubt despite it all the "Gospel is preached and in this I rejoice".
But I think simply hunkering down and saying "well, we'll see how this turns out" is an abdication on the part of the body of Christ from holding each other mutually accountable for how we present the Gospel.
Well I don't think too many people in Reading are that interested in what get discussed here. Looks to me like they are thinking very seriously about what they are doing.
--------------------
'
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
[Doing evil once actually resulted in good, so we should continue doing evil? What's a good ratio? If we drive 1000 people away from Christ and 1 person gets saved, is that a good ratio?
(ps it's "moniker")
Reminds me of something Paul said.
Exactly my point.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
I don't think too many people in Reading are that interested in what get discussed here. Looks to me like they are thinking very seriously about what they are doing.
It is evident from the literature and from the various claims that cognitive dissonance is at full throttle, for instance the constant fudging between "commitments" and "recommitments" in the claims. If people are going to think seriously about what they are doing, this cognitive dissonance will impede them from doing so. That deserves to be pointed out.
And if they've been listening to Bill Johnson, they will actively have been discouraged from taking notice of reality intruding into the rhetoric by declarations such as "you can't build a doctrine out of a disappointment".
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
what examples of street evangelism have you seen/heard/been part of that constitute some kind of good practice?
First, my credentials. I have done hundreds and hundreds of evangelistic talks using a sketchboard in dozens of outdoor locations across France, translated a manual to train other preachers and led multiple sessions to train people in doing it. I must have engaged in thousands of conversations about Christ on the street. I began my career as an interpreter doing consecutive translation of street preaching in Paris in the mid-80s.
In my book, good evangelism is, amongst other things:
- something people are free to walk away from without feeling pressured. Many people do when the name of Jesus is mentioned. Then again, others actually arrive at that point and stay
- something done in a way such that, inasmuch as is within our power, the only offence caused is the "offence of the cross". Or as Adrian Plass put it, ensure we are being a fool for Christ and not a twit for Christ
- something that does not use any deceptive or dishonest methods
- something that is reported on/testified about with absolute honesty
- something that is not in any way focused on the hearers reaching a decision. This completely changes the dynamic both for those entrusted with doing it (it takes the pressure off) and of the interactions that take place.
quote:
Reminds me of something Paul said.
As mousethief has pointed out, I could hardly think of a better argument as to why bad evangelism should not be allowed to go unchallenged.
[ 22. August 2016, 17:57: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Or as Adrian Plass put it, ensure we are being a fool for Christ and not a twit for Christ
Or to put it in the vernacular, we're being a fool for Christ and not a tool for Christ.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, indeed, and the proof positive that some - I said 'some' - of these people in Reading aren't thinking at all seriously about what they're doing is found in the examples in their literature and accounts that Eutychus has cited and highlighted.
If they were thinking seriously they wouldn't inflate, they wouldn't fudge nor would they attempt to cut corners.
I'm sorry, Ramarius but I'm afraid that your commendable interest in evangelism and in the power of the Gospel seems to be matched by a degree of credulity in this instance and some wishful thinking.
Now, that may lay me open to the charge of patronising you .. and I'd understand that.
But it's not my intention.
With the best will in the world, I don't trust some of the sources behind this - and I certainly don't trust Bethel nor Bill Johnson.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
But then, Mousethief, to paraphrase a well-known NT passage ...
'The hand cannot say to the tool, I have no need of thee ...'
(or should that be the other way round ... )
Or, 'The ear cannot say to the arsehole (asshole to you) I have no need of thee ...'
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
@Eutychus. Shame the Ship doesn't allow you to link to your book. I'll see if I can track it down.
Interested in your comment about not seeking a decision. The call to "repent" is at the heart of the Gospel - which is surely a call to a decision. That's not to diminish the value of just presenting the Gospel and leaving people space to reflect on it or give them other avenues to explore. Paul gave no call to repentance in Athens for example.
I'm sure you've thought about this - just not covered it in your post.
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
But then, Mousethief, to paraphrase a well-known NT passage ...
'The hand cannot say to the tool, I have no need of thee ...'
(or should that be the other way round ... )
Or, 'The ear cannot say to the arsehole (asshole to you) I have no need of thee ...'
A body that had not got one would become very puffed up very quickly.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
But then, Mousethief, to paraphrase a well-known NT passage ...
'The hand cannot say to the tool, I have no need of thee ...'
(or should that be the other way round ... )
Or, 'The ear cannot say to the arsehole (asshole to you) I have no need of thee ...'
I hope you don't mean this seriously. Just because I can't dismiss someone as a Christian doesn't mean I can't criticize what they're doing. Just because the hand can't disown the foot doesn't mean the foot should go on kicking street people or stepping on sleeping dogs.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Pages in this thread: 1 2
|
Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
