RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Salvation Issues



Message

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/4/2008 5:15:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

When a person comes forward they are certainly evidencing belief. Whether or not they are evidencing saving faith is another question.
True, no one can know the heart of another; but, we are making the assumption it is saving faith. Otherwise, little would be left to discuss.

quote:

Based upon Scripture I don't see the Holy Spirit washing away a person's sins when they believe.
I agree "believing" has nothing to do with regeneration. This is made absolutely clear in John 3:8.

quote:

I see that occuring when a person is baptized.
But, you have no evidence anywhere that "water" baptism is the time and place of regeneration. And John 3 actually contradicts such a thing. Truly, you place a time, place and action restraint on God. We do find that sins are washed away by the Holy Spirit having no relation to water baptism. One such passage is Titus 3:5 "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;"

quote:

It is still the Holy Spirit washing away sin, though, whether it happens when one believes or when one is baptized.
Actually, it's neither - believing or water baptism. God performs this miracle of regeneration in the life of the sinner so that faith will come about. It is wholly the action of God not conditioned upon our faith or water baptism.

quote:

Even though they are both necessary in precisely the same way, belief and the baptism don't, in and of themselves, wash away sins. Only the Holy Spirit does that.
No, neither are "necessary" for the Holy Spirit to "wash away" our sins. Faith and other good works, such as water baptism, will follow regeneration.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/4/2008 7:53:01 AM)

VCO,

I appreciate your personal testimony and I have no doubt that God did a great work in your life, Praise Him!!

But your personal testimony is just that -- it's personal. It does not rise to the level of Scripture and should not be used as an example of how God works in everyone's life. Especially when Scripture presents a somewhat different picture of how salvation occurs.

Nevertheless, God certainly did a marvelous and merciful work in your life and I'm overjoyed that He did and that you are now a child of His. Praise Him!!



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/4/2008 8:03:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

quote:

Based upon Scripture I don't see the Holy Spirit washing away a person's sins when they believe.
I agree "believing" has nothing to do with regeneration. This is made absolutely clear in John 3:8.
I don't think "believing" has "nothing" to do with regeneration. I just don't think it occurs instantaneously when we believe.

quote:

quote:

I see that occuring when a person is baptized.
But, you have no evidence anywhere that "water" baptism is the time and place of regeneration. And John 3 actually contradicts such a thing. Truly, you place a time, place and action restraint on God. We do find that sins are washed away by the Holy Spirit having no relation to water baptism. One such passage is Titus 3:5 "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;"
Actually there is ample evidence that baptism is the time and place of regeneration. It's just that many people refuse to accept that and thus spiritualize the dozen or so scriptures, one of which is in John 3, that indicate that baptism is, indeed, the time and place of regeneration.

I am not placing a time, place and action restraint on God. He's placing that restraint upon Himself.

I believe that the "washing of regeneration" in Titus 3:5 is referring precisely to baptism. In fact, Titus 3:5 is one of the dozen or so verses that tell us that baptism is the time and place of regeneration.



bob97 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/4/2008 10:54:52 AM)

greatdivide...what was it that Paul told us in Romans 10? Wasn't it that when we confessed and believed in our hearts that we were saved? Where did he talk about baptism when making that statement?

Romans 10:8-10 ( NLT ) 8In fact, it says,

“The message is very close at hand;

it is on your lips and in your heart.ӣ

And that message is the very message about faith that we preach: 9If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is by believing in your heart that you are made right with God, and it is by confessing with your mouth that you are saved.

Bob



bob97 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/4/2008 10:55:57 AM)

The only way to be saved is to be justified and that means sins are forgiven.

Bob



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/4/2008 4:50:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bob97

greatdivide...what was it that Paul told us in Romans 10? Wasn't it that when we confessed and believed in our hearts that we were saved? Where did he talk about baptism when making that statement?
Certainly when we confess and believe in our hearts we are saved. But neither the word "only" nor the word "alone" are in the verses cited. Therefore I conclude that while confession and belief are certainly required for salvation, they are not necessarily all that's required. For instance, Paul did not talk about repentance in these verses either, but I'm not going to conclude that because Paul didn't use the word "repent" here that it, therefore, is not a requirement for salvation. Same thing with baptism.

I'm not so sure that it's ever a good idea to base a doctrine on only one passage of scripture.



FolkSingerBlues -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/4/2008 10:09:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bob97

greatdivide...what was it that Paul told us in Romans 10? Wasn't it that when we confessed and believed in our hearts that we were saved? Where did he talk about baptism when making that statement?

Romans 10:8-10 ( NLT ) 8In fact, it says,

“The message is very close at hand;

it is on your lips and in your heart.ӣ

And that message is the very message about faith that we preach: 9If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is by believing in your heart that you are made right with God, and it is by confessing with your mouth that you are saved.

Bob


I understand you're question...let me give you an accurate answer.

Yes he did say that in the Roman letter. The Roman, like other letters, was meant to be taken in it's entirety. The Roman letter does not skirt baptism, but rather is included in the letter as well. I have seen attempts to explain water baptism away from instances where baptism is mentioned. I understand why that happens, but that doesn't make it an appropriate hermeneutic. The important question is for us to continue trying to understand the Bible in it's historical context as well. Baptism cannot mean something different in 2008 than it did in 35 A.D.

I understand the issue at hand and I have applied myself to understanding of the "faith alone" stance. However everything I have studied pertaining to the 1st century church suggests that water baptism (I add by immersion UNDER water) was the accepted method for accepting the message of the gospel.

So the Roman letter does most definitely say
"If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."
But taking into account historical context I would have to continue standing the ground that baptism cannot be excluded as a precept for accepting Christ and the gift of grace God has presented to mankind for atonement.



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/5/2008 3:35:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

quote:

Based upon Scripture I don't see the Holy Spirit washing away a person's sins when they believe.
I agree "believing" has nothing to do with regeneration. This is made absolutely clear in John 3:8.
I don't think "believing" has "nothing" to do with regeneration. I just don't think it occurs instantaneously when we believe.
So regeneration happens when you get water baptized; but, not when you have faith?

quote:

Actually there is ample evidence that baptism is the time and place of regeneration. It's just that many people refuse to accept that and thus spiritualize the dozen or so scriptures, one of which is in John 3, that indicate that baptism is, indeed, the time and place of regeneration.
Since the verses don't mention "water", there's no reason, other than one's own presuppositions to insist they mean water.

As for John 3 - it is spiritual. It's about the Holy Spirit cleansing us from sin which, again has nothing to do with water baptism. John 3 does not mention baptism.

quote:

I am not placing a time, place and action restraint on God. He's placing that restraint upon Himself.
Not so. In this parable, we find Jesus declaring the publican justified without water baptism - "And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other:...."

quote:

I believe that the "washing of regeneration" in Titus 3:5 is referring precisely to baptism. In fact, Titus 3:5 is one of the dozen or so verses that tell us that baptism is the time and place of regeneration.
There's really no reason to since the verse doesn't even mention baptism, let alone water baptism. It speaks only of the Holy Spirit regenerating the sinner.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/5/2008 8:54:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

So regeneration happens when you get water baptized; but, not when you have faith?
That's what I see being taught in Scripture.

quote:

quote:

Actually there is ample evidence that baptism is the time and place of regeneration. It's just that many people refuse to accept that and thus spiritualize the dozen or so scriptures, one of which is in John 3, that indicate that baptism is, indeed, the time and place of regeneration.
Since the verses don't mention "water", there's no reason, other than one's own presuppositions to insist they mean water.
Actually my own presuppositions would lead me to believe exactly as you do. But when I took Greek in college, I learned that baptizo, when taken literally, always means immersion in water. Therefore, unless baptism is used figuratively, such as baptism in the Holy Spirit, it means immersion in water.

quote:

As for John 3 - it is spiritual. It's about the Holy Spirit cleansing us from sin which, again has nothing to do with water baptism. John 3 does not mention baptism.
I don't believe that John 3 is about the Holy Spirit cleansing us from sin. It is about how to enter the Kingdom of God. Jesus says that is accomplished through water and the Spirit. Since the only place where water plays any part in entering the Kingdom of God is baptism, I don't see how it can be talking about anything else.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/5/2008 9:02:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

quote:

I am not placing a time, place and action restraint on God. He's placing that restraint upon Himself.
Not so. In this parable, we find Jesus declaring the publican justified without water baptism - "And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other:...."
Well, of course the publican was justified without baptism. First of all, if you're going to use this as an example of someone becoming a Christian, you have to realize that the publican was already a Jew, therefore his justification had nothing to do with salvation.

Secondly, even if it did have to do with his salvation, he would not have to had been baptized since baptism was not a requirement for salvation under the Old Testament Law.

quote:

quote:

I believe that the "washing of regeneration" in Titus 3:5 is referring precisely to baptism. In fact, Titus 3:5 is one of the dozen or so verses that tell us that baptism is the time and place of regeneration.
There's really no reason to since the verse doesn't even mention baptism, let alone water baptism. It speaks only of the Holy Spirit regenerating the sinner.
Yes, it speaks of the Holy Spirit regenerating the sinner when the sinner is literally "washed." The only literal "washing" that a penitent believer undergoes is baptism.



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/6/2008 6:21:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
quote:

Since the verses don't mention "water", there's no reason, other than one's own presuppositions to insist they mean water.
Actually my own presuppositions would lead me to believe exactly as you do. But when I took Greek in college, I learned that baptizo, when taken literally, always means immersion in water.
Perhaps that's the problem. Why not "learn" how God uses the word in Scripture? If we look to Scripture for our definition we see that God does NOT always use baptizo to mean immersion (Mark 7:4).

We see baptism and baptized (baptizo) used by Jesus in a number of passages where it has absolutely nothing to do with water.

Luke 12:50 But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!

quote:

Therefore, unless baptism is used figuratively, such as baptism in the Holy Spirit, it means immersion in water.
That is a conclusion again based only on presuppostion. There is no reason to assume that the word baptism always means to immerse in water. In fact, Scripture prevents us from doing so. Water baptism is simply the figure, picture or the shadow of the substance which cleanses away our sins - regeneration, the baptism with the Holy Spirit.

We see this so clearly as John the Baptist and the Aposles performed water baptism. It is taught by both the Baptist and Jesus that water baptism was insufficient. What was "real", what was of necessity, was what Christ would do. Water baptism simply prefigured this.

quote:

quote:

As for John 3 - it is spiritual. It's about the Holy Spirit cleansing us from sin which, again has nothing to do with water baptism. John 3 does not mention baptism.
I don't believe that John 3 is about the Holy Spirit cleansing us from sin. It is about how to enter the Kingdom of God.
Is there some other way of entering heaven than being cleansed of our sins?

quote:

Jesus says that is accomplished through water and the Spirit. Since the only place where water plays any part in entering the Kingdom of God is baptism, I don't see how it can be talking about anything else.
Jesus is speaking metaphorically. He uses the figure of the wind for the Holy Spirit just as He uses "water" as a figure for the Holy Spirit. And clearly, we don't see water baptism mentioned.



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/6/2008 6:23:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
quote:

Not so. In this parable, we find Jesus declaring the publican justified without water baptism - "And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other:...."
Well, of course the publican was justified without baptism. First of all, if you're going to use this as an example of someone becoming a Christian, you have to realize that the publican was already a Jew, therefore his justification had nothing to do with salvation.
Justification has everthing to do with salvation for the OT Jew just as it does for everyone else.

quote:

Secondly, even if it did have to do with his salvation, he would not have to had been baptized since baptism was not a requirement for salvation under the Old Testament Law.
Just as it is not a requirement in the NT era.

quote:

quote:

quote:

I believe that the "washing of regeneration" in Titus 3:5 is referring precisely to baptism. In fact, Titus 3:5 is one of the dozen or so verses that tell us that baptism is the time and place of regeneration.
There's really no reason to since the verse doesn't even mention baptism, let alone water baptism. It speaks only of the Holy Spirit regenerating the sinner.
Yes, it speaks of the Holy Spirit regenerating the sinner when the sinner is literally "washed." The only literal "washing" that a penitent believer undergoes is baptism.
It is you who said the Baptism with the Holy Spirit did not mean a literal "washing".

Besides, the verse says that it is NOT by our "works of righteousness" which would mean water baptism.

We see Jesus saying precisely this in Mat 3:15 "And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him."

In addition, when do we ever see water baptism spoken of as "washing" in Scripture?...never.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/6/2008 8:08:09 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

Perhaps that's the problem. Why not "learn" how God uses the word in Scripture? If we look to Scripture for our definition we see that God does NOT always use baptizo to mean immersion (Mark 7:4).
Certainly the word "baptizo" is translated "wash" in Mark 7:4. However, I think its unlikely that anything can be washed without immersing it in water. [:)]

quote:

We see baptism and baptized (baptizo) used by Jesus in a number of passages where it has absolutely nothing to do with water.
Of course we do!! "Baptism" is used figuratively in a lot of places. But the idea is that however it's being used it always implies an immersion in something, i.e., the Holy Spirit, suffering, fire, etc.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/6/2008 8:18:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

There is no reason to assume that the word baptism always means to immerse in water. In fact, Scripture prevents us from doing so. Water baptism is simply the figure, picture or the shadow of the substance which cleanses away our sins - regeneration, the baptism with the Holy Spirit.
I agree. There is no reason to assume that the word baptism always means to immerse in water. Baptism is often used figuratively. My point is that the word "baptizo" as defined in the lexicon means immersion in water. That doesn't mean that its never used figurately in Scripture.

quote:

We see this so clearly as John the Baptist and the Aposles performed water baptism. It is taught by both the Baptist and Jesus that water baptism was insufficient. What was "real", what was of necessity, was what Christ would do. Water baptism simply prefigured this.
Again, I agree. The baptism of John the Baptist and the Apostles was indeed insufficient and did prefigure what Christ would do. However, baptism after Jesus did that is not the same. Physically its the same, but the spiritual aspect of baptism changed after Jesus' death and resurrection.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/6/2008 8:24:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

Is there some other way of entering heaven than being cleansed of our sins?
It's the only way I know of. Did you honestly think that I thought there was another way? [:)]

quote:

Jesus is speaking metaphorically. He uses the figure of the wind for the Holy Spirit just as He uses "water" as a figure for the Holy Spirit. And clearly, we don't see water baptism mentioned.
I think you're referring to John 3:5 here. I don't believe Jesus is speaking metaphorically here. I believe He's being literal. When He says Holy Spirit in this verse I believe He means the literal Holy Spirit. Therefore, when He says water I believe He means literal water.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/6/2008 8:30:12 AM)

Regarding your citation of the parable of the publican who was justified without baptism because of his prayer: If you are going to use this as an example of how a Christian is justified then I assume you would equate the publican's Jewishness with Christianity. What I was saying is that the publican was already a Jew and therefore would have already been justified, since Christians are justified when they become Christians.

Ultimately, it seems to me that this is not a very good example, because it is possible to be Jew and not be justified, I suppose, but I can't see how one can possibly be a Christian and not be justified.

I don't know, maybe I'm just dense and can't see what you were trying to point out by using this parable as an example of someone being justified without baptism.



FolkSingerBlues -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/6/2008 9:56:50 AM)

The parable of the publican is a lesson of humility before God.
It would be an act of "hermeneutical gymnastics" to say that was a teaching excluding baptism.



SuccessinTruth -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/9/2008 8:36:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: A_crucified_man

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

quote:

ORIGINAL: A_crucified_man

Scripture doesn't support it - we're saved by GRACE alone, water can't save you.
I agree we are saved by grace alone. But the fact that we are saved by grace alone doesn't mean that we do nothing in order to receive that grace.


Faith allows us to receive God's grace - faith in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection and nothing else.

Being baptized in water doesn't secure anything from God with respect to His grace or forgiveness or anything else - we do it out of obediance and love for our Lord in order to be identified with His death, burial,and resurrection.

But it doesn't add anything to our salvation - water baptism is an ordinance just the same as communion. Water baptism identifies us with Christ and communion maintains our life by keeping us focused on Christ's work on the cross.



Excellent, I wish others could see that their refusal to be baptized is nothing more than a rebellious state of mind. Why should anyone be unwilling to be baptized? No one is saying that you can't be saved without it, but is there something in Scripture that makes you feel that you would be less of a follower of Christ if you are baptized as He was?



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/10/2008 5:16:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
Certainly the word "baptizo" is translated "wash" in Mark 7:4. However, I think its unlikely that anything can be washed without immersing it in water. [:)]
So when you clean your kitchen table after lunch, you immerse it?

quote:

quote:

We see baptism and baptized (baptizo) used by Jesus in a number of passages where it has absolutely nothing to do with water.
Of course we do!! "Baptism" is used figuratively in a lot of places. But the idea is that however it's being used it always implies an immersion in something, i.e., the Holy Spirit, suffering, fire, etc.
Not so, since we know for a surety the table is not immersed. Besides, you have no evidence that baptism "always implies an immersion in something, i.e., the Holy Spirit, suffering, fire, etc." In fact, you cannot even point to one event of water baptism which proves immersion - not one.



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/10/2008 5:20:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

There is no reason to assume that the word baptism always means to immerse in water. In fact, Scripture prevents us from doing so. Water baptism is simply the figure, picture or the shadow of the substance which cleanses away our sins - regeneration, the baptism with the Holy Spirit.
I agree. There is no reason to assume that the word baptism always means to immerse in water. Baptism is often used figuratively. My point is that the word "baptizo" as defined in the lexicon means immersion in water. That doesn't mean that its never used figurately in Scripture.
A lexicon is not the Bible. And, we have absolutely no evidence from the Bible that water baptism entails immersion. Nor, do we have evidence the word itself is always used to mean immersion...think table.



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/10/2008 5:23:49 AM)

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

I don't believe that John 3 is about the Holy Spirit cleansing us from sin. It is about how to enter the Kingdom of God.

Is there some other way of entering heaven than being cleansed of our sins?
It's the only way I know of. Did you honestly think that I thought there was another way? [:)]
It sure sounded like it since you said John 3 isn't about being cleansed from sin - only about entering heaven. The problem with that idea is this is the passage where Christ explains "how" to enter heaven. Therefore, John 3 most certainly is about having your sins cleansed.

quote:

quote:

Jesus is speaking metaphorically. He uses the figure of the wind for the Holy Spirit just as He uses "water" as a figure for the Holy Spirit. And clearly, we don't see water baptism mentioned.
I think you're referring to John 3:5 here. I don't believe Jesus is speaking metaphorically here. I believe He's being literal.
How can you say that? Do you believe God is actually wind?...you know, the air that blows the leaves on trees? Is that what you're saying?



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/10/2008 5:36:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
Regarding your citation of the parable of the publican who was justified without baptism because of his prayer: If you are going to use this as an example of how a Christian is justified then I assume you would equate the publican's Jewishness with Christianity. What I was saying is that the publican was already a Jew and therefore would have already been justified, since Christians are justified when they become Christians.
I don't know what you mean by this. The fact that the publican was a Jew had nothing to do with his becoming justified. There is only one salvation, one justification, one baptism with the Holy Spirit whether a Jew or a Gentile in the OT or the NT.

quote:

Ultimately, it seems to me that this is not a very good example, because it is possible to be Jew and not be justified, I suppose, but I can't see how one can possibly be a Christian and not be justified.
You just said above that the publican was a Jew and therefore justified. I'm glad you didn't mean that. I agree one cannot be a Christian and not be justified.

quote:

I don't know, maybe I'm just dense and can't see what you were trying to point out by using this parable as an example of someone being justified without baptism.
The point I was trying to make is that water baptism has nothing to do with being justified, i.e., the publican, the thief on the cross. We don't find Scripture teaching that water baptism is the means of justification.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/10/2008 8:34:15 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

So when you clean your kitchen table after lunch, you immerse it?
Yes, I get it completely wet and then I dry it off. However, I don't pick the table up and submerge it in water, but niether do I just sprinkle a few drops of water on it and then call it clean. I do, however, pick up the other utensils I used for lunch and submerge them in water.

quote:

We know for a surety the table is not immersed. Besides, you have no evidence that baptism "always implies an immersion in something, i.e., the Holy Spirit, suffering, fire, etc." In fact, you cannot even point to one event of water baptism which proves immersion - not one.
Everytime baptism is used in Scripture it means immersion -- overwhelmed by something. That's the definition of the word "baptizo." It means to immerse in liquid, to get something completely wet.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/10/2008 8:36:24 AM)

On a personal note, I'll be leaving today driving from Alabama to Montana. I'll be gone for a couple of weeks. If I can get access to a computer while I'm gone I may still show up here during my vacation. Didn't want anyone to think I'd bailed out of this thread. [:)]



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (9/10/2008 10:03:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

A lexicon is not the Bible. And, we have absolutely no evidence from the Bible that water baptism entails immersion. Nor, do we have evidence the word itself is always used to mean immersion...think table.
You are quite right -- a lexicon is not the Bible. However, without a lexicon we would be unable to understand the words of the Bible. Even those who know koine Greek and Hebrew rely on lexicons to determine the meaning of words.

When the word "baptize" entered the English language in 1611 it was a transliteration of the Greek word "baptizo." If they had translated the word instead of transliterating it, it would have read "immersion."

As for the table, it still gets completely wet, whether you call that immersion or something else.



Page: <<   < prev  36 37 [38] 39 40   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI