Sunday, February 21, 2010 P.M.
GOD’S SOVEREIGN JUSTICE
Romans 9:1-16
Tonight we want to come to Romans 9. Why? We are still considering Phil. 2:12-13, "Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. 13. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure." We have been considering the paradox concerning how sanctification can be both the work of man and the work of God. Within that paradox, is there a priority? Does the initiative and the conclusion depend upon one more than the other? Two weeks ago we digressed a bit by going back to justification and asking the question: “Whose work is it?” Well, it is the work of God and it is the work of man. It is the work of man in that a man must repent and believe in order to be saved. But again, is there a priority here? Who is it that takes the initiative? In the final analysis, who has the decisive vote concerning who will be saved?
As I shared two weeks ago, I believe the scripture makes it clear that the decisive vote lies with God and God alone. We looked at several scriptures -- John 3, Eph. 1:3-14, I Cor. 1:17-31, Rom. 8:28-30, and Rom. 9:11. I suggested that we would come back to Romans 9. That is what we want to do tonight.
Let me give you a quick review of one of the issues that surfaces again and again. We know that election (God’s choosing) is a biblical teaching. The question is how we understand it. Some hold to what we might call “corporate election.” That is, from the foundation of the world God made the decision to choose a people for Himself. That is election. Whether or not you are a part of that people is up to you. But perhaps the dominant understanding among fundamentalists and evangelicals today is the idea that God chooses on the basis of His foreknowledge. In other words, God looks down through time, sees that Ron Tyson will repent and believe, and then He chooses Ron Tyson on that basis. If that is true, then the ultimate decision concerning my salvation is mine, not God’s. Romans 9 deals with both of these concepts, as Paul defends the sovereignty and righteousness of God.
The Problem
So let’s dive into Romans 9. I believe the thing that will help us most is setting Romans 9 in its proper context, getting in on the beginning of Paul’s argument. As most of you know, Romans 9 follows Romans 8! The latter part of Romans 8 is one of our dearest treasures. What amazing promises God gives us through this precious passage of scripture. “Who can separate us from the love of Christ?... Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom. 8:35,37-39).
As we come to 9:1-5, a problem arises. Let’s read it. Rom. 9:1-5…
I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, 2. That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. 3. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 4. Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 5. Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
Paul reveals to us that most of his fellow-Israelites are cut off from Christ. Paul has great heaviness and continual sorrow because Israel as a whole is rejecting their Messiah. In spite of the fact that they have been given great privileges, they have not come to the Savior. That in itself is a great problem for Paul, but it raises a much greater difficulty for all of us. What about God’s promises? Did God not say in Jer. 31:33, "But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people"? And what about the words of the angel to Mary in Matt. 1:21, "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins"? But is Israel not rejecting her God by refusing to follow His Son? And Paul makes it clear that Israel was not being saved from their sins, for "neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).
Do you see the difficulty here? Has God gone back on His Word? If He hasn’t kept His Word about being faithful to Israel, then how can we be sure that He will keep those wonderful promises we claim from chapter 8? What about 8:33, “Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth.” But if God doesn’t keep His promises to Israel, can we be sure that He will justify, as He said He would? Maybe someone can lay a charge against me. This is no small problem. Paul recognizes the difficulty and in the rest of this chapter he deals with it.
The Solution
Now we come to verse 6, “Not as though the Word of God hath taken none effect.” First of all, Paul wants to make it clear that the Word of God has not failed. God has not gone back on His promises. Though it appears at first glance that He has not kept His promises to His people Israel, that is certainly not the case.
Okay, Paul, can you explain how that is? How can you look at the plight of Israel and maintain that God is faithful, that His Word is true? The answer is in the second part of verse 6, “For they are not all Israel which are of Israel.” At first, that may seem like doubletalk. The English Standard Version, not quite as literal at this point, says, “For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel.” Simply put, not all the descendants of Jacob/Israel are Israelites. Paul doesn’t stop there. He makes the same claim twice more in verses 7 and 8. 9:7, “Neither because they are the seed of Abraham are they all children.” In other words, not every descendant of Abraham is a true child. And then in verse 8, “That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God.” In short, Paul says that not all ethnic Israel is the true Israel. Not everyone who claims Abraham as his forefather is a part of God’s people.
Now let’s make sure we understand how this answers the difficulty with which Paul is dealing. If God promised to be Israel’s God and save them from their sins through Jesus, then how can we say God is faithful to His promise, when most of Israel is not saved, is cut off from its Messiah? Paul answers by saying that we must be careful in our definition of Israel. Not everyone who claims to be an Israelite is indeed a true Israelite. The implication is that God’s promise was not made to all of Paul’s kinsmen, to all who are physical Israelites. And this brings us straight to the heart of the principle of election.
Paul’s Scriptural Support
Paul, if you are going to make such a bold claim, show me in the Word of God. That is what Paul does throughout this passage. Let’s go back now and read again 9:6-7, "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: 7. Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called." To show from scripture that not all who are descendants of Abraham are true children of Abraham, Paul quotes from Genesis 21. Before we read it, let’s review. Who was Abraham’s first son? It was Ishmael, who was born some 14 years before Isaac. After Isaac was weaned, Abraham threw a big party to celebrate. But Sarah noticed that Ishmael was mocking her son Isaac. So she demanded that Abraham get rid of Hagar and her son Ishmael. That really hurt Abraham, because Ishmael was his son. Ishmael had as much of Abraham’s blood in him as Isaac did. Now listen to what God told Abraham in Gen. 21:12, “Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken under her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.” These last words are what Paul quoted here in Rom. 9:7. The Lord went on to tell Abraham that He would also made a nation out of Ishmael. Nevertheless, it could never be the same with Ishmael as with Isaac. God’s choice of Isaac over Ishmael transcended the birthright. Ishmael came first, but Isaac was the one God chose.
The reason for the choice of Isaac is further explained in verse 8, "That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed." He begins in this verse by stating the principle of election without giving any specific names. The children of the flesh are contrasted with the children of promise. Only the children of promise are truly the children of God. Then the scriptural support for this assertion is given in verse 9, “For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son.” These words are quoted from Gen. 18:10, when the Lord announced that Sarah would indeed have a son in her old age. We read in Gal. 4:22-23 that Abraham had two sons, the one by the slave girl and the other by the freewoman. The one was after the flesh, while the other was by promise. In scripture, Isaac is know as the child of promise.
Are you following Paul’s argument? He is showing from scripture that although Abraham had two sons, only one was the child of promise. Only one of his sons would be a part of the true people of God. Furthermore, it wouldn’t be the older son. Physical birthright was only the mark of the flesh, while the younger son was born by the promise of God. Note again verse 9, “I will come, and Sarah shall have a son.” Abraham and Sarah were old. Sarah was barren. So how could they possibly have a son together? Only one reason -- the promise of God. The promise was not made to Hagar, but to Sarah. Paul is continuing to make the case that God chooses whomever He wants to be His children of promise. It was true with Sarah and the son Isaac, and so it was still true in Paul’s day. Some physical Israelites were children of promise; others were not.
In verse 10 Paul proceeds to move to the next generation. Now instead of talking about the sons of Abraham and Sarah, he speaks of the sons of Isaac and Rebekah. He will use the birth of those sons to illustrate from scripture that not all who are of Israel are truly Israel. It is in this section that he will set forth most clearly the divine principle of election. Let’s read it in verses 10-13…
And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; 11. (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) 12. It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 13. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
We know the story from Genesis 25. Let’s read Gen. 25:20-23…
And Isaac was forty years old when he took Rebekah to wife, the daughter of Bethuel the Syrian of Padanaram, the sister to Laban the Syrian. 21. And Isaac entreated the LORD for his wife, because she was barren: and the LORD was entreated of him, and Rebekah his wife conceived. 22. And the children struggled together within her; and she said, If it be so, why am I thus? And she went to inquire of the LORD. 23. And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.
So the Lord told Rebekah that her older son would be servant to the younger son. Again, we see that the Lord’s election transcends the birthright. What is clear is that God chose Jacob over Esau. That is confirmed by the quote from Malachi in Rom. 9:13, “Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.” The question is, “Why?” Why did God choose Jacob over Esau? And why did God make his choice before they were born? Those questions are answered in verse 11. Let’s read it again, “For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth.” God chose them before they were born so that no one could ever say His choice was based on something that they did. They had done nothing, because they hadn’t even been born. Someone might say, “But the choice is still based on foreknowledge; God knew that Jacob would be a better man than Esau.” But if that were the case, the text before us would lose its obvious meaning. If it were like that, then the choice would depend on works, even the works that God saw in the future. The whole point here is that God’s purpose is based on election, on His choosing. And that choosing does not depend on the works of the man who is chosen, but upon the choice of the God who chooses him. Paul is laboring to show that God’s choice is absolutely sovereign and is based upon nothing in man.
Difficult Questions Answered (14-18)
Wow! That is quite a message. Paul started out by dealing with the problem of God’s faithfulness, but his answer has stirred up other serious questions, and he knows it. Beginning in verse 14 we have another example of the unique style of Paul. He anticipates that someone is going to ask a question about what he has just said, so he asks it for the objector. We have seen this especially in chapter 6. The classic is in 6:1, “What shall we then say, Shall we continue in sin?”
In verses 6-13 Paul has defended the faithfulness of God and explained why even though national Israel has largely rejected God’s Messiah, God remains faithful. The key to his argument is in the identification of Israel. Paul maintains that the promises of God were never given strictly to a physical people. Though he made great promises to Abraham and his descendants in Gen. 12, those promises were never intended for all Abraham’s descendants, as shown by the illustration of Isaac and Ishmael. If that was the case in the past, that was still the case. They are not all Israel who are of Israel. But in advancing his careful argument, Paul has made some very bold statements about God’s sovereignty in election. In other words, Paul has clearly said that God chooses a man to be His own due to absolutely nothing in that man.
So now we come to the objection which Paul anticipates. In verses 14-18, Paul ill state the objections and then deal with them. His primary purpose in these verses is to show that God is just/righteous in His unconditional election.
He states the first objection concisely in 9:14, “What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God?” In other words, in light of what Paul has just stated, can we charge God with being unfair? After all, if He makes His choice before people are even born into this world, then surely His choice is arbitrary and He is unjust. After all, we expect a good judge to judge a man on the basis of what he has done or hasn’t done. Either judge or jury evaluates a person on the basis of his conduct. But Paul, you are saying that God makes His choice with no regard to a person’s conduct. Surely you can’t deny that this makes God unfair.
Brothers and sisters, this is exactly the charge that is often made against the biblical doctrine of unconditional election. “It can’t be this way, because it if were this way, it would mean that God is unfair. And we know that God is not unfair.” For some, that is an airtight argument and the case is closed. But we can’t stop reading in the middle of verse 14. We must give Paul an opportunity to answer this objection. That is exactly what he does at the end of verse 14. His short answer is, “God forbid.” Literally, “May it never be.” Does this make God unfair? Absolutely not.
Paul doesn’t stop with the short answer. As in other places in chapters 6 and 7, after he gives the short answer, he then launches into a more detailed explanation. Verse 15, “For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” Notice that Paul comes back again and again to the scriptures. He bases his argument upon the Word of God.
Now this is where we have to take a little time, because this verse is so critical to Paul’s argument. Has has been asked a very good question. Let me review it one more time. Understand that in verses 6-13 Paul is stating that God chooses individual believers. This is not the choice of Israel as a people or subsequently of the church as a people. The reason we know that is because of Paul’s dilemma in the first 5 verses. While there were certainly some Jews who trusted the Lord Jesus for salvation (Paul himself was among them), the vast majority of the Israelites rejected Jesus as their Messiah. From the outset of this chapter there is a distinction among individuals. Paul amplifies that understanding by then focusing on God’s choice of Isaac over Ishmael and Jacob over Esau. Now comes the searching question: “Paul, we are understanding you to say that God chooses individuals to be His own due to nothing in those individuals. You are saying that God chooses them unconditionally, based only on His own preference. If that is true, then we would have to conclude that God is unrighteous.” In response to that charge, Paul says, “May it never be that God would be considered unrighteous.” Then we come to the longer answer: “For God said to Moses…” That is, “God cannot be considered unrighteous in His unconditional election, because He said to Moses…” Do you see? Paul is basing his denial of God’s unrighteousness on these words which he quotes from the Old Testament. So if this is the scriptural support for Paul’s argument, we need to take a good look at it.
Let’s begin by identifying the quote. Where does it come from? Let’s read it from Ex. 33:19, "And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy." We won’t concern ourselves with the slight difference between the meanings of the words mercy, grace, and compassion. Paul’s quote is word for word from the LXX (Septuagint; Greek translation of the Old Testament). He uses this quotation in a way that he believes will settle the argument.
Let’s look at the context of Ex. 33:19. The setting is Mount Sinai, the place to which the people had come on their journeying out of Egypt. It was there that the Lord told Moses to go up on the mountain, and it was on that mountain that the Lord gave Moses the Ten Commandments. But while Moses was up on Mount Sinai receiving the commandments, what were the Israelites doing down below? Yes, they made a golden calf and began to worship it. Part of the consequence of their sin is stated in Ex. 33:1-3…
And the LORD said unto Moses, Depart, and go up hence, thou and the people which thou hast brought up out of the land of Egypt, unto the land which I sware unto Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, saying, Unto thy seed will I give it: 2. And I will send an angel before thee; and I will drive out the Canaanite, the Amorite, and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite: 3. Unto a land flowing with milk and honey: for I will not go up in the midst of thee; for thou art a stiffnecked people: lest I consume thee in the way.
Moses, along with all the people, were greatly troubled by the Lord’s statement that He would not go with the people into the land. So Moses went into the tabernacle of the Lord and spoke to Him. Now let’s pick it up and read all of Ex. 33:12-19…
And Moses said unto the LORD, See, thou sayest unto me, Bring up this people: and thou hast not let me know whom thou wilt send with me. Yet thou hast said, I know thee by name, and thou hast also found grace in my sight. 13. Now therefore, I pray thee, if I have found grace in thy sight, show me now thy way, that I may know thee, that I may find grace in thy sight: and consider that this nation is thy people. 14. And he said, My presence shall go with thee, and I will give thee rest. 15. And he said unto him, If thy presence go not with me, carry us not up hence. 16. For wherein shall it be known here that I and thy people have found grace in thy sight? is it not in that thou goest with us? so shall we be separated, I and thy people, from all the people that are upon the face of the earth. 17. And the LORD said unto Moses, I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken: for thou hast found grace in my sight, and I know thee by name. 18. And he said, I beseech thee, show me thy glory. 19. And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.
The Lord agreed that He would go with Moses and the people into the land, because Moses found grace in the sight of the Lord. I would expect Moses to start jumping up and down with joy. No doubt, there was joy, but there was something more. Remember that Moses was speaking to Almighty God (even face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend -- verse 11). He was so overwhelmed by this encounter that He said, “I beg of you, Lord, show me your glory.” Moses couldn’t get enough of the living God.
Brothers and sisters, I have to stop here. Moses couldn’t get enough of the living God. When God gave him the answer he was looking for, he wasn’t able to walk out of the Lord’s presence and go back to business as usual, even though business was leading the very people of God. The presence of the Lord brought forth a great longing to know more of the Lord. Brothers and sisters, how we need the Lord to work in us. How I need the Lord to work in me. Here was a man who could not see the glory of the cross clearly. He didn’t have the Spirit of the Lord within him as you and I do, and yet He longed to see God’s glory. How much do we long to see His glory? Yes, God has worked among us and is working among us, but it’s like the song writer said, “Mercy drops round us are falling, but for the showers we plead.” Do we? The reason we don’t see more of the Lord’s working is not because we don’t know the right methods. Isn’t it because we don’t long to see His glory? We sing, “Turn your eyes upon Jesus; look full in His wonderful face. And the things of earth will grow strangely dim in the light of His glory and grace.” How long has it been since His glory and grace dimmed the things of earth in your eyes.
Now back to the Lord’s response to Moses in Exodus 33. Verse 19, “And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.” When Moses petitioned the Lord to see His glory, the Lord said, “Yes, Moses. I will give you what you asked for.” The Lord tells Moses three things. First, He said He would make all His goodness pass before Moses. I don’t know all that is wrapped up in that. We read in the rest of the chapter that the Lord told Moses He would hide him in the cleft of the rock as He passed by. Then in 34:6 we read, “And the Lord passed by before him…” We are never given the exact nature of that mysterious passing by.
However, notice that there is a good bit of emphasis on the second thing the Lord told Moses here in 33:19, “And I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee.” Let’s read Ex. 34:5-6, "And the LORD descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the LORD. 6. And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth…" There is a definite emphasis on the proclaiming of the name. The Lord proclaimed His own name. And what name was that? We see it in verse 6, “The LORD.” It is the name Yahweh, Jehovah.
The best way to learn about that name is to go back to Exodus 3. You will remember the story. The Lord is sending Moses back to Egypt to deliver His people Israel from bondage there. But Moses said, “Lord, when I come to your people in Egypt, they are going to say, ‘Moses, who sent you? What is His name?’ What will I tell them.” God’s answer is recorded in Ex. 3:14, “And God sait unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM; and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me to you.” God reveals His name as “I am who I am.” The emphasis is on the fact that He exists with no aid from anything outside Himself. He doesn’t rely on anyone or anything else. He is who He is. “I am that I am” is embedded in the name LORD (Yahweh). That is why Jesus’ arresters “went backward and fell to the ground” when Jesus said, “I am.” He was boldly announcing the fact that He was indeed God. In so doing, He manifested such glory that they were blown off their feet.
Now we come to the third facet of the Lord revealing His glory here in Ex. 33:19, “…and [I] will be gracious to whom I will be gracious and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.” At first, that statement seems kind of out of place. What does that have to do with God’s glory? It is an amplification of the Lord’s name. “I am who I am; I exist by my own will and my own power. And I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy. Yes, I am a merciful and gracious God, but I will extend that mercy to whomever I choose. As the great I am, I exercise that authority and sovereignty and no one can change it. I myself will determine the objects of my mercy because I am who I am. I am not dependent upon anyone or anything outside myself to determine the extent of that mercy.” This is what it means to for the Lord to be God. In proclaiming His name and this statement concerning His self-determination of mercy, He was indeed revealing His glory.
Now come back to Romans 9:15. Paul is basically saying this, “God is not unrighteous in His unconditional election, and I will show you that from the scriptures. He is perfectly righteous in sovereignly determining the objects of His mercy today, because that is what He has always done, because that is exactly what He said to Moses. Even there at Mount Sinai hundreds of years ago, He revealed that this self-determination of objects of mercy was a part of His name and His glory.” This was not some new doctrine Paul came up with; this was part of the revelation of God. Paul was simply applying it to the current situation involving the vast majority of Israelites rejecting the Lord Jesus Christ.
What is the righteousness of God. What would it mean for God to be unrighteous? This is where we must be very careful. The charge is often made, “If this is the way it is, that would make God unfair.” We must be careful that we do not impose our standards of fairness upon Almighty God. Does God have to adopt our standards of fairness in order to be righteous. Please allow me to read you a brief quote from John Piper…
God’s righteousness is essentially his unswerving allegiance to his own name and his own glory. God is righteous to the degree that he upholds and displays the honor of his name. He is righteous when he values most what is most valuable, and what is most valuable is his own glory. Therefore God’s justice, his righteousness, consists most fundamentally in doing what is consistent with the esteem and demonstration of his name, his glory. God would be unrighteous if he did not uphold and display his glory as infinitely valuable.
(taken from sermon “The Freedom and Justice of God in Unconditional Election”)
This is where we find a great and fundamental conflict in people’s thinking. What is the bottom line? Is it the glory of God? Or is it the free will of man? Many conclude that God cannot ignore the free will of man and still be righteous. Again, which is more important -- the glory of God or the free will of man? The answer to that question will shape our thinking about many things.
That brings us to verse 16, "So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy." The first question we must ask is this, “What is it?” The answer is found in the context. We could say that “it” refers to “the purpose of God according to election” from verse 11. The purpose of God according to election does not depend on the one who wills, nor on the one who runs, but upon God who shows mercy. This is really a restatement what Paul has said in verse 11.
Notice that Paul uses both the terms “wills” and “runs.” We might parallel these terms with faith and works. God’s election does not depend on the person who wills to have faith, upon the person who decides by his will that he will trust Jesus Christ. Nor does God’s according-to-election purpose depend on the one who runs, the one who works to try to please God. No, it depends only on the God who shows mercy, because that is a part of His very nature to show mercy on whom He chooses.
Conclusion
That is where we are going to stop tonight. That should give us plenty to chew on. My purpose tonight was primarily to set the strong statements of verses 11-16 in their proper context here in chapter 9. Lord willing, next time we will deal with the other side of the coin, which is even more difficult. If the Lord has mercy on whom He has mercy, does that mean that He hardens whom He chooses to harden? Paul takes up that question as well, and we will look at it in some depth.
You may have noticed that I didn’t deal specifically with the statement, “But Esau have I hated.” It seems fitting that we save that for next week, since it is parallel to the idea of the hardening which Paul takes up in verse 18.
“Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it God who works in you both to will and to do of His good pleasure” (Phil. 2:12-13). As we go through Romans 9, ultimately I hope and pray that we will see how its truths undergird this concept of God’s work in us and as a result will take heart in working out our own salvation.
As you continue to look at Romans 9 and related passages, please feel free to talk about these things. If you want to come and discuss them with me, I would welcome that.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Comments to rot777@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment