What do mormons believe – Part 5

by Rusty Lindquist on January 25, 2011 · 0 comments

(Disclaimer: These views are all based on my knowledge and interpretation as an active Latter Day Saint, or “Mormon”, only the actual article of faith I list should be considered “official”.  Still, I try to be accurate and do my homework 😉

We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.

5th Article of Faith

Core to Mormon Doctrine is the notion of divine authority, the priesthood of God.  For something to be binding in heaven it must be done by the proper authority.  No man can simply declare himself an authority and conduct the eternally binding business of the Lord on the earth.  A man cannot simply aspire to an office, calling, or ministry, or declare any authority of himself or through his education or accomplishments (“And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that was called of God, as was Aaron” Hebrews 5:4)

But rather we believe that a man must be called of God by divine inspiration and revelation by those who are in authority, and then given the keys, or the rights, to administer in specific and limited ways.

So, you might ask, wherein do “those who are in authority” claim their authority?  The answer is the same now as it was in the days of Christ – from the Lord.  For the priesthood and the keys to administer thereof must be passed directly, by the laying on of hands, in an unbroken chain.

When Christ was crucified, there began a great apostasy, where truth diminished, the gospel became polluted with the teachings man, and the rights of the priesthood were removed from the earth, for those who held it were killed, or died.  Because of that great falling away, it became crucial for a complete restoration, not only of truth, but of authority, for the work of God must continue today as it did in Christ’s time (“he is the same yesterday, today, and forever” Hebrews 13:8). 

So Mormons believe that there was a great restoration, where the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ, along with the priesthood authority to administer the gospel and the affairs of the church were brought back to the earth in their totality, through the prophet Joseph Smith.  And that since that time, those keys have been passed in an unbroken chain, by the laying on of hands, down through the generations to our present day, at all times overseen by a prophet of God, just as in times of old (“for surely the Lord God will do nothing except he reveal his secret to his servants, the prophets” Amos 3:7).

What’s even more interesting is that in practice, it creates a dynamic within the church that is indeed very unique.

For since all who serve are called of God, and don’t “graduate” or “earn” a position, you have no idea who might be called, or when.  Consequently, the people that lead the church today, even the very apostles and prophet, all come from different walks of life.  None of them aspired to their position.  And since the general “clergy” of the church are unpaid (very unique indeed), they all continue to work, serving the Lord in their various capacities in an entirely volunteer manner.

None of these are professional “clergymen”, but rather ordinary people, called to do extraordinary things and make extraordinary sacrifices, enabled and empowered by the extraordinary power and priesthood of God.  Because he whom the Lord calls, he qualifies.  Through divine assistance, they’re able to conduct the Lords work on the earth, far beyond what would is befitting their native capacities.

How wonderful it is to know that we are led by men who have been called of God, chosen and called up to do his work, and who are given the authority and rights to function in ways that make the ordinances for our salvation official, binding, and eternal.


See also Part 1Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7

Subscribe to Ongofu | Get Ongofu by Email

If you’ve enjoyed this post, please bookmark it by clicking on the button below, and selecting a service so others can find it too. Many thanks.

Bookmark and Share

{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Margaret May 20, 2008 at 7:51 PM

Great post, Rusty.
This concept is the one my family and friends have had the hardest time with. Like many concepts, it can’t be scientifically proven, and I am definitely not an intellcetual, but by study and faith and answer to prayer, I know this to be true.

Ditchu said in an earlier post that he hoped we are extraordinary. I believe that by our beliefs we are peculiar and extraordinary. I’m sure there will be a lot of discussion on this one.

From Rusty:

I agree, for many accustomed to Christian traditions, this can be hard to fathom. it’s another instance in which tradition becomes a burden of blindness. Which is sad, because the doctrine here is beautiful and sweet, showing us that God has an active hand in His church, rather than some passive observer, watching from afar the struggle for mens souls. Indeed, this makes us a peculiar people… peculiar, but blessed. As you look at all those saints led at the beginning of any gospel dispensation, they too must have seemed quite peculiar. The early followers of Christ – peculiar indeed. The followers of Moses, of Noah, etc. Highly peculiar people.

I find that peculiarity refreshing actually for the Bible tells us (as does the book of Mormon), that straight and narrow is the way that leads to eternal life, and few there be that find it, but broad is the way that leads unto damnation, and many there be that find it.

Lord, let me be peculiar.


2 Lollard May 20, 2008 at 10:22 PM

“When Christ was crucified, there began a great apostasy, where truth diminished, the gospel became polluted with the teachings man, and the rights of the priesthood were removed from the earth, for those who held it were killed, or died.”

So we can say with confidence, that Jesus is a liar, when he said to Peter:

“And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.”

Are you saying Rusty, that God didn’t know how to build a Church? That He couldn’t pick the right men to lead his Church?

From Rusty:

We needn’t be silly to discuss scripture, especially one as crucial as this (thank you for bringing it up).

This reference (Matthew 16:16-18) is vital, and must be understood. First, from the beginning of the chapter, the Pharisees and Sadducees came asking for a sign. They were not of sound faith or understanding, and as such, required some physical manifestation to know that Jesus was the Son of God. Jesus then chastises them for seeking signs, and departing, warns his disciples against this behavior, and the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Then he asked his disciples “Whom do men say that I am?” and finally “Whom do YE say that I am?” (verse 13-15)

Then Simon Peter answered and said “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God”. To which Christ answered with a crucial lesson, saying “Blessed ar thou, Simon, Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father whish is in heaven.” (verse 17).

In other words, Simon knows Christ is the Lord because it was revealed unto him, and because of this the Lord tells Simon that he’s blessed. For instead of seeking a sign to know that Christ is the Lord, he knew it through revelation.

The great lesson taught in this chapter, from the very first verse, is that we should not seek confirmation by signs, but by revelation.

Then, in the very next verse (verse 18) he says, speaking of revelation “I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”.

He wasn’t saying he’d build the church on Peter, it’s not Peter’s church, but Christ’s. Peter is just a man. He’s saying that upon this rock, the rock of revelation, shall he build his church. Peter would die, but revelation does not, and that is the foundation upon which his church is built.

But this is a greatly misunderstood truth, for many say the heavens are shut, that god does not reveal more unto man, that somehow he’s changed, that he’s shut his mouth. That somehow because he’s spoken once, he cannot or should not speak again. Such a belief is contrary to the scriptures, for they surely teach us about revelation, repeatedly.

But the teaching of this scripture you so fortunately point out is that we cannot seek testimony by signs, but by revelation only. The only way to know, and recognize truth, and God’s church, the only way to know God, and Jesus Christ, is through revelation, and upon this great and everlasting principle he builds his church, and the gates of hell cannot prevail against it. For testimony given through revelation cannot be denied, whereas signs and wonders can be explained away at will.

Hence, we can see, that one of the ways we shall know the church of Christ on the earth, is one that believes in revelation, that believes that the heavens are not shut, and that teaches man that they must gain their own testimony through their own personal revelation. For flesh and blood hat not revealed it unto thee, but my Father, which is in heaven.



3 ponderingpastor May 21, 2008 at 8:48 AM

“When Christ was crucified, there began a great apostasy, where truth diminished, the gospel became polluted with the teachings man, and the rights of the priesthood were removed from the earth, for those who held it were killed, or died. Because of that great falling away, it became crucial for a complete restoration, not only of truth, but of authority, for the work of God must continue today as it did in Christ’s time …”

I would hope that Mormons would be open enough to be willing to question this. It is just too convenient for Joseph Smith and those who follow after him. It provides a reason to exclude or minimize almost all New Testament writings, especially Paul. It suggests that there was no faithful church in existence for a very long period of time. It suggests essentially that God has no control or influence over the events of history for hundreds of years … or at the very least, abandoned the church. Do you really want to say these things?

The Mormon church emphasizes “revelation” because that allows it to distance itself from the rest of Christianity … the so-called apostate church … and make claims about “truth” that run counter to all that was God-led for centuries. Yes, corruption existed … but so did faith and the true church.

Lutherans, at least, teach the “priesthood of all believers” but for good order set apart some (ordination, consecration, etc.) for particular ministry, such as “Word and Sacrament”.

Pondering Pastor

Thanks for coming back; I was afraid that the duration since my last post might have caused you to lose interest.

I would hope that from the frequency with which I have quoted the New Testament that you’d know we believe it in its entirety as I’ve stated before. But let me clarify. The falling away to which I refer wasn’t instantaneous, for as you suggest, all through the New Testament there were prophets on the earth, directing the church, and holding the authority of the priesthood. As long as there is a prophet of God on the earth, there too will be truth, righteousness, and authority.

For God loves his people, and gives them prophets and apostles to lead and guide them. But suddenly prophets ceased, but that was not because God abandoned his church, but because the church abandoned God.

How else can you describe the pervasive belief that God won’t reveal any more to us? In my estimation, denying revelation is equivalent to denying God. For denying revelation either means we say God CANNOT answer, which directly contradicts the notion of his omnipotence, or that he’s somehow not WILLING to answer, which directly contradicts scripture.

James 1:5 – “If any of you lack wisdom let him ask of God, who giveth to all men liberally”. Why be instructed to ask God if he won’t answer?

What does Mathew mean when he says “Ask and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find, knock, and it shall be opened unto you… or what man is there of you whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone?” (Matthew 7:8-11) What does this mean, if not that God still communicates to man?

He tells peter that he will build his church on revelation (Mathew 16).

Ephesians 1:17 “That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:”

So regarding the apostasy, or the eventual falling away from truth and authority, it’s not hard to see how that would happen in the absence of revelation (or our willingness to receive it).

For once you start ignoring or rejecting ongoing revelation you start suffering the inevitable course of entropy. That is why in times past, as in the restored church, there must needs be a living prophet and the assurance of personal revelation. What is the purpose of the Holy Ghost if not to communicate and confirm truth? Why would James tell us to ask God if God is unwilling or unable to answer? Does God somehow love us less? Isn’t he unchangeable? Why would he tell us that he would build his church upon revelation, if revelation would cease? Are the heavens closed?

In my estimation, the convenience seems to be in denying revelation, not subjecting yourself to it. For then man is trusting to man, in the arm of the flesh, for guidance and scriptural interpretation, rather than in all things seeking divine clarity through revelation. “Even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the spirit of God” (1 Corinthians 2:9-14).

This is how the apostasy was brought about. Men started trusting to mans interpretation, and not Gods. Hence there became so many sects and diversions among Christianity, for all men are inclined to see things differently. Without the all important leadership of a true and living prophet (as in days of old) and a departure from belief in personal revelation such a course was inevitable.

It was for this very reason that caused such great confusion for Joseph Smith, what caused him to seek the Lord. He saw how hotly the various Christian religions debated scripture, and read James 1:5 “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God”, and so he did (his experience you can read here). Thus began the restoration of truth and authority, and the calling again of prophets in this dispensation.

But I ask that no man simply trust in my words, but rather that they should do as James suggests – read the Book of Mormon, and ask God for yourself if it is not true, for I can assuredly testify that revelation is as obtainable today as it ever was.


(p.s. I realize that contained a lot, feel free to break up discussions by points in separate comments – that might be easier, or whatever you’d like).


4 Pondering Pastor May 21, 2008 at 5:27 PM

I was away from home for a few days.

Well welcome back! 😉

“How else can you describe the pervasive belief that God won’t reveal any more to us?” This is often misunderstood by Mormons, and you repeat that misunderstanding. God continues to grant revelation … it is that the canon is closed. Those are two different things. The closing of the canon was due, in part, to competing claims made about what constituted necessary scripture. To suggest that God won’t reveal any more to us is to say that the Holy Spirit is not active. You get that correct. It’s just that your starting point, the assumption that Christians teach that there is no more revelation, is wrong. Christian churches boldly claim that God continues to provide revelation to God’s people … through the work and gift of the Holy Spirit.

Actually, it’s not that I don’t understand the difference (for I do), but rather that we don’t see such a distinction between the two. The bible is the recorded revelation and teachings of prophets of old, and I see no distinction between that and the recorded revelation and teachings of prophets today – in short, the cannon isn’t closed, but open. We believe that god works through prophets, and always has. An open/closed cannon is something I’ll address fully in my post tomorrow when discussing the Bible and the Book of Mormon. It’s bound to be interesting.

Really, part of the problem is how Mormons and Christians differ in many of the terms used, and in how those terms are applied. We use the same words but we are not speaking of the same things. It is my belief that the leaders and creators of the Mormon Church (and I don’t believe that to be God) have twisted scripture and these phrases to justify a particular perspective. They can make it say whatever they want it to say by re-defining terms and saying that the Christian church was apostate.

I guess that’s what I was saying about how the two of us, and others, are merely reciprocating the same beliefe – we each interpret the scriptures differently. In each of our minds, it seems clear. While you believe that we have twisted scripture, we too read the same scriptures and hear your interpretations and think “how twisted is that”. LOL. Hence the importance of personal revelation in seeking the truth. Let each man determine for themselves, through prayer, the way that is right, and be accountible for their choice.

“But I ask that no man simply trust in my words, but rather that they should do as James suggests – read the Book of Mormon, and ask God for yourself if it is not true, for I can assuredly testify that revelation is as obtainable today as it ever was.”

I have read it. I have asked God if it is true. God says no, it is not true. It is not as self-evident as you want to believe.

As I said above, let each man determine for themselves, through prayer, what is right, and what is not, and be accountible for their choice. As for me, I have received an undisputable and undeniable confirmation of the truth of the Book of Mormon, that it is a true book, that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, that we have a living prophet today (Thomas S. Monson), and that he presides over the only true and living church on the face of the whole earth, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints… or, more popularly the Mormons!

Out of curiosity, how did God tell you that it was not true? Indeed, one must ask in faith, having actually read, not to prove incorrect, but to understand. Can you tell me, with sincerity, that you read to understand? Were you a pastor when you read the Book of Mormon? Finally, what was it that prompted you to read it?

Pondering Pastor


5 Margaret May 21, 2008 at 7:51 PM

I just have to add something.

In 1967 I was almost ready to graduate from college. I had been searching for purpose in my life. By the end of January I had been investigating the LDS Church for about 6 weeks. I had read the Book of Mormon and felt good about it. All of my friends at school and all of my family were against me becoming a member. These people were all very important to me-but still-I had to know for myself.

It was Saturday night and most of my friends were gone, so I was alone in the dorm. I got down on my knees and began to pray. For 3 hours no answer came but I was persistent. I HAD to know!

About 2 AM the answer finally came. From my head to my toes I knew the Book of Mormon was the Word of God, and that He wanted me to be baptized. From that day until this I can’t deny it.

The answer didn’t come easily. It seldom does when that answer is so important. It was an absolute life change for me and the life I have now is 100% a result of that answer and the decision that followed.

It hasn’t all been easy. I’ve had my share of ups and downs, but I have never doubted that my decision was right. I absolutely know it was right. I can see it in the faces of my husband, kids and grandkids-especially the grandkids.

My experience is a personal one, I can’t tell anyone what to do or how to do it. I’m just sharing my own experiences and feelings. Many others have had more dramatic experiences than mine. I’m just grateful that mine came to me when I was ready for it, and for the life I have been able to live.

I’m so glad you shared your experience. Any attempt of mine to say anything would only detract from your comment, but I did want to say thank you.


6 Pondering Pastor May 22, 2008 at 1:09 PM

“Out of curiosity, how did God tell you that it was not true? Indeed, one must ask in faith, having actually read, not to prove incorrect, but to understand. Can you tell me, with sincerity, that you read to understand? Were you a pastor when you read the Book of Mormon? Finally, what was it that prompted you to read it?”

Well, one must be careful here. Believers often will suggest that when the answer is not the same as theirs, the reading wasn’t done honestly, or seeking faith, or seeking answers. Yes, I read to understand. Given to me by extended family members to read. Not a pastor when read. How did God tell me? In a voice as clearly as any other times that has happened to me, and the voice said something to the effect of “this is what happens when people feel alienated from the church” and “these people have been misled”. The kind of experience that Margaret describes is exactly the kind of experience I’ve heard countless number of times from those who have entered Christian churches because of their experiences, so it happens outside the Mormon church also.

In fact, one of the most recent “God experiences” I’ve had was finding this blog at just the time you were starting up the Articles of Faith discussion, and was compelled to engage in civil conversation/refutation 😉 and education about these matters from a Lutheran perspective. I wasn’t out there looking for this task.

Leaders in a church are more accountable than those who have been led. Christ says “Woe” to those who lead others astray.

Pondering Pastor

From Rusty:

Well said, but I’m confused. I agree that we who endeavor to teach and lead others will be accountable for the influence we have on them. But I’m curious as you your terminology.

I can see how I would believe that way, since I believe we are held accountable for our works and actions, but if you believe that my salvation is sure in spite of my works, how am I held accountable? I’ll be saved regardless.

Curiously, I’ve wondered the same thing about why people invest so much time in refuting Mormonism, if our works do not hamper our salvation. Why can’t I then act as I will?

Also, in terms of the timing, I too find it coincidental. And meaning no disrespect (for surely you’ve been the most respectful pastor I’ve met, intelligent, friendly, and of sound heart and good intent), but would it not also be so that if my blog were to be of divine purpose, that the adversary would simultaneously seek out those willing to rise up in opposition of it? I only bring this up because one cannot look at coincidence to determine truth or right, in my case or yours. Instead they must look instead at the doctrine before them, pondering it out in their own minds, and then seeking personal confirmation from the Lord.

What’s more, I won’t debate with you that many are converted to other Christian faiths and I can’t say that those conversions are entirely without merit. That concept does not work against my view. In other words, pretend for a moment that Mormonism is true (LOL, just pretend, that’s all). If one who did not believe in Christ, or who was living a life rife with sin and iniquity, or whatever the circumstance, was to encounter another Christian faith, let’s say Luthernaism. It makes sense that this person, coming in contact with Christ through this venue, would be naturally drawn, their soul responding to the power of the truth they find (for Mormons don’t believe that other Christian faiths are all wrong, but rather that they contain many truths), and become converted. It falls in line with how the Lord teaches us, line upon line, precept upon precept. And then, sometime in the future, they may encounter Mormonism, and now seeing the fullness of truth (again, I’m only asking you to pretend), might be converted again, and thus progressing towards their exaltation line upon line. Until they’re ready, or have the opportunity, to embrace the fullness of the restored gospel. If in his infinite wisdom, the Lord knows that said person, would not encounter Mormonism for another 5 years, why not begin to prepare them now by helping them be converted to another religion with so many beliefs that are the same.

In short, I don’t think the conversions of some to other religions can negate the truthfulness of the Mormon church, just as I would expect others to not assume my conversion to the Mormon church should mean all others are false. Every man must discern for themselves, independent of any other man, and wholly dependent upon their own experience with the Holy Spirit.


7 Pondering Pastor May 23, 2008 at 6:59 AM

Some good reflection here.

I agree that just because “things come together” does not mean that we understand why or can attribute them entirely to God. That is a matter of discernment of the work of the Holy Spirit.

I would offer a small challenge to your “wholly dependent upon their own experience with the Holy Spirit”. The book of Acts and Paul’s writings (and often Mormon teaching) says that the experiences of the Holy Spirit are to be confirmed by other believers. Our culture often suggests individualism when reading scripture. That “rumbling” inside might be gas and the conversations with God in my head might be mental illness.

Awesome. Each morning, as I barely begin to experience some semblance of cognition, I roll over and grab my iPhone from my nightstand, and check for comments on my blog (and email, weather, etc.). Well, as you’d expect with 6 kids, during the night, one or two of the littlest have somehow made their way up and are snuggled up next to me. When I read this, I burst into laughter, interrupting their slumber. Fortunately my wife was already out for her run… I assume you’ve read my history on my about me page. It gives your comments a great deal of humor.

On a more serious note, we don’t seem to be in short supply of other believers who confirm our belief. But even so, we actually don’t believe (at least not to my knowledge) that our interaction with the Holy Ghost needs to be legitimatized by any others. Of course, one must be careful to distinguish between indigestion, and the Holy Spirit. But I’ve found, that when the Holy Spirit speaks to me, it’s highly distinguishable.


Of course, pretending that your conditions were true, then this makes sense. As you properly guess, I dismiss the assumptions you make to draw the conclusions.

Lutherans (well, most of us) won’t claim to be the one true church. One way that I’ve thought about denominationalism is to suggest that people are drawn to those church bodies where they might “fit best”… where their gifts for ministries and needs might be met. Denominations become simply parts of the body of Christ as Paul describes. Our brand of Lutheranism has worked hard in ecumenical relations with other Christians, trying to find ways to lift the common ground rather than seeing Lutheranism as the pinnacle of God’s church. I’ll help a person connect with a church of another Christian denomination.

Are your views of Mormonism such as this then, where you want to lift the common ground and believe that some are drawn to us because we appeal to them in some specific way, or are we different?

Finally, out of curiosity, how do you interpret 1 Corinthians 1:11-13 “There are contentions among you. That every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Aplos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ, is Christ divided?


Lutherans in particular have been willing to embrace paradox when it comes to our experience and encounter with God, and that is a difficult thing to describe. I maintain that it means that we take seriously all of scripture, and not disregard those sections which seem to contradict others.

God is loving and forgiving and wrathful and judgmental all at the same time. God demands obedience and is gracious at the same time. We can’t not sin and yet, being called to obedience, attempt to live upright lives. I am slave and free at the same time. I am saint and sinner at the same time. What we are clear about is that we are not saved through our “works”. God’s forgiveness is complete and not conditional. We are held accountable and forgiven at the same time.

Critics often say that we Lutherans talk out of both sides of our mouths. But once again, scripture says both things. Am I saved? Yes, for I am a baptized child of God, and Christ has already freed me. Am I a sinner, held accountable for my deeds? Certainly. Well, which one is true? Both … at the same time.

I don’t think I understand this one, but perhaps that’s me. I’m not sure how you can say Gods words are a paradox. Doesn’t that imply that he contradicts himself? Whereas Mormons reconcile all his words together (along with modern revelation), and believe it creates one harmonious “whole” that is the gospel.

Pondering Pastor


8 Margaret May 23, 2008 at 4:34 PM

For what it’s worth, I investigated several churches before finding the “Mormons”. There was Catholic, Methodist, Episcopalian, and Lutheran. One of my roommates was Lutheran and we were and still are very good friends. I never had a similar experience with any of those churches. I met lots of wonderful people during those years. There are wonderful people in all of them. I can’t adequately put my experience into words. I don’t think anyone can understand it without experiencing it themselves. I definitely didn’t take the easy way, but for me it was the only way. Thankfully, my family and my most important friends didn’t disown me. That has happened with some.

I have a great deal of respect for you, pondering pastor, and I am glad you’re here, but truth can’t be refuted. I know this to be true.


9 Margaret May 24, 2008 at 11:30 AM

This is for pondering pastor. I owe you an apology. In my zeal to defend my testimony, I temporarily forgot that religion is not like math or science. As has been said before, it can’t be proven by facts or numbers. However, my experience with prayer, to me, gave me knowledge that the Book of Mormon is the word of God and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the Lord’s true Church. I approached it with a real desire to know if it was true. Maybe that is a difference between you and me-the approach.

During my first 2 years of college I spent weekends studying the churches of my friends. I wasn’t trying to prove them wrong, but I wanted to find what was right. Not finding what I was looking for, I gave up for a while and attended no church, except when I went home to visit my family.

Then as a senior student nurse, I was assigned to take care of an LDS missionary. I was uncomfortable at first, but the more we talked, and the more I read and learned, the more excited I became. He was sent home due to illness, but 2 others took over where he left off. I can see the Lord’s hand in all of this. It could be dismissed as coincidence, but I know better.

I agree with you that people go to the church where they fit best. it would have been so much easier for me to just find a conventional Christian church. My friends and family would have been fine with that and I wouldn’t have had to make any major changes in my life. The problem was-I didn’t “fit” there. I do fit where I am now. I fit very well.


Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: