Is Hell Eternal Separation From God?

Many Christians define Hell as eternal separation from God. However, I wonder if this is born out by Scripture. It seems that a lot of people go to Jesus Christ’s cry on the cross to prove this point: “My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?” If Christ experienced Hell on the cross, as most Reformed believers rightly believe, then Hell seems to be defined here as being forsaken by God.

Another argument that seems to point in this direction is the relationship of Revelation 20 to Revelation 21. In Revelation 20, the dragon and the two beasts are thrown into the lake of fire, along with Death, Hades, and everyone whose name is not written in the Lamb’s book of life (Revelation 20:15). When one reads on into Revelation 21, it says that God will dwell with His people, which seems to suggest that He is not dwelling with those who are in the lake of fire.

To answer the first argument, it is not true that God the Father abandoned God the Son at the cross. The cross did not result in a rift in the Trinity. The abandonment consists of the God-man suffering the full wrath of God the Father. It is a giving up of Jesus to the judicial wrath, not an ontological abandonment. This becomes clear when the judgment context of Psalm 22 is taken into account, from which Jesus’ cry comes.

To answer the second argument, I wonder Who keeps the lake of fire hot? Who throws Satan into it? Who torments Satan day and night forever? Are these not divine passive constructions? Who can administer the justice but God alone? How would we ever trust that the punishment fits the crime perfectly unless it is God who punishes?

A passage that gives a bit more light on this is Revelation 14:6-13. In this passage, those who worship the beast, and receive the mark of the beast will drink the cup of the wrath of God, poured full strength (verse 10). This torment is eternal (verse 11). Therefore, John is talking about eternal punishment in Hell in these verses, not a temporal punishment. The key phrase, then, for our purposes, is the last part of verse 10: “in the presence of the holy angels and the presence of the Lamb.” It is the torment that will happen in the presence of the Lamb and of the angels, a torment that lasts forever. It is, therefore, true that the torment will last eternally in the presence of the angels and of the Lamb.

Another argument can be deduced from the principle of God’s omnipresence. If God is everywhere (see Psalm 139 for an extensive proof of God’s omnipresence), then God is present in Hell as well. Some of us might be uncomfortable saying that, as if God shouldn’t be involved in the punishment of Hell, as if it would dirty His holy hands. I would counter by saying that I wouldn’t want anyone BUT an omniscient God administering punishment for eternity! How else could permanent justice be assured?

I conclude that the formulation of Hell being eternal separation from God needs a bit of tweaking. Hell is eternal separation from the grace and mercy of God. It is not eternal separation from God entirely. I believe that people will fervently wish that they could escape the judging presence of God! Hell is a place where God is present only to judge and punish. Heaven is the place where God is present only to love and cherish.



  1. Suzanne wooden said,

    September 28, 2015 at 3:44 pm

    I have had similar thoughts myself. The presence of God without Jesus righteousness credited to our account is terrifying. His perfect holiness must execute wrath and judgment against sin. Does his omnipresence not apply to Hell? I would say it does. I think people prefer to think of a Hell without the presence of God as that somehow seems less terrifying.

  2. John Harutunian said,

    September 28, 2015 at 4:11 pm

    A distinction between forsakenness and abandonment seems critical to your argument. But I don’t think there is one.

  3. Ackbach said,

    September 28, 2015 at 4:23 pm

    I was taking my kids for a walk a year ago when, oddly enough, the subject of death came up, and a thought occurred to me: we have this definition of death that I’ve been taught forever. Physical death is the separation of the soul and the body, and spiritual death is the separation of the soul from God. There’s just one little snag with this definition: God is everywhere. How can a soul be “separated from God”? Then I thought about hell, and what happens there? It’s definitely not that God is absent from hell – see Psalm 139:8. What happens in hell that is so terrible is that God is there, but He is always wrathful and never gracious (except insofar, perhaps, as those in hell might not sin more to increase their punishment??)

    So how about this for a definition of death: the death of something is the separation of that something from a good will (defined as a will that wants what is, in the end, beneficial to the something), where nothing can be done by the something to repair the separation.

    So, thinking of several different kinds of death here, we have:

    1. Physical death is the separation of the body from the good will of the soul, and the body can do nothing to repair that. The immediate counterexample coming to mind is suicide thoughts: has someone contemplating suicide separated his good will from his body? Because surely we would not yet call such a person dead. But I would argue that such a person still has a good will connected to his body. It may be eroded, but notice how suicide attempts are not always successful. There is that survival instinct intact. On the other hand, if someone has “lost the will to live”, we often say that person is “already dead” or “as good as dead”.

    2. Spiritual death is the separation of a human soul from the good will of God. Now, God is always good, so I do not mean to imply otherwise. What I mean here is that, during the condition of spiritual death, many things happen to the dead soul that are not beneficial to it. If this soul is still alive physically, then we are talking about an unregenerate man whose sinning is storing up wrath in the day of judgement. If this soul is not alive physically, then we are talking about the soul in hell being tormented, which I think we could definitely say is not beneficial to the tormented soul. Either way, bad things are happening to that soul.

    Objection: bad things happen to regenerated souls as well. Answer: well, yes, but they all work out for the good of the soul in the end. That is, the telos of all things are good for that soul, whereas the telos of all things for the non-elect soul are bad for that soul.

    Now it seems to me that this definition makes sense of a number of passages in Scripture that otherwise are a bit cloudy. What do you think?

  4. September 28, 2015 at 4:55 pm

    I think the notion hell is separation from God comes from CS Lewis. Too many churches quote CS Lewis. Not enough quote the bible like you did.

  5. greenbaggins said,

    September 28, 2015 at 5:00 pm

    John, a distinction between forsakenness and abandonment is not really what I am arguing. Instead, I am saying that the kind of abandonment that most people think of at the cross is not the kind of abandonment that actually happened. In other words, the distinction is not between one word and another word, but between one meaning of a word and a different meaning of that same word.

    Bro, I’m not sure I can evaluate that formulation at this point. It seems a bit odd to me to connect death with the will, since most deaths happen contrary to the wish of the person dying. I am still comfortable with the definition of physical death as the separation of the body from the soul.

  6. roberty bob said,

    September 28, 2015 at 6:08 pm

    Those who have shut Christ out of their lives during this earthly sojourn — wanting no fellowship with him, refusing the gracious invitation to the Great Wedding Feast — will be granted their wish for the life to come: a Christ-less, love-less, grace-less everlasting existence. They will get what they said they always wanted; but as the cruel consequences bear down heavy upon them, they will suffer deep remorse; hence, all of the weeping and gnashing of teeth.

  7. Ron said,

    September 28, 2015 at 9:01 pm

    And added to the omnipresence of God and His providential upholding and ordering of hell, the Lord of conscience will no longer be suppressed in unrighteousness, a most dreadful and terrifying thought.

  8. John Harutunian said,

    September 29, 2015 at 12:55 am

    Jimmy, the idea of hell as separation from God goes back way before C.S. Lewis. It’s a common view in Roman Catholic circles. More important, there are Bible verses like I Thessalonians 1:9 (where unbelievers are said to be “separated from the presence of the Lord’) which seem to teach it.

    Greenbaggins, what kind of abandonment do you believe Christ experienced on the cross? Whether or not there was an ontological rift within the Trinity I don’t know. But if sin cannot exist in God’s presence, and Christ became sin for us, there was surely a rift of some kind.

  9. Matt Foreman said,

    September 29, 2015 at 5:23 pm

    The 2 Thess.1:9 verse is interesting, because the use of ἀπὸ is a little ambiguous. But also of interest is that προσώπου τοῦ κυρίου etc is OT language of God’s face and God’s glory from the Exodus. Given that Jesus was the Angel of God’s Presence and Angel of Great Council in the OT, and that Jesus is now raised in a glorious Body as first-born from the dead – the language of eternal separation is, I think, still appropriate in the sense of separation from the manifestation of the Person of Christ and the gracious, real presence of God – while admitting that God’s essence is still omnipresent – his manifestation to us is multifaceted. So I’m not sure that the original definition Lane starts with is wrong from one perspective, but there is more to be said.

  10. John Harutunian said,

    September 30, 2015 at 12:38 am

    Matt, I know neither Hebrew nor Greek. But my intuition tells me that you’ve touched upon (as I see it) a major problem in much Reformed theology. From my perspective, God the Father is a God of wrath (i.e., retributive justice) to precisely the same degree as is God the Son. No more. And God the Son is a God of grace to precisely the same degree as is God the Father. No more. If you’re associating “the manifestation
    of the Person of Christ” exclusively with “the gracious, real presence of God” it looks like you’re missing a fundamental truth: that the Persons of
    the Trinity are one not only in substance but also in will and purpose.

  11. Matt Foreman said,

    September 30, 2015 at 9:08 am

    John, I agree entirely that the Persons are one in substance, will and purpose. My argument is for ‘both-and’. 2 Thess.1 also says that the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire afflicting vengeance. But then it says that unbelievers will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction away from the face of the Lord and of the glory of his might. The face and glory of the Lord is language for the Angel of the Lord’s presence with his people from the Exodus – that the Angel was manifested as dwelling with them in their camp. Believers will see his “face” and he will dwell with them as their God. In the new heavens and new earth, Jesus will be with us in bodily form, in physical manifestation. He will be with us, we will see him and be with him – in ways that the reprobate will not.

  12. Dennis said,

    September 30, 2015 at 4:15 pm


    I think eternal separation comes from Matthew 25:31-46. God after judgement tells the unrighteous to depart from Him. Also, Matthew 13: 41-43 and Luke 16:19-31.

    If God is all good, then eternity in heaven with God is the ultimate we can strive for. It’s eternal happiness. If all good comes from God, then eternal separation from God is not only evil, it’s the ultimate evil. All good comes from God and therefore, God’s presence in Hell means that there would be a presence of goodness in Hell. A presence of goodness in Hell would mean that “things could be worse.”

    From the above Scripture references and logic, we can deduce that:

    1. The judgement casts the sinners into Hell.
    2. There is a giant chasm that separates Heaven and Hell.
    3. The angels will throw the evildoers into the fire while the righteous will be in the Kingdom of the Father.
    4. Hell is the ultimate evil.
    5. The ultimate evil would be completely devoid of God (since He is all good).
    6. God cannot be in Hell.

  13. Kevin said,

    September 30, 2015 at 8:29 pm

    What about whaling and knashing of teeth? Or for who the black darkness is reserved forever? Or Lazarus? I thinl you are going a little light on hell.

  14. Kevin said,

    September 30, 2015 at 8:33 pm

    Greenbaggins, in regard to being forsaken, its the only time He says My God, My God, and not Father. I believe He would have not said forssken if He didnt feel forsaken. Catholics do this, the cross wasnt really the sacrifice, it was the bread on thursday. I think we should take Jesus at His word. God bless

  15. Ackbach said,

    September 30, 2015 at 8:59 pm

    Bro @ 5: But my definition of death has nothing to do with the will of the person dying. It’s about a different person’s good will departing from the person, who thus “dies”.

  16. Dennis said,

    October 1, 2015 at 10:15 am


    The black darkness is reserved for those who do evil. Matthew 13 is very clear. Jesus says that if you cause others to sin or do evil, you will be cast into fire.

    The righteous are those who have a solid foundation. On good soil. Who bear fruit. If you have a solid foundation in Christ, you will bear fruit. Your love for God shines through your actions and you can be counted as righteous.

    If you bear no fruit (or bad fruit), you will be thrown in the fire. (Matthew 7:19).

  17. Dennis said,

    October 1, 2015 at 10:24 am

    Kevin (14),

    You are misrepresenting Catholicism. Catholics understand the sacrifice happens at the cross. The Last Supper establishes the Eucharist but the Eucharist is the Body of Christ at the Cross. It makes us present at Calvary. By partaking of the Eucharist, we are further joined to Him (from our initiation at Baptism) at the Cross so that we can rise in newness of life at the Resurrection.

    We do take Christ at His word.

    In regards to “My God, My God…” my understanding is that He is referencing Psalm 22. Since the Psalms were not numbered yet at that time. He couldn’t say “Psalm 22”. They were referenced by the first line of the Psalm. Psalm 22 is a foreshadowing of the Crucifixion.

  18. M.Colvard said,

    October 1, 2015 at 10:40 am

    To comment on Dennis’ early comment (the list), #2. Giant chasm separates Heaven and Hell – How would you square that with Luke 16 ‘Lazarus and the Rich man’. It would seem that part of the awfulness of Hell as described in the parable is that those in Hell see what they are missing.

  19. roberty bob said,

    October 1, 2015 at 11:48 am

    In our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount, Jesus warns those who are in danger of going to hell. The following persons ought to take heed: the angry and contemptuous who sow the wicked seed of murder (Matthew 5:22), and those who look at a person lustfully who sow the wicked seed of adultery (Matthew 5:29-30), Christ is clear that to enter the kingdom (and not be shut out of it) one’s righteousness must surpass that of the Pharisees and teachers of the Law. Christ goes on to spell out how this is done by obeying the commandments (Matthew 5:21 – 7:29) so that one’s righteousness adheres to the standard set by our God for life in the heavenly kingdom, namely, to do the will of our Father in Heaven by putting Christ’s words into practice — hearing + doing — in order to bear much fruit.

    Read the Book. Hearing + Doing = Everything!

    Dennis @ #16 is correct.

    Do the Protestants — do the Reformed — teach and preach these basic truths of kingdom righteousness with all of the attendant warnings that hell awaits those who refuse to obey?

  20. Kevin said,

    October 1, 2015 at 12:50 pm

    Dennis, no I disagree, the sacrifice for sins in Catholicism is the bread on thursday, not the cross on Friday. Unfortunately, Catholics dont realize the early fathers maintained their categories meticulously, bread was never offered to God, but men. And only praise and thanksgiving offered to God. These modern so called scholars like Scott Hahn is very clear that thursday bread is their sacrifice. Unfortunately for Catholics Jesus cant seem to get off the cross to save them. He is risen!

  21. Kevin said,

    October 1, 2015 at 12:55 pm

    Dennis, of course the black darkness has been reserved for evil doers, thats what we are talking about. Hell isnt just separation from God, its etrnal punishment. Kesus was a hellvfire and brimstone preacher. He talks about it as much as anything. MacArthur has a n hour sermon on hell, best ive heard.

  22. roberty bob said,

    October 1, 2015 at 1:51 pm

    at #21 . . .

    “MacArthur . . . an hour sermon on hell . . . .”

    Did anyone walk out? One could get awfully hot in an hour!

  23. Mitch said,

    October 1, 2015 at 7:52 pm

    I think it was R.A. Finlayson who said something to the effect that, “Hell is the presence of God w/o a mediator.”

    In light of the Revelation texts mentioned in the post, esp. 14:10, I have always found the Finlayson take on the matter quite helpful.

    I do, however, need some help understanding the Christological implications of the Lamb’s presence in BOTH heaven and hell.

  24. October 2, 2015 at 12:02 am

    […] the Presbyterian Church in America and is pastor of Lebanon Presbyterian Church in Winnsboro, S.C. This article appeared on his blog and is used with […]

  25. J.R. said,

    October 2, 2015 at 8:35 am

    I would guess that to understand Christ’s forsakenness on the cross one must better understand His human/divine nature. Were both forsaken…I would think not…

  26. greenbaggins said,

    October 2, 2015 at 9:03 am

    Mitch, interesting point about the Christological implications. As Reformed Christians, we believe that the human being Jesus is in heaven. Period. He is nowhere else. However, the divine nature extends past the human nature, if you will. This is the so-called extra calvinisticum. Either nature can be referred to by terms that normally apply to the other nature. The person as a whole can also be designated by either nature.

    Kevin, actually I am going much heavier on Hell by saying that unbelievers experience the unmediated presence of God in Hell. It is all justice and no grace. There will be no opportunity for stifling the conscience, because God won’t let that happen.

    I disagree that Hell is the ultimate evil. Evil and sin are the ultimate in evil. Hell is the place of ultimate justice. So that chain of reasoning is invalid, I believe. When Jesus says “depart from me,” that must be understood in the context of the two natures, as discussed above.

  27. roberty bob said,

    October 2, 2015 at 1:22 pm

    John Calvin’s view of Christ’s Descent into Hell [see Institutes] is interesting. Calvin speaks of Jesus FEELING [as if] FORSAKEN of God as he experienced the Hell of enduring the Divine judgment [wrath] for the sin of the world. What interests me is that Calvin allows [in his own understanding] for Christ to feel or experience Hell even as he holds firm in faith to the Father; thus, it leaves open the question of whether Christ, in reality, was forsaken / abandoned. For Calvin, the Hell that Christ experienced was his redemptive agony.

  28. tominaz said,

    October 2, 2015 at 1:59 pm

    I read a sermon by Ligon Duncan in which he quoted a Scottish divine: “Hell is eternity in the presence of God; Heaven is eternity in the presence of God with a mediator.”

  29. roberty bob said,

    October 2, 2015 at 5:58 pm

    Psalm 51:11 “Do not cast me from your Presence, or take your Holy Spirit from me.” — The Prayer of the Penitent Saint David

    I’ll take David’s Word over the Scottish Divine!

  30. Stuart (OPC) said,

    October 3, 2015 at 9:10 am

    I agree with the basic thrust of the main post. Yet I think all language needs a proper context and one may say hell is separation from God but then add the proper qualifications or context if there is confusion. It is not “metaphysical” separation from God. Indeed there is a terrifying or tormenting presence that should be recognized. I think Klaas Schilder in his Trilogy treats Christ’s forsakenness as loss of the Holy Spirit’s presence in Christ’s human nature. Perhaps that needs qualifying as loss of the “blessed” presence. Simply saying Christ “felt” forsaken might not deal adequately with an objective truth (real wrath) at the cross. But certainly that truth is not a disruption in the essence of the Trinity or God’s omnipresence. Simple slogans fail here when we touch on a mystery calling for some elaboration still leaving us some mystery.

  31. rfwhite said,

    October 3, 2015 at 10:45 pm

    30 Stuart: I appreciate your comment. Your citation of Schilder is thought-provoking. Not having easy access to Schilder, I was wondering if he discussed Heb 9:14 in connection with his treatment of Christ’s foresakenness. Not that that text would necessarily preclude his observation, but just wondering if he discusses it and its possible bearing on his view.

  32. Dennis said,

    October 4, 2015 at 12:18 am


    I’ve been stuck in Canada the past few days (a different kind of hell)…and been thinking about this during that time. I’ve also been reading up about it a bit.

    Per Augustine, Evil is the absence of Good. So, God (from whom all goodness comes forth) being in Hell would mean that there would be some goodness in Hell which to me is illogical.

    Additionally, in reading some Augustine, He mentions that in Heaven, we have eternal life while in Hell, we suffer eternal death. A constant agony while not dying. Interesting.

    There CAN be a few arguments for God being present in Hell…not in being but in essence:

    1. God would be present in the memories of the condemned in Hell. Similarly to the way a prisoner would be hearing the voice of the judged who passed sentence on him.

    2. God is present in His creations. As all creatures have been created for God and through God, then His creatures in Hell point to God. If an alien life form were to find the Mars Rover on Mars, that would be a presence created by Man and would be a presence of Man.

    3. God’s presence in Hell can be felt in the fact that God wills Hell to existence. Additionally, the lost souls and fallen angels exist only because God wills them to exist. If it were contrary to God’s will, the demons and damned would not exist.

    So while God is not physically present in Hell, His presence can be seen in their memory, in His creatures, and through His will.

  33. J Cilliers said,

    October 5, 2015 at 5:15 am

    What are we to make of John Stott’s “Conditional Mortality” – a view that denies the existence of hell?

  34. J Cilliers said,

    October 5, 2015 at 5:22 am

    Sorry, small mistake above – it should be “Conditional Immortality”

  35. greenbaggins said,

    October 5, 2015 at 9:26 am

    Dennis, I hear your argument, and it would seem logical, except that one assumption that is built in does not make sense to me. I deny that Hell itself is evil. If Hell is the place of judgment, then it is the place where justice is being served, yes? If that is the case, then there has to be some good in Hell, namely the good of punishment for unbelievers.

    J Cilliers, I do not hold with Stott’s views on Hell and conditional immortality. I believe they are seriously mistaken.

  36. Dennis said,

    October 5, 2015 at 1:35 pm


    I guess our difference is actually our understanding of heaven. For me, heaven is eternity with God. At our Baptism, we are joined to God through Christ. Through living a life of love and bearing fruit (through the obedience of faith), we continually grow closer in union to Christ until our death when we inherit eternal life in Christ in heaven.

    If we are not joined to God through Christ or if our unity with God is fractured through our active disobedience then at our judgment, we are condemned to eternal death. In our active disobedience to God, we are “evil-doers” and will be cast into the eternal fire by the angels. In Hell, the suffering are in eternal rebellion to the will of God. Doing things contrary to the will of God causes suffering and death. (e.g. a secular example would be driving. Breaking the traffic laws like running traffic lights or being on the wrong side of the road will eventually lead to death) Following God’s laws brings us life and happiness. Disobeying laws (like driving on the wrong side of the road) leads to death. In Hell, the damned through their own rebellion are suffering eternal death. The evil does not come from God or His creation. It comes from the rebellion of the suffering.

    I understand what you mean about the judgment being “good”. It comes from God so then it is good. . I don’t know if I would go so far as to say the suffering in Hell is “good.” I would call it more “just.”

  37. rfwhite said,

    October 5, 2015 at 2:23 pm

    Greenbaggins/Dennis: perhaps we’d move the conversation along by seeing hell in connection with the holiness of God, that is, the holy wrath of God. IOW, hell cannot properly be called evil in that it is the holy wrath of God expressed in the punishment of sinners.

  38. roberty bob said,

    October 5, 2015 at 8:32 pm

    The clause in the Apostles’ Creed, “He [Christ] descended into hell,” is controversial because the shift in meaning that occurred from the time of the early church fathers to the reformers (notably Calvin). Originally the church conceived of the Christ going down to the lower earthly regions [hades, sheol, hell (!)] in order to preach to the spirits in prison [the OT righteous, and maybe to the damned] that he had conquered sin and the grave. The idea of the harrowing of hell emerges from this. And there are biblical texts that can be cited which suggest as much. Calvin, however, drifts away from these views and shifts hell to the cross where Christ suffers redemptive agony; this is contrary to the Creed, upsetting the sequence:
    1 conceived by the Holy Spirit
    2 born of the virgin Mary
    3 suffered under Pontius Pilate
    4 was crucified
    5 died
    6 was buried
    7 he decended into hell
    8 on the third day he arose from the dead
    9 he ascended into heaven
    With Calvin, the descent goes between #4 and #5

  39. Stuart (OPC) said,

    October 5, 2015 at 9:04 pm

    Rhwhite31: Interesting text (Heb 9.14). First: Schilder’s remarks come in “Christ Crucified” and the chapter title interestingly is “Christ thrust away but not separated from God.” Van Til told us to beg, borrow or steal this trilogy. I eventually bought it when reprinted a long time ago. Second: A few quotes: “God did not forsake God. That is an eternal impossibility.” [pg 397]. Next sentence: “Even in the moment in which the Son as Christ was rejected from God in his humanity, God yearned for God, and accepted God.” Further down: “No, it is not God, but man, who is here being forsaken by God.” And a little later: “Now the language of men is inadequate for exhausting the eternally real and the really eternal things.” Page 401: “Does the fourth utterance from the cross give expression to something which is really true, or to something which Christ ‘felt’ was true.” [He then quotes some Bavinck—rich stuff!] Page 402: “The lament of Christ is not a subjective, but is an objective abandonment.” [He explains negatively and positively] “Negatively considered, this forsaking may be regarded as complete withdrawal from Christ of all those gifts by means of which God through His common and special grace has comforted and sustained His creature.” “… The Holy Spirit does not comfort the office bearer….And the Spirit which gave no comfort gave no strength either.” [Page 403} “The issue, consequently, was not one of uniting, but one of indwelling.”
    Now to your query: I did not find reference to Heb 9:14 after a very brief scan of Schilder and the one chapter in view. If I had time I would look more and then to Vos who did work on the book of Hebrews but I have a vague memory of some teaching (Vos? Gaffin ?) which might regard Heb 9:14 as having reference to the exalted Christ (cf. Verse 12 where entry into the Holiest Place is in view, though verse 15 refers back to his death). If I am wrong about the potential of Heb 9:14 to refer to the presentation of the exalted sacrificed Christ in heaven (and I have not thought about this for a while), I still think Schilder is basically on the right track.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: