Place your banner ad here.          See all banner ads

|| ConcernedMembers.com || About || Links Library || Help Warn Others ||
|| Madison Church of Christ || Richland Hills Church of Christ || Hillcrest Church of Christ || More Churches || Sunday School in Exile ||

Where is my NewThisWeek Email subscription?Click Here

Place your text ad here.           See all text ads

  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>  
Donnie Cruz
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
99.177.250.192

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 26 2013, 10:10 PM 

Dr. Crump, it is OK to identify yourself in some other way. "B" was not addressability-friendly. Call yourself "Professor" perhaps? You are aware that we may address "Anonymous" as "Annie Mouse."

Putting away "Trinity" is not feasible; so, that's not going to happen. The use of the expression "Trinity" itself is not an issue until an investigation of the creed reveals that what it teaches regarding "the 3rd PERSON HOLY SPIRIT IS GOD" is NOWHERE found in the Scripture.

The use of the term "Bible" or "Holy Bible" is not analogous to the what the Trinity doctrine teaches. You know better than that.

What about dealing with this very specific issue -- DO YOU BELIEVE that God's holy spirit is another (a separate, the 3rd PERSON of the "Trinity") Divine Being? Please do not explain what others believe; rather, share with us what you believe.

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
70.193.13.60

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 26 2013, 10:28 PM 

I knew that you can get a doctorate of theology (doctor of the law) without being able to read beyond 'proof texts.' Now, it seems you can be an M.D. and use your human imagination to write a prescription. Figures: "first we gonna pass it then we gonna read it--or not."

Sorry, I just felt like abusing old people.

 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
74.179.204.214

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 26 2013, 10:56 PM 

Speaking strictly about terms, if we reject "Trinity" but accept "Bible," even though both terms are NOT found in the Scriptures, then we practice a double standard. If we reject "Trinity" because the early Catholics coined the term but accept "Bible," a term the early Catholics ALSO coined, we likewise practice a double standard. If we're going to teach anyone anything with credibility, we must first be consistent with our reasons for accepting or rejecting terms derived from a common origin.

Therefore, rejecting certain terms just because Catholics coined them or because they are not explicitly found in the Scriptures just doesn't cut the mustard. You know better than that.

I have no trouble with "Trinity," since I do not perceive Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three physical persons. Some may say, "No, no, 'Trinity' ALWAYS means three separate, independent, physical persons." Such a general assumption applies ONLY IF people do not further clarify how they perceive the "Trinity." I have clarified my own concept of the "Trinity" and am content to leave it at that.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
99.177.250.192

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 27 2013, 1:55 AM 

Bill,

There's no agreement between us in terms of the direction in which this discussion is going.

No one argues the point that God's holy spirit cannot be a "physical" person. Of course, a spirit is not a physical person whether it is "the spirit of man" or "the spirit of God."

I am sorry, but you have not clarified your own concept of the "third member" of the "Trinity." I have asked you numerous times already a very specific question relative to that third member. You keep explaining everything else but that. So, I don't think I should be asking you that question anymore. I truly see no point in furthering this discussion with you.

 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
74.179.63.135

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 27 2013, 8:27 AM 

You're right: we don't agree. We each have our own perceptions about the term "Trinity." Is that to say one of us is right and the other is wrong? Not at all. I don't believe that our salvation absolutely hangs on how we perceive the term "Trinity" one way or another. At the Judgment, I cannot visualize God saying to some, "So, you believed the 'Trinity' consisted of three persons; I condemn you to hell!" OR saying to others, "Well, I see you rejected that 'Trinity' doctrine; welcome to paradise!" I do believe God would have us accept "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit," just as the Bible teaches, but to argue endlessly about whether or not they are three individual, separate, independent "persons" or three-in-one or one-in-three is vacuous and pointless IMO.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
99.177.250.192

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 27 2013, 1:27 PM 

Bill,

I believe that THE HOLY SPIRIT OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST is not a separate Divine Being. His spirit sanctifies just as His blood redeems. I do not believe that the blood of Christ is a separate Divine Being, either.

Here are some references to THE SPIRIT OF JESUS CHRIST:

  • But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. (Romans 8:9)

  • Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. (I Peter 1:11)

  • For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ... (Phil. 1:19)
Since we do not agree and you seem to have NO KNOWLEDGE of the passages above, explain why you believe that THE SPIRIT of Jesus Christ is a separate Divine Being.

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublettt
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
70.193.13.60

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 27 2013, 1:50 PM 

The neo-trinity does not confess that the Man Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God: they confess God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. These all have their centers of consciousness or their own spirit: each has their own separate abilities needed for the dispensation of the Father, Dispensation of the Son and Dispensation of the Holy Spirit person.

You cannot affirm the word TRINITY in the LU sense of the Word without believing in THREE GODS: they are ONE only in that they are UNITED.

Acts 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
Acts 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.


You cannot be baptized INTO the Word or School of Christ if you DENY that MESSIAH came fully in the flesh: you are an AntiChrist. Jesus was not Messiah or Lord or Word until the ONE GOD "made him to be both Lord and Christ."

Blasphemy is also afoot by claiming that the enoch who had an Isaiah scroll (Bible) with him confessed that Jesus Messiah is the Son of God when latter day NON-readers refute that by saying: NO, he should have said that "I believe that Jesus Christ IS God."

If you no deny that confession the you have despised the Word and your own confession and the Spirit OF Christ in Jeremiah 23 calls that blasphemy and John marks you as an anti-Christ. Yes, it would be consoling if IT DON'T MAKE NO DIFFERENCE.

Moses promised Another Prophet Like Me: in that sense Moses was called "a god" but not Jehovah.

1Timothy 2:3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
1Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
1Timothy 2:5 For there is one God [Theos], and one mediator between God and men, the MAN Christ Jesus;
1Timothy 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.



    
This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 70.193.13.60 on May 27, 2013 1:55 PM


 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
74.179.249.129

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 27 2013, 2:03 PM 

What you believe about the Holy Spirit and the Trinity is fine. What I believe about them is also fine. Our perceptions differ, but that's also fine, because I don't believe this subject has anything to do with our eternal salvation. It is not advantageous for anyone to say that his/her viewpoint about the Holy Spirit is THE ONLY RIGHT ONE and every other viewpoint is absolutely false, because the New Testament does not command us to see the Holy Spirit this way or that way on penalty of damnation. Because I don't believe this topic pertains to salvation, it is academic IMO, meaning that it allows for arguments by those who enjoy arguing for the sake of arguing. There's also nothing wrong with that, unless either side becomes so arrogant and fanatical about his own viewpoint that he is intolerant of other views and shouts down or cuts off all who disagree with him. You can't have a decent dialogue with that kind of hostile environment.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
99.177.250.192

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 27 2013, 2:19 PM 

Bill,

I was speaking ONLY about "the holy spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ." I was asking you a very specific question as to why you believe that "the holy spirit of Christ" is a separate Divine Being.

I quoted passages regarding the spirit of Jesus Christ.

Please get to the point. Get busy with your study of the Bible and the online search features. I await your answer.

 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
74.179.62.202

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 27 2013, 3:08 PM 

No need for your harsh attitude. [. . .]

=====================

The remainder of this message (which does not belong here) has been transferred to:

A Special Thread Dedication -- Non-Doctrinal in Nature


    
This message has been edited by Donnie.Cruz from IP address 99.177.250.192 on May 27, 2013 4:22 PM


 
 Respond to this message   
<:o~~~~
(no login)
98.81.116.114

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 27 2013, 4:21 PM 


Bill said,

"What you believe about the Holy Spirit and the Trinity is fine. What I believe about them is also fine. Our perceptions differ, but that's also fine, because I don't believe this subject has anything to do with our eternal salvation. It is not advantageous for anyone to say that his/her viewpoint about the Holy Spirit is THE ONLY RIGHT ONE and every other viewpoint is absolutely false, because the New Testament does not command us to see the Holy Spirit this way or that way on penalty of damnation. Because I don't believe this topic pertains to salvation, it is academic IMO, meaning that it allows for arguments by those who enjoy arguing for the sake of arguing. There's also nothing wrong with that, unless either side becomes so arrogant and fanatical about his own viewpoint that he is intolerant of other views and shouts down or cuts off all who disagree with him. You can't have a decent dialogue with that kind of hostile environment.

++++++++++++++

Bill, I could not agree more! You nailed it.
We do not expect all conservative brethren to agree on every doctrinal matter.


Galatians 5:22-23

New International Version (NIV)

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.


[linked image]



 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
99.177.250.192

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 27 2013, 4:36 PM 

There is no disagreement there. I've already mentioned "not to expect all conservative brethren to agree on every doctrinal matter."

That's common knowledge, in fact.

The missed point, however, is that the discussion board is designed to be a dialogue, even of doctrinal controversies. Specific questions deserve answers. Otherwise, the conversation dies when the issues at hand are not dealt with but instead are replaced by a sermon on "love." (Anyone is invited to initiate a thread on "love" -- a separate subject altogether.)

 
 Respond to this message   
<:O~~~~
(no login)
98.81.116.114

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 27 2013, 4:57 PM 

Actually, self-control may be a better starting point. happy.gif

 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
74.179.246.198

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 27 2013, 5:36 PM 

Fish, as Donnie rightly notes, a dialogue dies when questions posed are not answered. [...]


=====================

The remainder of this message (which does not belong here) has been transferred to:

A Special Thread Dedication -- Non-Doctrinal in Nature


    
This message has been edited by madisonchurchofchrist from IP address 99.177.250.192 on May 27, 2013 8:13 PM


 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
70.193.13.60

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 27 2013, 7:18 PM 

FAITH comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of the Lord: to say I BELIEVE is a strong delusion if you deny that there is

ONE GOD (Theos) THE FATHER
One Lord (Kurios) Jesus of Nazareth

You are not remotely CLOSE to the kingdom if deny what Jesus said:

Mark 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is,
.....Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:

1Corinthians 8:5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
1Corinthians 8:6 But to us
.....there is but one God, {Theos} the Father, OF whom are all things, and we in him;
.....and one Lord (Kurios) Jesus Christ, BY whom are all things, and we by him.


ANYONE whom God permits to read BLACK text will be TOLD and will NECESSARILY INFER that Jesus is not ONE OF THE THEOS.

God [Theos} is the ONLY source OF Life, Word, Truth, everything.
Jesus [Kurios] is the ONLY source BY WHICH are all things.

OF defines the sole DEITY. BY defines God's INSTRUMENTAL MEANS

Mark 12:32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God (Theos); and there is NONE OTHER but he:

Trinitarians say that Jesus and a holy spirit PEOPLE are TWO OTHERS.

Mark 12:34 And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him any question

AGAIN despising Jesus is BLASPHEMING the Holy Spirit OF God by saying that Jesus did not live in the POSTMODERN world and did not attend ACU, LU etal and He SHOULD have made it perfectly clear and REPUDIATED the Old Testament by saying: Whoa! There are THREE EQUAL members of the God Family and WE, too, are the source OF all things.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(Premier Login madisonchurchofchrist)
Owner
99.177.250.192

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 27 2013, 8:04 PM 

Self-control would be an excellent starting point.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
99.177.250.192

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 26 2013, 6:49 PM 

Do you mean trust the translation's inconsistency?
  1. Pointing out the translation's inconsistencies (one time it's a "he"; another time it's an "it") is not an interpretation or a personal preference on my part. There is nothing wrong with pointing that out. When we take note of the inconsistency, then we are interested in some really serious Bible study -- by questioning the motive of the translator.

  2. Translators (1500s to the present) should not be influenced by a particular doctrinal invention, such as the Trinity Creed (3rd PERSON Holy Spirit is God) by the Council of Nicea in 325 AD in which the "Christian Church" [later to become the evolving Roman Catholic Church] and the Roman Emperor Constantine were involved]

  3. Translators are not supposed to interpret first and then translate.

  4. Grammatical rules are very important. When a passage, in order to complete its meaning, that needs an article or a pronoun where it is missing in the original Greek text, it is not a matter of the translator's preference by using a "he" instead of an "it." The correct pronoun must be based on the context of the definition of the noun. The word "spirit" is an improper noun. You would not want to identify YOUR "spirit" as a "HE" or "SHE" any more than you would identify YOUR "mind" as a "HE" or "SHE." I don't think I would use the pronoun "he" for my "nose." My nose is an "it" because my nose is not a person.

  5. Selective theology is an entirely different ballgame from proper translation. Selective theology should never influence any translation of the Scripture. This is what's happened in the translation of certain passages of Scripture -- those that deal with God's holy spirit, in particular.

  6. In the case of designating "the holy spirit of Jesus Christ" a masculine or neuter gender, we cannot have it both ways. It appears that some people are content with being confused -- one moment think of God's Spirit as a "he"; another moment as an "it."
I'm sure there are other reasons why proper translation is very significant in helping us understand certain passages of Scripture.

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
70.193.13.60

Re: Caging "The Trinity" Grammatically

May 26 2013, 7:41 PM 

If a word is never in recorded history the NAME or description of a PERSON (people) and has a very LIMITED literal definition, translation depends on the context. Contrary to the latest course in theology, there is no upper case Spirit in the text.

Aaron is a male: his gender is masculine (mostly). Aaron is the NAME of a person. Aaron is made of body (machine), soul (life) and spirit. His spirit is his mind and it has no gender: it is an IT. If he has a spirit OF nastiness it is the "mental disposition" toward being nasty. That mental disposition is personified as HE. Sally's spirit OF nastiness is a SHE. Sally's spirit or mind is still an it or that. God's MIND is His Spirit: words which are BREATHED out can be nothing else than Spirit or Mind. Jesus of Nazareth who began to be when He was born afterward ARTICULATES the Words of God: Jesus was not the WORDS of God in the beginning. When God SENDS FORTH His Spirit (breath) it does not become another PERSON. That would leave God MINDLESS and that is what theology seeks to prove.

"Spirit" in Hebrew, Greek and Latin means WIND. Words have definitions. Spirit CANNOT and has never been the name of a person. It is specificially limited:

Spiritus
a breathing or gentle blowing of air, a breath, breeze
1. The air: imber et ignis, spiritus et gravis terra
2. The breath of a god, inspiration:
2. Spiritus, personified, a spirit


Jesus makes it clear in Matthew 13 that truth is always HIDDEN in parables to fool the foolish.

Psalms 104:3 Who
.....layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters:
.....who maketh the clouds his chariot:
.....who walketh upon the wings of the wind [spirit?]
.....[not a person, silly person]
Psalms 104:4 Who maketh his angels spirits;
.....his ministers a flaming fire:


Since there is ONE MEDIATOR between God and Man, the MAN Jesus Christ, to say that God needs ANOTHER PEOPLE instead of His BREATH (Spirit) to communicate with Jesus of Nazareth whom GOD MADE TO BE BOTH LORD AND CHRIST, is according to common sense and John, the MARK of Antichrist and one who God has sent STRONG delusions so they CANNOT read the text when they PRETEND not to read the text as another mark.



    
This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 70.193.13.60 on May 26, 2013 8:02 PM


 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
70.193.13.60

Re: Possessive Case: "HIS" Holy Spirit Is Not Another Divine Being

May 27 2013, 10:28 PM 

Superstitious people always thought of "a little man" inside of the "Big man." And so do neo-trinitarians believing that a "person" in the image of Jesus can fit inside their larger, carnal body.

Spirit means WIND: no more no less. Beyond that it speaks of the BREATH of God. Paul in 1 Cor 2 draws the comparison

The Holy Spirit
.....is to God
what OUR spirit
.....is to us.

Paul then explains by saying that WE have the MIND of Christ. Mind or Spirit in humans is always CONTRASTED to FLESH. Our spirit is UNholy until we request A holy spirit or A good conscience ONLY by obedience in baptism. We do not have THE Holy Spirit OF Christ as a CUT OFF PERSON but our spirit becomes A holy spirit.

[linked image]


    
This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 70.193.13.60 on May 27, 2013 10:47 PM


 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
99.177.250.192

"The Spirit [He?] Was Active in the Creation"

May 28 2013, 1:19 AM 

Here's Fish's lesson (cf. first response to this thread above) from the PreachersFiles.com, by Tom Moore -- "What the Bible Says About The Holy Spirit #1":

The outline says:

--- A. WHY STUDY THE HOLY SPIRIT?
-------1. It is a biblical theme
----------a. He was active in the creation Psalm 104:30

Discussion:

Psalm 104:30 says -- "Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth."

There is nothing wrong with the Spirit being active in creation. But the big question I have is in regard to the assignment of the pronoun "HE" to the Spirit. To me that's a presumption based on a preconceived notion that "The Holy Spirit IS God" per the Trinity Creed. It would have been fine had the teacher said that "the Spirit was active in creation" rather than "He was active in creation."

Let's analyze the verse (the verse is truth; man interprets):


  • 1. "Thou" = "You" (a personal pronoun, second person) refers to God
  • 2. "Thy" = "Your" (a personal pronoun, 2nd p., possessive determiner) refers to "God's"
  • 3. "Spirit" = the possessor's object as in God's spirit
  • 4. There's no implication that "the spirit" IS God [another divine being] sent by God.
Genesis 1:2 says -- "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." The preposition "OF" once again indicates possession. It is conclusive that the expressions "the Spirit of God" and "the Spirit is God" cannot be used interchangeably.

The word "spirit" is never defined as a person; it is a common noun, an improper noun which means "wind" or "power" or "force" or "breath," etc. Can you imagine God Himself being in your nostrils? Job 27:3 -- "All the while my breath is in me, and the spirit of God is in my nostrils." That's one of God's manifestation of His spirit -- "breath."

We realize and recognize the inconsistencies in translations, especially when influenced by the Trinity Creed that masculine-genderizes God's holy spirit. In some cases, a translation may assign the pronoun "HE" to refer to the holy spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ; in other cases, it may assign the neuter gender "IT" to God's holy spirit.

We're thankful for these passages, when the translator(s) forgot all about the Trinity Creed [oops!!! the translators referred to the Spirit of the Father as "ITSELF" instead of "HIMSELF":

  • The Spirit ITSELF beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: (Romans 8:16)

  • Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit ITSELF maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. (Romans 8:26)


 
 Respond to this message   
 
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>  
Place your text ad here.           See all text ads

This web site is not part of or approved by any Church!

...........................THE BOOK

What Happened at the Madison Church of Christ?


There are thousands of churches being taken over across America.

This book is only about one of those churches. It's about the Madison Church Of Christ. By studying the methods used here along with the resource references you might be able to inoculate your church. At the very least you will recognize the signs early on.

Many of the current members of the Madison Church of Christ still don't know what happened.
Some never will know! This book is for them as well.

Madison Church of Christ was a 60 year old church. At one time it was one of the largest churches in the US, and the largest Church of Christ.

It thrived for many years on the vision of it's elders and those of it's ministers. Those visions undoubtably came from the the inspired word of Jesus Christ.

At sometime in the last 10 years there was a deliberate plan by a majority of the elders to take the Madison Church of Christ into a more worldly realm.

They used secrecy, covert planning, and outside sources to scheme and to change the format and direction of the Madison Church of Christ.

The Elders knew that the membership would never approve such a plan. Using the tools of the "Community Church Movement"(consultants, books, seminars, meetings,planters,seeders) they slowly started initiating change so it was never noticed by the members until it was too late.....

At the heart of the plan was the fact that old members were going to be driven off so new techniques could be used to go out and reach the unchurched through new "Contemporary Holy Entertainment" methods developed by the "Community Church Movement"

Old members had to be kept on board long enough to get their plans ready, or the funds would not be there to pay for the new building. So by the plans very nature, it had to be secret.

The church had no plan in effect to renew or approve elders. There was never any need. The elders had always been "as approved by God". 10 of the last 15 elders would begin to shed some doubt on that.

The Elders did not even need a majority at first, because some of the elders went along unwittingly.

This edition starts shortly after some of the members begin to smell something strange in January 2001. Later editions may go back and fill in some of the timeline.

To even start to understand whats happening here, you must read the background materials in the first of the book.

This is only the first edition, and not the end. New editions will be printed as needed. To keep abreast of current changes, please visit our web site; http://www.concernedmembers.com/madison

Here is the list of players;

5 Godly Elders
10 Not so Godly Elders
120 "Deacons" (allegiance unknown)
2,800 - 4,000 church "members"
2 "teners" (people who have publicly confessed to have broken all ten commandments)
Unknown number of "sinners" (This is what the 10 elders call us.)
Unknown number of "demons" (Flying everywhere, to many to count)
 

Click Here......The Book is Available Now FREE

Place your banner ad here.           See all banner ads

...ConcernedMembers.com ...About ...Links Library ...Sunday School in Exile ...Help Warn Others


FastCounter by bCentral

CM Visit Counter as of 6/25/2015
2,101,394

Site Visits Since 6/30/2015
page counter