| Author | Message | ||
| Cindy Registered user Username: Cindy Post Number: 549 Registered: 7-2000 |
Steve, Hi! I was wondering if you knew what Ravi Zacharias thinks of Seventh-day Adventists? I've read one of Ravi's books ("Can Man Live Without God?") and think it is excellent, but I have not heard him speak or write on SDA'ism... cindy | ||
| Steve Registered user Username: Steve Post Number: 10 Registered: 7-2000 |
Hi Cindy, I haven't read his book, Jesus Among Other Gods, which is defenitely on my list of books to get. He is an excellent evangelical Christian writer. The very little I've read of him, makes me believe he would view Adventism as a cult. However, since it was Walter Martin's most famous book that he was editing, I believe he, along with Kenneth Samples and others want to be very careful about what they say. My personal belief is that since Martin was so open to Adventists, anyone editing his work may be reluctant to go "all the way" and label SDA as a cult. Over time, I think that the church will regain the label of "cult" by those who initially trusted Martin's research. Once the word gets out that nothing really changed in the 1950's, the label will be a more common one to apply to Adventism. Well, those are my thoughts, for what they're worth. Steve | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 238 Registered: 7-2003 |
Why does it seem evangelicals are so afraid of Adventism? Are they really ignorant to their teachings, taking what they say at face value or is it something else that keeps most from taking that bold leap? I heard one person say that since it was possible to find Christ in Adventism, even with all the other junk, that's the hesitation, but it seems more likely people get diverted from the complete truth about God which is the ultimate danger in any cult. It is a strange phenomenon to me. | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 238 Registered: 7-2003 |
Melissa, I suspect that evangelicals are doing their best to follow the Lord's directive that we "be as one". I think they are extremely reluctant to create divisions within the Church unless it becomes very clear that a given organization has placed itsel outside the Church by virtue of it's false teachings. It's pretty black and white with many groups. For instance, the JWs deny the deity of Christ, Mormons are polytheistic, and Christian Scientist are modern day gnostics. All of these destrutive false heresies have been vigorously combated since the days of the apostles. It's clear that none of these religous systems could be considered "Christian" in any sort of Biblical sense. It's a little different with Adventism. Despite their past, they now claim an orthodox view of the Trinity (even though it's not well taught and many SDAs are confused on this topic). The affirm the full deity of Jesus Christ. They claim the Bible as the ultimate source of doctrinal authority (debateable in practice). They claim salvation through faith alone (debateable in practice). They claim a literal bodily return of Christ. They claim a literal bodily resurrection. On the surface they would seem to be an evangelical Christian group with a few heterodox doctrines. I can well understand evangelicals reluctance to exclude them from the evangelical tent. But here's the problem. There is a "language barriar". The words Adventists and evangelicals use are the same, but they mean very different things. In addition there is a culture of deception. Adventist, from leaders to lay people, tend to put the best face on their doctrines when talking to evangelicals. The deemphsize the cultic portions of the doctrines and emphasize the more orthodox portions. But among themselves, this pattern is reversed. Dr. Martin was well aware of other cults using these types of tactics as well as the "language barriar" in dealing with cults. That is why it suprises me so much that he was taken in by Adventism. Perhaps SDAs are just slicker than others. Chris | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 239 Registered: 7-2003 |
But if SDAs are so sure their doctrines are correct, why the deception? I have long recognized we talked from different dictionaries, but it seems to be so blatantly dishonest to hide the full truth of your theology. I know B has justified deception by saying God deceived people like when he hardened pharoah's heart, etc. But that seems to be dangerous territory to walk in ... Also, I know B is very negative towards groups that claim to be "evangelicals" and have read that in the words of other SDAs too. So, why the two-facedness if they don't care that much about us anyway? Why do they care what we think? It is just so hard to understand their real motives since nothing is as it seems. And I know there probably aren't hard and fast answers to any of these questions. It's just stuff I wonder about from time to time. | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 239 Registered: 7-2003 |
When it comes to motivation, I can only speak for myself. I was absolutely convinced that what I had been taught and believed was 100% correct in all aspects and details. I was absolutely sure that everyone else needed to believe the same things. However, no one wants to be considered a nut. Everyone would like to be seen as a normal person with reasonable beliefs. So when another Christian asked me about my religion I would always reassure them that we had a great many things in common. I would talk about how we blieved in the Trinity, in the Bible, in forgiveness of sins through the death of Jesus on the cross, in the return of Christ to take us home, in the resurrection, etc. Sometimes I would say something like, "We're pretty much like most other churches except we hapen to worship on Saturday morning." (I never used the word "Sabbath" with a "non-Adventist".) My thought was that by stressing our similarities, they would see me as normal and reasonable *AND* that might then give us some common ground that would allow me to share deeper truths such as the Sabbath truth. This is what many Adventist call "witnessing" in my experience. "Witnesing" is not so much about Jesus as it is about Adventist distinctives or "truths" (especially the Sabbath). Often my mention of Saturday morning worship would lead to a conversation about why we worshipped on Saturday morning. This would give the opportunity to talk about the 10 commandments (something most of the Christians I talked to seemed to agree were important for Christians). Then I would talk about the 4th commandment and point out the fact that it says "THE Seventh-Day" not any day you want or the first day or any day in seven. I would point out that the Jewish people always understood the 4th commandment to be the day that they currently worship on (Saturday). I would point out that there is no Biblical command to change this day to Sunday. I always felt like once I got them to admit that they should follow the 10 commandments that I had them. In retrospect, I still think that's true. If you believe that Christians are bound by the 10 commandments, that the 10 commandments represent God's ultimate law for all people of time (rather than just a summary of the old Mosiaic covenant for the Hebrews), then I don't see how you can avoid observing the Jewish sabbath in the same way they did. Chruches that teach the 10 commandments as the law for Christians are creating parishoners who are ripe for Adventist "witnessing". In summary, I didn't see it as being deceptive, just gradually revealing more truth as that person was ready for it. Chris | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 240 Registered: 7-2003 |
Oh, I absolutely agree with your discussion into the 10 commandments. I could see that progression easily, but what I could never make the complete connection to was that the 4th commandment REQUIRED worship and that ANY day is a wrong day to worship. Even IF the 4th commandment were still to be observed, where do they find the mandate to worship and if one can make that connection, say through Lev 23, how can they make the next leap that there is EVER a wrong time or day to worship? And why is it wrong to worship on Sunday, but not ... Wednesday or Thursday when many churches, even SDAs, have mid-week services? That just seems like a huge inconsistency to me. Is it as simple as the tie in to EGW that makes those other things logical? But in hindsight, that whole story is so similar to how B approached me. SOOO similar. I guess it's one thing to use it on someone you're just trying to"witness" to, but B was pursuing me on a personal level. He knew I was concerned about introducing him to my kids, and had grilled him pretty intently about what he was looking for. His keeping silent about these things, not only affected me, but my children. But maybe that is the where the purest deception began and the one I am really reacting to. Had it merely been an acquaintance or associate relationship, there's not the investment. It's not that it's not at the very least a hidden agenda, it is just not nearly as impacting as trying to romance someone at the same time. I'm just trying to process all this out. I appreciate your responding to my seemingly stupid questions. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 106 Registered: 12-2003 |
Chris, your experience totally parallels mine. Having been taught that "progressive revelation" meant gradually changing from untruth to truth (as a means of explaining EGW's doctrinal flip-flops and contradictions in what she reported the Lord had "shown her"), I really didn't see that what I believed or said was deceptive. Having been taught that the name for "black" was "white", figuratively speaking, I'd no idea that I was wrong. It's a most crazy-making belief system; you really learn to rationalize facts to explain your own deviations, and you believe that the process is TRUTH. Christians are often vulnerable to Adventists partly because they so often do not understand the true nature of the new covenant. As Chris pointed out, they usually agree that the 10 Commandments are for them to keep. As our pastor said last Sunday, however, Christ-followers are NOT under the law including the 10 Commandments. Our job is NOT to keep the law; our requirement now is to live by the Spirit. Because Christians don't really understand that fact, they are completely vulnerable to the Adventist argument that to properly keep the law, they must keep #4 literally. And, if we were to keep the law, the Adventists would be right. Adventists do have disdain for evangelicals in general. There is a sometimes stated but often merely implied belief that evangelicals are anti-intellectual, Bible-thumping, none-critical-thinking "sheep" who simplistically follow their leaders and claim the Bible has all the answers to every question that should be asked. Melissa, you're right about the contradiction between Adventists' desire to be seen as mainstream evangelical while believing themselves to be superior at the same time. That whole phenomenon is part of the deception. They desperately want to seem "normal" so they can be respected and have status an power within their communities, but they also secretly want to convince others that they must become Adventist to really have truth. An example of the deception is the large gold cross LLU Medical Center installed on the side of its building a few years ago. We've discussed before the fact that traditionally, Adventists believe crosses are nearly popish symbols and have no place in Adventist institutions. That cross, though, has helped convince people (I've had people tell me this fact!) that LLU was really Christian because they display the universal Christian symbol. The "vocabulary problem" is a huge part of the deception also. Adventists know exactly the words to say to convince others that they are orthodox. In practice, however, they promote very different understandings. All of this problem with deeplyy ingrained deception that is nearly impossible to dissect away from the lifestyle, practices, and beliefs of Adventists leads me back to the (often controversial) statement I've made before: Adventism has a spirit of deception. It is a real spirit, and it is the reason Adventists can't "see" the problem with their beliefs and practices. It is the reason people can't have logical, truthful doctrinal discussions with Adventists who don't want to know reality. It is the spirit that keeps people emotionally and psychologically locked in Adventism. It is the spirit that the Holy Spirit replaces in the hearts of those who come to see the truth and surrender their Adventism to Jesus. I know that when the truth about EGW and the teachings of the Bible and Jesus began to be clear to me, the whole deceptive paradigm began to be visible. For the first time I realized how crazy my old way of thinking had been. Suddenly all the unexplained dichotomies between my beliefs and the Bible began to make sense. Suddenly my cognitive dissonance began to resolve. Truth became accessible and beautiful! Praise God! Colleen | ||
| Doug222 Registered user Username: Doug222 Post Number: 486 Registered: 3-2001 |
Chris, I can relate completely to your attempts to appear mainstream so that you could then present "the truth" to them. The thing about that "truth" is that it never freed anyone from anything. The letter kills, but the Spirit frees (and gives life.) Melissa, you said:
Having been indoctrinated as a SDA, the htought that worship and rest could be separated never appealed to me. As far as I was concerned, they were inextricably (sp) linked. Your logic is good, but I do not think it is the line of reasoning that most Christians use in order to worship on Sunday. To most, Sunday holds some special significance as the Resurrection Day and that it has replaced (or at least superseded) Saturday as the preferred day of worship. Like Chris, I cannot see how anyone could possibly extol the importance of keeping the commandments and not hold Saturday in some form of high esteem--even if only to cease from all secular work. Colleen, I know what you mean about realizing the absurdity of the things we held so dearly once the veil started to be removed. There are far too many inconsistencies for me to ever go back. The sad thing about it is that there are very intelligent SDA Christians who cannot see what is so plain. In His Grace Doug | ||
| Steve Registered user Username: Steve Post Number: 12 Registered: 7-2000 |
Hi Melissa, What Chris and others write is excellent insight to the working of deception from Adventists to non-Adventist Christians. You ask a great question: But if SDAs are so sure their doctrines are correct, why the deception? I have long recognized we talked from different dictionaries, but it seems to be so blatantly dishonest to hide the full truth of your theology. When the leadership of the SDA church decided to specifically deceive Martin, Barnhouse and Cannon, they began the process of "doublespeak." They used terms in one way in-house, but to the watching Christian community, they used the same terms in a completely different way. They also started using language that had not been used before in Adventism. That was the 1950's. Since then, two generations have been raised hearing the terminology being used in two different ways by the leadership and their own pastors and teachers. Today, when an honest SDA uses these terms to define his/her theological positions, they don't even realize that they are engaging in the practice of deception. It has been so carefully woven into the fabric of the SDA church, most people don't realize it's happening (some outside of the church do realize it.) As Chris has said, scaling the language barrier is very critical. The reason Martin couldn't scale that barrier in the 1950's is because the leadership of the church was intent on gaining the trust of the Evangelicals. This was unlike any other group Martin had dealt with. When he met with Mormon leaders, they were clear: they believe that God was "once a man as we are now, and dwells in yonder heavers." The Jehovah's Witnesses were honest with him: Jesus Christ is a creature like us and was given "manufactured" bodies after his resurrection so the disciples would believe in the physical resurrection, even though Christ did not experience a physical resurrection. The Chrstian Scientists were clear with him: These so-called physical infirmities (injuries, illnesses, etc.) are an error in our thinking. (Martin was excellent at understanding the Christian Scientists, having been raised to believe in that by a family member, I believe an aunt.) All the groups Martin ever researched were honest with him, EXCEPT THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS! They were truly the ravenous wolves that dressed most completely like a lamb. I used to meet for Bible study with fellow employees every Wednesday morning before work. I was the only Adventist. I truly believed that I had them convinced that I was just like them, even though I really wasn't. I was using "double speak" and they apparently saw that. After coming out of Adventism, one of the members of that group, a Baptist, said, "Praise the Lord, we've been praying all this time for you. Thank God you're finally out!" Yes. Thank God we're all finally out. Steve | ||
| Steve Registered user Username: Steve Post Number: 13 Registered: 7-2000 |
P.S. Most Adventists do not know their own theology. I had spoken with one of the pastors of La Sierra University Church to explain to him that I no longer believed in the SDA messages (many messages.) Just a few weeks later, as we continued our discussions, and I repeatedly made it clear that I don't believe in these things, he asked me to teach his sabbath school class while he was out of town. I asked him what the subject was. He said, "the Investigative Judgment." I said, "I don't even believe in that anymore. It's false. How can I teach a class on the IJ?" He said that he still wanted me to teach the class. I agreed so long as I could be honest about it. He said he still wanted me to teach his class, and wanted me to feel free to share my viewpoints. That morning, I began by asking if anyone could define the Investigative Judgment. Approximately 35-40 college/young adult age students were in the class. Not one could state it properly, however, one individual studying theology, came very close. (I stated in the classic sense, but very simply, that since 1844 we are being judged for our works as believers so that God could determine whether we are "safe to save," or whether from lack of perfection, poor dietary habits, and not following the law properly, we would have our names blotted out of the Book of Life.) I completed the definition and initially asked for response to the definition of the IJ. Not a single person in that class believed in the IJ. All but two or three had even heard the doctine taught them by their parents. The pastors own daughter, a missionary, was in the class. She said her father had never taught her the IJ. I was amazed. I then gave a careful response to the IJ, explaining why it is not Biblical. They all agreed with the summary at the end of the class. I truly believe they were involved in double-speak. To those who don't believe in the IJ, they don't "believe" in it. If it was presented by this pastor in a "positive light", I'm convinced they all, without exception, would have accepted the IJ as being Biblical. They are not even aware of what they believe, but when presented it in a positive way, have no problem accepting it. It reminds me of a beautiful Mormon girl I was "dating" (unofficially, of course) in the late 1970's. We studied the entire Book of Mormon together for well over a year as I attended churhc with her and her family. I was initially unaware of specific Mormon beliefs. At one point, a non-Mormon presented me with a quote from a poem written by one of the Mormon prophets. "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become." I had also been told about the polytheism (henotheism) of the Mormon church. Next time at our nightly Book of Mormon study, I confronted her with that statement and what it apparently meant God was, and the fact that they believed that more than one God existed. She flat-out contradicted me and stated that they "do NOT believe in more than one God. The Father is the only one we worship." I argued a little with her, but she consistently denied the church believed those things. The next evening, she began with an apology. "Steve, I asked my dad and he said that you are right. I was wrong. We do believe in more than one God, BUT WE WORSHIP ONLY ONE GOD!" In the space of one night, this young woman went from believing that one God exists to believing that a plethora of God's exist. She did not seem to be shaken in the least, except for the fact that she inadvertently lied to me. The same mentality thrives in Adventism. If given a proper explanation, any doctrine will be accepted, no matter how opposed it is to the Gospel. Deny it today, accept it tomorrow. What does it matter? Our leaders would never lie to us, would they? They don't understand the nature of wolves. Steve | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 241 Registered: 7-2003 |
Steve, I think you provide great insight in the parallel of SDA and Mormons. Your friend said: "I was wrong. We do believe in more than one God" It sounds like it's not even the girl's faith or beliefs, it's the faith or beliefs of the religion. The girl has "chosen" the religion (albeit by birth) so she believes what it teaches. It seems to me many SDAs are the same way. B used the term "we" when he talked about his beliefs and I know he was just spouting what he'd been taught and probably not intimately studied it for himself. It is the same thing, honestly, with those who go to church on Sunday. MOST people go because that's when their parents took them. I have never been taught that "when" I went to church held some special significance and I keep hearing SDAs tell me I believe there is some significance to Sunday, but honestly in 40 years I have NEVER heard that and I"ve been a "member" of several different denominations. I don' t know if I've just hit the only churches in the area that don't hold the day as something individually special or if it really isn't made the big deal that SDAs claim. I have heard that the early church fathers used to call it resurrection day and when I ask people now, they say it's the Lord's Day, which was mentioned in Revelation ... so those do believe the Bible at least gives passive approval of worshipping God on Sunday, but I have just never heard it in connection to a sabbath, a sabbath replacement or any sort of 'holy day". So, when an SDA does ask someone about it, I'm sure they don't have any real good answers. It's not something that started this decade, century or even this millenium. It easily goes back to the earliest church fathers, and some argue that Paul indicates churches met on days other than Saturday (some say everyday) and since it was specifically mentioned that collections be gathered on the first day of the week, some think that was the early beginnings of worship services on Sunday. I haven't met a SDA yet who set aside his money for the church on a Sunday and the only people ever trying to say that passage is less than it seems at face value is the SDAs I know. From everything I've read, it was an evolution, not a deliberate act to undermine the Jewish sabbath. SDAs make "us" sound so evil and immoral, yet it is soooo irrelevant to the people I know. When I ask them, and I've asked a lot, most of them laugh to think "when" matters at all. As a matter of fact, the rise in Saturday services in our area is prolific. It fits into people's busy lifestyles and yet allows them to still participate in worship. I don't know how the SDA argument is even holding water these days that we hold Sunday special. Can you imagine an SDA church putting services on a Sunday to meet the lifestyle needs of its memebers? It is just not the same. I think it just boils down to, really, what you've been raised believing and sometimes no "proof" to the contrary is going to budge some people from that truth. You know, I hope I don't sound like a broken record, but I so appreciate every one here who takes the time to respond to my questions. I guess it if were a logical belief system, you wouldn't have left it, but it is sure hard to wrap your arms around as an outsider whose basic premises in life are just so different. I am thankful that you have been willing to share you experiences and let an outsider like me probe into things that could be personal and sometimes still sensitive. I do not take that for granted. I learn so much from you. Sometimes I think I should just drop it and stop trying to figure it out, but then I think of my son and just keep plugging on, trying to understand what makes it logical to some. Anyway, thank you very much! I greatly appreciate your time and openness. | ||
| Cindy Registered user Username: Cindy Post Number: 550 Registered: 7-2000 |
I totally concur with Chris', Doug's, Colleen's, and Steve's comments above!! The "doublespeak" preaching/thinking is a HUGE factor, Melissa (and others reading here). And, Colleen, yes, it may be considered controversial, but I also believe there is an actual underlying "spirit" of deception!! And it is a powerful one...a one that in the final analysis actually DETHRONES Jesus Christ's Lordship and Supremacy!! Jesus Himself warned in Matthew 24: "many FALSE PROPHETS will appear and deceive MANY..." Many, many in Adventism really do not understand the true falsity and danger of remaining under that Old Covenant mixture with New Covenant grace... Others do know, but still remain in it; to me they are living in dishonesty. But God Is GOOD!!! I know He will lead out of that cult those who really desire JESUS Alone!! He did for me! grace always, cindy | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 222 Registered: 7-2000 |
There's definitely an 'enculturation' process within the SDA church and most other cults. The kids are wrapped up in a culture but not told all of the beliefs of the church. SDA's do this very successfully through Pathfinders and Maranatha Mission trips. These activities take a lot of time and the kids form friendships there. Soon, all of their friends are there and they want to attend church with their friends as well. Of course, not much of EGW gets in---mostly it's a sort of Bible study using the hermaneutic of the SDA church. This is why my daugthter, who's definitely in this situation, won't consider leaving. All of her friends are there and she wants to go to an SDA academy that several new friends from a Maranatha mission trip she went on are attending. She keeps saying that 'nobody in her group believes in EGW'. My reply is that 'wait until you're in the adult groups where the study/conversation are full of EGW quotes. What do you do then? There is not one doctrine that contradicts EGW so it makes no difference whether she is mentioned or not!'. I get an exasperated sigh and shrug. She tried to get me to go on a Maranatha mission trip. I said 'no way'--I'm not going to build churches where error is taught and the locals won't even own the church. Daughter says 'but they at least have some place to worship'. I said 'yes, but worship what?' .....and so it goes. I won't give up and I hope that in a couple of years when she winds up with the adult classes something will click in her head and the light will come on. What a contradiction! Nice folks with really deceptive (albeit sometimes unintentional) practices. | ||
| Cindy Registered user Username: Cindy Post Number: 551 Registered: 7-2000 |
Yes, Loneviking...there is a great "enculturation process" in Adventism. And in any "church" that adds to the FINISHED work of CHRIST! The social association based on "good morals" and a helping-hand mindset largely disregards Ellen White's more bizarre quotes. Often, a relaxed, friendship-based Sabbath is promoted rather than a rigid 'rules' observance. (Leave those issues to the "historic" Adventists!) But still... underneath it all there remains an essential denial of Jesus... ...Jesus as being totally sufficient for our salvation and for our motivation/guidance in holy living! Many times I have read that we NEED the Sabbath Day to remind us of our Creator and Redeemer! ???? I remember every morning! The Holy Spirit is well able to keep us from forgetting! Also, to a cultural Adventist to be told to "witness", the task can seem daunting indeed. "Friendship evangelism" of socializing on Sabbath afternoons is the easy part! But not many want to take on explaining the 1844 prophetic timetable, Ellen White as a true prophet, clean/unclean meats, etc. etc. etc.!! Those complicated and somewhat embarrassing topics are better left to the pastors or evangelists to explain! grace always, cindy | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 107 Registered: 12-2003 |
Cindy, you have completely stated what I also believe. In spite of the friendly, warm, grace-sounding words from many pockets of Adventism, underneath it all lies an essential denial of Jesus. I do believe there are a few true believers in Adventism. I also believe, however, that a huge division is occuring in the church, and sooner or later those true believers will find themselves on the outside. The problem is that Adventism is not 180 or even 90 degrees off from true north; it's extermally off onlyby a couple degrees or so. If a person continues two to five degrees off course, however, he ends up in a place he never expected to be. Praise God for leading us to himself! Colleen | ||
| Hoytster Registered user Username: Hoytster Post Number: 69 Registered: 9-2003 |
My son's mother has not yet communicated this to me, but I'm told she has agreed that my son will be enrolled in a non-denominational Christian school next fall. Before the split, we took our son to both Sabbath School and Sunday School. After I received the boot, she unilaterally enrolled him in a tiny Adventist school: 16 kids in grades 1-8. He'll have been there three years. The new school is great. Much closer geographically, with 23 kids in a class, teachers with training in their subject areas, a wonderful Christian spirit. And many other advantages. I'm so grateful that this is happening. Praise God! - Hoytster PS: Last night I asked my son if he was willing to talk about the validity of the Adventist treatment of Sabbath-keeping as a salvation issue. He said he was! I'm going to do it in small doses, probably when he's been at the new school for a while, so he's no longer embedded in Adventism all day M-F. I'll be asking for your advice then.  | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 272 Registered: 7-2003 |
Hoytster, I am SOOO happy for you and your son. That is wonderful news. That must be a huge weight off you. Praise God, indeed! | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 276 Registered: 7-2003 |
Praise God Hoyster! This is great news!!! Chris | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 162 Registered: 12-2003 |
Hoytster, I am SO happy for you and your son!! I'll keep praying for you and your kids. Colleen |
