Page 2 of 5 (83 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next >
This post has 82 Replies | 1 Follower

Posts 2869
Forum MVP
Ted Hans | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jun 23 2009 1:03 PM

George Somsel:

I don't know how much original languages training you have had, but, with the little that I have looked at Peterson, he appears to be reasonably accurate even if he is a bit unconventional.  Of course, being unconventional is the whole idea behind his translation.  As Wayne Leman, who was a SIL translator and who runs a Bible Translation list, says, we must avoid "biblish" if we are to be understood by the average Joe or Jo.  I haven't delved into it enough to comment on any theological perspective it has, but I didn't note anything in what I read.  Some live by 6,000 translations, but I prefer to go to the original and therefore don't get too excited by what a particular translation might have.

 
Hi George, have you had the opportunity to read the various post on Joe Miller's blog, four in total on Eugene Peterson? He compares the NET,NIV with the Message Bible & the Message did miss the point on a lot of verses. I do believe Joe was fair in his analysis & gave proof for his conclusion. Check the post on his website, that is if you have not done so
 
Ted

 

Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jun 23 2009 10:28 PM

Ted Hans:
Hi George, have you had the opportunity to read the various post on Joe Miller's blog, four in total on Eugene Peterson? He compares the NET,NIV with the Message Bible & the Message did miss the point on a lot of verses. I do believe Joe was fair in his analysis & gave proof for his conclusion. Check the post on his website, that is if you have not done so
 
Ted

 

I read as much of the blog as I felt I could tolerate.  It would seem that Joe has a problem with Peterson's speaking of something as God's work rather than specifically mentioning the HS.  I'm wondering what he thinks the work of the HS is if it is not the work of God?  Indeed, Peterson's Message is not the usual word-for-word translation of the scriptures.  I think, however, that one must ask whether he makes the passages comprehensible to the modern reader.  I could also criticize the ESV which seems to be much beloved in Fundamentalist circles today.  I note that it has reverted to the old, wornout translation in Is 7:14 of "virgin."  Apparently the committee was wary of receiving any returns of their translation riddled with bullet holes as happened when the RSV was issued with its very accurate translation of "young woman."  The lunatic fringe of Christianity seems to have lost all of the Christian graces when they engage in such behavior.  Here we have people who probably couldn't distinguish one Hebrew word from another who nevertheless pronounce that the RSV was wrong here.  On the contrary, the RSV got it right.  In Is 7:14 it is "young woman" though in Matthew it is most definitely "virgin."  Or perhaps we have an instance of the confusion of elevated spirits with the action of the HS.  It makes me think of the song, "I'm so excited, I just can't hide it.  I'm about to lose control and I think I like it."  The action of the HS is not to be confused with feeling good although I have heard people say that they could "feel" the presence of the HS when they were probably no more than feeling good.  I will remind you of the words of Karl Barth

If the question what God can do forces theology to be humble, the question what is commanded of us forces it to concrete obedience. God may speak to us through Russian Communism, a flute concerto, a blossoming shrub, or a dead dog. We do well to listen to Him if He really does.

Barth, K., Bromiley, G. W., & Torrance, T. F. (2004). Church dogmatics, Volume I The doctrine of the Word of God, Part 1. Translation of Die kirchliche Dogmatik.; Each pt. also has special t.p.; Includes indexes. (2d ed.) (55). Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.

 Sometimes the word of God comes to us in the retort of one of our fellows which brings us up short.  Our first reaction is to begin to be outraged, but then we realize that what they said was absolutely true.  At that point we must say, "Thanks be to God."

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 2746
Bohuslav Wojnar | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jun 23 2009 11:29 PM

George Somsel:
Here we have people who probably couldn't distinguish one Hebrew word from another who nevertheless pronounce that the RSV was wrong here.  On the contrary, the RSV got it right. 

I agree with you Georg on all you said. I like when translation is just a good translation and theology is left to preaching and teaching. It has to be both ways however. In our, very good by the way, Czech Ecumenical Translation there are some examples of the opposite direction. Like speaking in tongues (or various languages) is translated speaking in the extasis, or trans. Well, it is just a mistification. When we say about the New World Translation that it is biased, we have to make sure our translations are not biased too. All of us we have our pet doctrines (well, not all of us, many of us). Some realize it, some not. And to say frankly, it is on both sides of the doctrinal spectrum of Christianity.

Bohuslav

Posts 2793
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 10:32 AM

Ted Hans:
I have too much respect for the Bible to replace it with my own commentary
I agree there is a certain degree of arrogance in publishing ones commentary as a translation.  I think there is also a bit of duplicity when Peterson publishes a book like "Working the Angles" and then publishes "The Message" which violates the standard with which he judges other pastors.  SEE HERE

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 2793
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 10:40 AM

Ted Hans:
Hi Joe how are you getting on with Karl Barth. Hope you are are enjoying himWink

 

Regards

Ted

Hi Ted, thanks for asking.  First, I should say that reading Barth in Logos is wonderful!!!  (thank you mysterious benefactor!)

 He takes a lot more energy than I had imagined, but I am enjoying him quite a bit.   I don't get to blog every week on him as I had hoped, but I do get in at lest one or two posts a month.  Trying to summarize him into a short post is a fun challange though.  It forces me to really try and think through what he is saying so I can do him some justice Wink

If you are inclined, I am always open to some input on my summaries.

 

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 2869
Forum MVP
Ted Hans | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 11:28 AM

George Somsel:

I read as much of the blog as I felt I could tolerate.  It would seem that Joe has a problem with Peterson's speaking of something as God's work rather than specifically mentioning the HS.  I'm wondering what he thinks the work of the HS is if it is not the work of God?  Indeed, Peterson's Message is not the usual word-for-word translation of the scriptures.  I think, however, that one must ask whether he makes the passages comprehensible to the modern reader.  I could also criticize the ESV which seems to be much beloved in Fundamentalist circles today.  I note that it has reverted to the old, wornout translation in Is 7:14 of "virgin."  Apparently the committee was wary of receiving any returns of their translation riddled with bullet holes as happened when the RSV was issued with its very accurate translation of "young woman."  The lunatic fringe of Christianity seems to have lost all of the Christian graces when they engage in such behavior.  Here we have people who probably couldn't distinguish one Hebrew word from another who nevertheless pronounce that the RSV was wrong here.  On the contrary, the RSV got it right.  In Is 7:14 it is "young woman" though in Matthew it is most definitely "virgin."  Or perhaps we have an instance of the confusion of elevated spirits with the action of the HS.  It makes me think of the song, "I'm so excited, I just can't hide it.  I'm about to lose control and I think I like it."  The action of the HS is not to be confused with feeling good although I have heard people say that they could "feel" the presence of the HS when they were probably no more than feeling good.  I will remind you of the words of Karl Barth

 

If the question what God can do forces theology to be humble, the question what is commanded of us forces it to concrete obedience. God may speak to us through Russian Communism, a flute concerto, a blossoming shrub, or a dead dog. We do well to listen to Him if He really does.

Barth, K., Bromiley, G. W., & Torrance, T. F. (2004). Church dogmatics, Volume I The doctrine of the Word of God, Part 1. Translation of Die kirchliche Dogmatik.; Each pt. also has special t.p.; Includes indexes. (2d ed.) (55). Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.

 Sometimes the word of God comes to us in the retort of one of our fellows which brings us up short.  Our first reaction is to begin to be outraged, but then we realize that what they said was absolutely true.  At that point we must say, "Thanks be to God."

Thanks George on your take on Eugene Peterson & on Isaiah 7:14. I do take an evangelical line on Isaiah 7:14 but that is not to say that i am not aware of the controversy or the point you are making even though i do disagree.
 
Ted

 

 

Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ

Posts 2793
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 11:30 AM

George Somsel:
I read as much of the blog as I felt I could tolerate.  It would seem that Joe has a problem with Peterson's speaking of something as God's work rather than specifically mentioning the HS. 
Yes George, changing the Scripture and reducing the Holy Spirit to an impersonal force instead of a person of the trinity does bother me.  Had you demonstrated the appropriate intellectual curiosity and read fully the 8 comparisons I offered, you would see the issue with the  Message is more than just about the Holy Spirit.  Romans 6 is one quick example of several where Peterson inserts his theology of Baptismal Regeneration.  He is entitled to his theological opinion on that topic, but inserting his tradition and calling it a "translation" is misleading at best.  I would suggest that your limited understanding of Greek, which you mentioned in your post, is part of the problem you have in fully understanding the topic.

As to the rest of your confused rant, it has absolutely nothing to do with my post.  Your trademark name calling and innuendo do little to meaningfully engage the topic at hand lacks any substantial thought.   Most of what you post Mr. Somsel reflects a bitterness designed to create fights, and I have no interest in such trivial things.  You may have the last word, but I will not engage with your further.

I pray you find peace friend.

 

II Tim 2:22-26

But reject foolish and ignorant controversies, because you know they breed infighting. 24 And the Lord’s slave must not engage in heated disputes but be kind toward all, an apt teacher, patient, 25 correcting opponents with gentleness. Perhaps God will grant them repentance and then knowledge of the truth 26 and they will come to their senses and escape the devil’s trap where they are held captive to do his will.

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 11:35 AM

Joe Miller:

Ted Hans:
I have too much respect for the Bible to replace it with my own commentary
I agree there is a certain degree of arrogance in publishing ones commentary as a translation.  I think there is also a bit of duplicity when Peterson publishes a book like "Working the Angles" and then publishes "The Message" which violates the standard with which he judges other pastors.  SEE HERE

Are you pursuing some sort of vendetta against this man?  It seems that you pursue him like the hound of hell.  How would you like it if I were to do the same to you?  Drop it !

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 2869
Forum MVP
Ted Hans | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 11:52 AM

peace be still

Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ

Posts 108
Rob Suggs | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 12:26 PM

I recently preached Psalm 1. Its beginning in an accurate translation is fabulous, suggesting the process of walking, standing, and sitting in the way of wickedness. (Ps. 1:1) That preaches beautifully, as we show our listeners the spiritual restlessness of moving toward sin until we are settled in it--as against being "like a tree planted by streams of water." If you do the original language work, you see that the tree is actually "transplanted" by the kinds of irrigation canals the Israelites had to build to port water to their crops. That, too, is a very visual, highly symbolic teaching. 

But Peterson, who is a very gifted wordsmith, gives us this for the first verse:

How well God must like you—
     you don’t hang out at Sin Saloon,
     you don’t slink along Dead-End Road,
     you don’t go to Smart-Mouth College.
Peterson, E. H. (2002). The Message : The Bible in contemporary language (Ps 1:1). Colorado Springs, Colo.: NavPress.
You gain a certain amount in attention-grabbing shock value, but you lose a wealth of genuine meaning in the metaphor of moving toward the way of sin, which is more than a collection of bad destinations. As for the transplanted tree, which has been brought to root near the life-giving streams of living water, Peterson gives us "a tree planted in Eden," which sounds good but is not quite what the text is saying. The inspired truth, I find, is always more exciting than the spins we can put on it. I don't want to be critical of Peterson. His method worked far better with the informal language of the New Testament than the formal poetry of the Old. But I use The Message less and less.

Posts 390
Alain Maashe | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 12:28 PM

George said

"I could also criticize the ESV which seems to be much beloved in Fundamentalist circles today.  I note that it has reverted to the old, worn out translation in Is 7:14 of "virgin."  Apparently the committee was wary of receiving any returns of their translation riddled with bullet holes as happened when the RSV was issued with its very accurate translation of "young woman."  The lunatic fringe of Christianity seems to have lost all of the Christian graces when they engage in such behavior.  Here we have people who probably couldn't distinguish one Hebrew word from another who nevertheless pronounce that the RSV was wrong here."

Speaking of grace, those in the so-called lunatic fringe of Christianity are apparently not the only in need of grace. Even the enlightened minds among us need a refill of grace especially when it comes to being gracious to and respectful of others, might be a case of  Proverbs 15:1 (now, that would make the enlightened wise also, glory!)

George said

"Here we have people who probably couldn't distinguish one Hebrew word from another who nevertheless pronounce that the RSV was wrong here. " 

George, I agree with you in principle, one should not dismiss the rendering of almah by the RSV without looking at the Hebrew text and do lexical studies. This is not to say that that “virgin” is necessarily wrong .  People should know what they are talking about before criticizing

However, I was disappointed to see that you do not apply the same principle to yourself

You obviously have not (sufficiently) read nor understood Joe’s Miller’s excellent arguments (you at least admit that you have not read it past what you “could tolerate”) and from the observations you made, you missed his point entirely. Equally regrettable is the fact that you are only marginally familiar with the Message itself (from your own admission).

What happened to making sure that we know what we are talking about?

May I be so bold as to ask for consistency?  (But I forget my place… in the fringe)

 

Disclaimer: if anyone detects even an infinitesimal trace of mild sarcasm in the above post, let me remind you that English is not my first language and whatever you might have noticed could possibly be blamed on a case of “lost in translation” kind of issue  J

Posts 2793
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 12:48 PM

Ted Hans:

Hi Joe how are you getting on with Karl Barth. Hope you are are enjoying himWink

 

Regards

Ted

Hi Ted, I did reply earlier, but it must have ben lost in the suffle.  I wrote this a few posts back...

--------

Hi Ted, thanks for asking.  First, I should say that reading Barth in Logos is wonderful!!!  (thank you mysterious benefactor!)

 

 He takes a lot more energy than I had imagined, but I am enjoying him quite a bit.   I don't get to blog every week on him as I had hoped, but I do get in at lest one or two posts a month.  Trying to summarize him into a short post is a fun challange though.  It forces me to really try and think through what he is saying so I can do him some justice Wink

If you are inclined, I am always open to some input on my summaries.

 

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 2:13 PM

Joe Miller:

George Somsel:
I read as much of the blog as I felt I could tolerate.  It would seem that Joe has a problem with Peterson's speaking of something as God's work rather than specifically mentioning the HS. 
Yes George, changing the Scripture and reducing the Holy Spirit to an impersonal force instead of a person of the trinity does bother me.  Had you demonstrated the appropriate intellectual curiosity and read fully the 8 comparisons I offered, you would see the issue with the  Message is more than just about the Holy Spirit.  Romans 6 is one quick example of several where Peterson inserts his theology of Baptismal Regeneration.  He is entitled to his theological opinion on that topic, but inserting his tradition and calling it a "translation" is misleading at best.  I would suggest that your limited understanding of Greek, which you mentioned in your post, is part of the problem you have in fully understanding the topic.

As to the rest of your confused rant, it has absolutely nothing to do with my post.  Your trademark name calling and innuendo do little to meaningfully engage the topic at hand lacks any substantial thought.   Most of what you post Mr. Somsel reflects a bitterness designed to create fights, and I have no interest in such trivial things.  You may have the last word, but I will not engage with your further.

I pray you find peace friend.

 

II Tim 2:22-26

 

But reject foolish and ignorant controversies, because you know they breed infighting. 24 And the Lord’s slave must not engage in heated disputes but be kind toward all, an apt teacher, patient, 25 correcting opponents with gentleness. Perhaps God will grant them repentance and then knowledge of the truth 26 and they will come to their senses and escape the devil’s trap where they are held captive to do his will.

 

From what I recall offhand (I do try to put these things out of my mind), Peterson speaks of God as acting rather than the HS.  Is God now impersonal?  What really troubles me about your blog and the reason I find it less than tolerable to read is that you are comparing two English language translations to the Message.  This is not about whether I like one English translation and choose to judge others by it.  It is about whether a translation accurately reflects the ORIGINAL.  If you want an NIV or an ESV or an NASB, go out and buy one.  That is not what the Message attempts to be.  Your quotation here bothers me as well.  Why is it that so many are intent on demeaning themselves by calling themselves "slaves"?  The word δοῦλος does not always designate a servile person.  Persons in high office are frequently referenced as servants and thus call themselves as well.  It is a high position.  I recall Colin Powell's several times repeated statement "I serve at the pleasure of the President." 

I found it necessary to come back to edit this post since I neglected to include one item which was high on my list of matters to bring up.  You speak of Peterson as inserting "his theology of baptismal regeneration."  I haven't read that much of Peterson, but I would find it extremely surprising if he were to hold to a doctrine of baptismal regeneration.  He is, after all, a Presbyterian, and the Presbyterian Church (whichever variety) does not teach that.  I will look at the passage you mention specifically, however, I am virtually certain that you are in error and therefore slandering the man.  You speak of my being bitter.  Yes, I am bitter when one Christian slanders another.  Repent.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 2:53 PM

George Somsel:

I found it necessary to come back to edit this post since I neglected to include one item which was high on my list of matters to bring up.  You speak of Peterson as inserting "his theology of baptismal regeneration."  I haven't read that much of Peterson, but I would find it extremely surprising if he were to hold to a doctrine of baptismal regeneration.  He is, after all, a Presbyterian, and the Presbyterian Church (whichever variety) does not teach that.  I will look at the passage you mention specifically, however, I am virtually certain that you are in error and therefore slandering the man.  You speak of my being bitter.  Yes, I am bitter when one Christian slanders another.  Repent.

I have just reviewed Rom 6 in Peterson's Message.  While it could be interpreted to teach baptismal regeneration, I believe you are overinterpreting it.  Baptism is a symbol as well as being an initiation rite.  The sybol is precisely dying to sin and rising to new life.  It is a symbol of identification as well. It speaks of Israel as being baptised to Moses.  Why is it necessary to attempt to prove that you are more orthodox than some other Christian?  Do you find him teaching baptismal regeneration elsewhere?  I believe that you have unjustly attacked the man.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 2793
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 3:02 PM

Alain Maashe:
Disclaimer: if anyone detects even an infinitesimal trace of mild sarcasm in the above post, let me remind you that English is not my first language and whatever you might have noticed could possibly be blamed on a case of “lost in translation” kind of issue  J
Alain, you write well enough!  What is your first language?

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 2869
Forum MVP
Ted Hans | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 3:19 PM

Hi Joe I have been away at church so the late response & i shall be following more of your writing on your blog. I have been going through your post on the church and it is great.

Kind Regards & we need more writing of your type in these days where truth, biblical truth is a vanishing concept.

Ted

Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ

Posts 2793
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 3:52 PM

Ted Hans:

Hi Joe I have been away at church so the late response & i shall be following more of your writing on your blog. I have been going through your post on the church and it is great.

Kind Regards & we need more writing of your type in these days where truth, biblical truth is a vanishing concept.

Ted

Thanks brother that means a lot.  If you find some broken links, I apologize.  I just moved my entire site from blogger to Wordprss and am still making some manual fixes to some stuff that was broken.

 

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 390
Alain Maashe | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 24 2009 10:27 PM

Joe Miller:

Alain Maashe:
Disclaimer: if anyone detects even an infinitesimal trace of mild sarcasm in the above post, let me remind you that English is not my first language and whatever you might have noticed could possibly be blamed on a case of “lost in translation” kind of issue  J
Alain, you write well enough!  What is your first language?

Joe,

My first language is French. I was just joking about the meaning being lost in translation (but it is such a nice excuse when I want to appear innocent, while not being so innocent) 

now my cover is blown

Alain

Posts 3917
Forum MVP
Friedrich | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 25 2009 8:10 AM

I am not a Peterson basher.  But this is one time when I DID think his translation was poor.  So I didn't use it.  I rarely use it, but there are times he captures well what I think the text says, and I use it because it sounds fresh and brings out God's Word.

It is clear that both Ted and John have hard core lines of thinking at different ends of the spectrum.  I am a bit dismayed at the tone that the discussion has devolved into. 

I always consult more literal versions when doing foundational study.  (NASB, ESV, NET--slightly less literal, but not so dynamic as NIV, etc).  Always.  But even THOSE translations are not void of their own theological leaning.  All you have to do is try to translate the enigmatic Romans 9:22 to see that.  Sometimes even, and especially, "literalness" is not the utopia we make it out to be.  certainly "thought for thought" has its problems too.  But it is not "wrong" in and of itself.

As a boy who grew up speaking English and German, I understand quite well the need for "dynamic equivalence."

It is clear this topic is an emotionally charged one depending on your spectrum of theology.  Take care my brothers to excercise love and gentleness.  Even God's word tells us to do so to those who are in error.  It does little good to be pseudo gentle and then  be condescendingly dismissive, either.  It's okay to stick to your guns, but be alert about the defensive posturing that is often a tool of the Enemy to divide us.

To stir up more controversy: as a kid, I read "The Way."  Shock.  Gasp.  I didn't agree with his theology, but I tell you what:  I READ the Bible (yes, I call "the way" the Bible, even with its faults).  I got the scope of God's plan, his people.  I would not have if I'd been forced to read a 400 year old tranlslation of the Bible.  And to this day, I promise you, my theology is not heretical after having read The Way.   In fact, I was helped spiritually by reading it.

Conversely, I love how KJV sticks to the "Walk" imagery of Ephesians (walk in sins, good works, etc).  It really pulls things together in a way that I think is softend (though it has the "same" meaning) in NIV's "to live."

Each brings something to the table.  Find out what it is, use it with all humility and with a relentless heart for the truth and love of God.

 

"Baptismal Regeneration" is also a label that is often misused and mischaracterizes those who do insiste on immersion as an initial step of salvation.  It probably accurately describes SOME people, but it is a term that is imo a straw man.  It stereotypes in sweeping generalizations those who practice water immersion.  I myself am really in neither camp ("faith only" or "water regenerationists").  Both seem to talk AT each other rather than listen to each other.  Oh great, this could be a whole new thread.

I like Apples.  Especially Honeycrisp.

Posts 3917
Forum MVP
Friedrich | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 25 2009 8:12 AM

hey, where is the "quote" of the reply?  I see it when I compose, but I click "post" and I only see my comment.

I like Apples.  Especially Honeycrisp.

Page 2 of 5 (83 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next > | RSS