Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,814 Year: 3,071/9,624 Month: 916/1,588 Week: 99/223 Day: 10/17 Hour: 6/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   In defense of prophecy
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1 of 22 (76599)
01-05-2004 7:37 AM


IN DEFENSE OF THE BIBLE:
As a believer, I have been taught that the Bible is basically an inerrent book. That it was inspired by God. Being open minded, I never believe what any one church, person, or basic group of people say. Just because a large group of like minded believers can document something, I am usually inclined to examine what their detractors say as well. It is also not just about facts, but about attitudes. For example, one time on my school campus, the local campus Christian club hosted a debate with a well known local atheist. The atheist was quite articulate yet came off a bit smug and aloof, whereas the Christians stated their side of the debate quite respectably. I must admit that atheists have some good sound arguments in general. Positive Atheism (since 1995) Join the Struggle Against Anti-Atheist Bigotry! is one such site.
I am not ready to conced that all biblical literalists are just a bunch of backwoods fanatics, however.
There are many educated theologians. Education gets my respect because I have been there sweating out answers and compiling papers myself. I am going to school to be a hi risk youth counselor. One area that interests me is prophecy. The standard argument against prophecy is that
it is changed to make itself fit. I would argue that based on what we know about the times that the old testament was transcribed and the new testament writings which came 70+ years after Jesus death, burial and ressurection, this argument would ONLY hold up if the New Testament authors lied to make it look as if though Jesus fullfilled prophecy. As numerous examples:
If we could speak to God down the corridors of time, it might sound something like this: We might ask the question,"How will we know when your son arrives? How can we tell that it is Him?
God might have responded, "I will cause him to be born as an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham (Genesis 22:18; Galatians 3:16)." We may have protested that Abrahams descendants will be as numerous as the stars! How will we tell Him apart?
" Then I will narrow it down to only half of Abraham's lineage, and make him a descendant of Isaac, not Ishmael (Genesis 21:12; Luke 3:23-34)."
"That will help, but isn't that still a grip of people?"
"Let him be born from Jacob's line, then, eliminating half of Isaac's lineage(Numbers 24:17;Luke 3:23-34)."
"But--"
"I will be more specific. Jacob will have twelve sons; I will bring forth the Messiah from the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10, Luke 3:23-33)."
"Hey...thats STILL a lot of people! How will we recognize him?"
"Don't worry! Look for him in the family line of Jesse (Isaiah 11:1; Luke 3:23-32) And from the house and lineage of Jesse's youngest son,David (Jeremiah 23:5; Luke 3:23-31) And then I will tell you where he will be born: Bethlehem, a tiny town in the area called Judea (Micah 5:2; Matthew 2:1)."
God is blowing us away! But we might still be puzzled. "How will we know which person born there (Bethlehem) is your Son?"
"He will be preceded by a messenger who will prepare the way and announce his advent (Isaiah 40:3; Matthew 3:1-2). He will begin his ministry in Galilee(Isaiah 9:1;Matthew 4:12-17) and will teach in parables (Psalm 78:2; Matthew 13:34-35), performing many miracles (Isaiah 35:5-6;Matthew 9:35)."
"Okay,that should help a lot."
"Oh," God might have responded, "I'm just getting warmed up. He will ride into the city of Jerusalem on a donkey(Zechariah 9:9;Matthew 21:2;Luke 19:35-37) and will appear suddenly and forcefully at the temple courts and zealously 'clean house'(Psalm 69:9, Malachi 3:1; John 2:15-16) Why, in one day I will fulfill no fewer than twenty-nine specific prophecies spoken at least five hundred years earlier about him! Listen to this:
1, He will be betrayed by a friend (Psalm 41:9;Matthew 26:49)
2. The price of his betrayal will be thirty pieces of silver(Zechariah 11:12; Matthew 26:15)
3. His betrayal money will be cast to the floor of my temple(Zechariah 11:13; Matthew 27:5)
4. His betrayal money will be used to buy the potter's field(Zechariah 11:13;Matthew 27:7)
5. He will be forsaken and deserted by his disciples(Zechariah 13:7;Mark 14:50)
6. He will be accused by false witnesses(Psalm 35:11; Matthew 26:59-60)
7. He will be silent before his accusers(Isaiah 53:7; Matthew 27:12)
8. He will be wounded and bruised(Isaiah 53:5;Matthew 27:26)
9. He will be hated without a cause(Psalm 69:4; John 15:25)
10. He will be struck and spit on (Isaiah 50:6; Matthew 26:67)
11. He will be mocked, ridiculed, and rejected (Isaiah 53:3;Matthew 27:27-31 and John 7:5,48)
12. He will collapse from weakness. (Psalm 109:24-25; Luke 23:26)
13. He will be taunted with specific words (Psalm 22:6-8; Matthew 27:39-43)
14. People will shake their heads at him (Psalm 109:25; Matthew 27:39)
15. People will stare at him (Psalm 22:17;Luke 23:35)
16. He will be executed among 'sinners' (Isaiah 53:12; Matthew 27:38)
17. His hands and feet will be pierced (Psalm 22:16; Luke 23:33)
18. He will pray for his persecutors (Isaiah 53:12;Luke 23:34)
19. His friends and family will stand afar off and watch(Psalm 38:11; Luke 23:49)
20. His garments will be divided and won by the casting of lots (Psalm 22:18;John 19:23-24)
21. He will thirst(Psalm 69:21;John 19:28)
22. He will be given gall and vinegar(Psalm 69:21; Matthew 27:34)
23. He will commit himself to God(Psalm 31:5;Luke 23:46)
24. His bones will be left unbroken(Psalm 34:20;John 19:33)
25. His heart will rupture(Psalm 22:14;John 19:34)
26. His side will be pierced(Zechariah 12:10;John 19:34)
27. Darkness will come over the land at midday(Amos 8:9; Matthew 27:45)
28. He will be buried in a rich man's tomb(Isaiah 53:9;Matthew 27:57-60)
29. He will die 483 years after the declaration of Artaxerxes to rebuild the temple in 444 B.C. (Danial 9:24)
He will be raised from the dead on the third day(Psalm 16:10;Acts 2:31)
He will ascend to heaven(Psalm 68:18;Acts 1:9)
In conclusion, I vaguely suppose that events could have been written to support earlier writings. But come on!

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Dr Jack, posted 01-05-2004 9:12 AM Phat has not replied
 Message 3 by PaulK, posted 01-05-2004 9:26 AM Phat has not replied
 Message 4 by Brian, posted 01-05-2004 9:48 AM Phat has not replied
 Message 5 by PaulK, posted 01-05-2004 3:28 PM Phat has replied

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 2 of 22 (76605)
01-05-2004 9:12 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
01-05-2004 7:37 AM


What strikes me about your list is how many of these are only shown in ONE of the gospels. Methinks the gospel writers or their sources added, or distorted, these events to match existing prophecy.
Quite a few are so generic as to be meaningless, e.g "He will be hated without a cause", "People will shake their heads at him", "People will stare at him" and "He will be mocked, ridiculed, and rejected". These could be applied to ANY notable religous leader.
Others are supernatural events without evidence "He will be raised from the dead on the third day" and "He will ascend to heaven".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 01-05-2004 7:37 AM Phat has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 3 of 22 (76606)
01-05-2004 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
01-05-2004 7:37 AM


I don't have time to go into details right now but here's a couple of little questions to think about.
How many of the verses you identify as prophecies of Jesus have you read in context ?
Having read them, how many claim to be predictions about a single individual identified as being the literal son of God ? How many say no such thing ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 01-05-2004 7:37 AM Phat has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 4 of 22 (76607)
01-05-2004 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
01-05-2004 7:37 AM


Hi,
In conclusion, I vaguely suppose that events could have been written to support earlier writings. But come on!
I really do not see any references from any external sources in your post, so all you have are claims from people who are trying to support their belief that Jesus was referred to in Old Testament prophecies.
This is very weak Phatboy, do you know what circular reasoning is?
For example, how do you know that:
Jesus was a descendant of Abraham.
Jesus was born of Jacob's line.
Jesus was born in Bethlehem.
Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey (or two).
Jesus was betrayed by a friend.
Jesus was beaten and spat on.
Hopefully you get the idea, so essentially how do you know Jesus fulfilled any of these Old Testament prophecies?
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 01-05-2004 7:37 AM Phat has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 5 of 22 (76664)
01-05-2004 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
01-05-2004 7:37 AM


Some more food for thought
Let's start with a question. Is it possible that the NT authors assumed that Jesus was of the House of David based on their prior belief that Jesus was the Messiah ?
I would say that the answer is yes. Luke and Matthew both give genealogies of Joseph, linking him to the House of David. But they are different - they can't both be right. So we certainly can't be sure that they had solid information. And what do inerrantists say about this ? They usually try to argue that the genealogy in Luke is really Mary's. But there is no real basis for this other than the assumption that both genealogies must "somehow" be correct. If modern believers think like that then how can we assume that the athors of the Gospels did not ?
And we can go on. Was Jesus born in Bethlehem ? Luke and Matthew again offer stories - but those stories are very different. Matthew has Joseph and Mary living in Bethlehem and moving to Nazareth after their return to Egypt since they did not want to live under the rule of Herod's son Archeleus. Luke has Joseph and Mary living in Nazareth, but visiting Bethelehem to register in a Roman tax census - a census held after the Romans deposed Archeleus.
SO it is not so far fetched to say that some of the "fulfilments" may be inventions - although we cannot be sure that they were made up by the gospel authors. Even today we can find urban legends cirulating among christians and being mistaken for facts. Of course these days it is easier to check up on the facts but even a story with obvious problems can be circulated - even when many fundamentalists publically state that it is false.
Have NASA computers really proven Joshua's long day? - ChristianAnswers.Net
NASA Discovers a 'Lost Day' in Time? | Snopes.com
And just to show that it is still being propagated:
http://www.geocities.com/guysworldtx/proof.html
But there are other ways prophecies can be fulfilled.
Riding into Jerusalem on a donkey ? Well that's easy - Jesus could simply have done it to fulfill the prophecy.
Or unrelated stories - or even poetry - could be reinterpreted.
Look at all your references - how many verses do you refer to from Psalms which are not given as any sort of prediction ? Or Zechariah which his symbolic of Zechariah's own times ? As for Daniel 9 it is well known that it refers to events 200 years earlier ! There are real problems that have to be addressed before you can claim successful prophecy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 01-05-2004 7:37 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Phat, posted 01-05-2004 4:39 PM PaulK has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 6 of 22 (76686)
01-05-2004 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by PaulK
01-05-2004 3:28 PM


Re: Some more food for thought
We have all seen the arguments and the counter arguments. Would it not be fair to go with the possible identities of Jesus, often quoted, of being either Lord, Liar, or Lunatic? Great man and just another prophet do not apply to Him. If the writers were trying to make Him fit the scenario of Messiah, He must have been either a Lunatic who thought that He was God Incarnate or He was a manipulator along with the writers. I could use the argument that History and Civilization changed so profoundly because of one man that He surely must have been divine, yet Muhammed was a mere man to us Christians, and he also caused quite a ruckus. Let me turn the question over to you guys. If Jesus was not the Son of God, who was this guy?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by PaulK, posted 01-05-2004 3:28 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Rei, posted 01-05-2004 4:49 PM Phat has not replied
 Message 8 by PaulK, posted 01-05-2004 4:52 PM Phat has not replied
 Message 9 by :æ:, posted 01-05-2004 4:53 PM Phat has not replied
 Message 10 by Brian, posted 01-05-2004 4:59 PM Phat has not replied

  
Rei
Member (Idle past 7012 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 7 of 22 (76687)
01-05-2004 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Phat
01-05-2004 4:39 PM


Re: Some more food for thought
Muslims would say "great man and just another prophet" certainly do not apply to Mohammed. Do you believe Mohammed was the last and greatest of God's prophets? If your answer is "No", then think of how you would describe him.
We would describe Jesus in the exact same way.

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Phat, posted 01-05-2004 4:39 PM Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by grace2u, posted 01-05-2004 5:24 PM Rei has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 8 of 22 (76690)
01-05-2004 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Phat
01-05-2004 4:39 PM


Re: Some more food for thought
No, it wouldn't be fair to go with "Lord, Liar or Lunatic". After all we don't know how that Jesus believed himself to be God (can you find anywhere in any of the three Synoptic Gospels where he makes such a claim ?)
In fact there are profound disagreements over what Jesus actually believed and taught.
Personally I think Jesus was much like modern cult leaders - and I would trust the Gospels just as much as I would trust a Scientology-approved biography of L Ron Hubbard - and for much the same reasons.
And if you have seen all the arguments then you know very well that a good number of your "propecies" are nothing of the sort. If you're willing to pass off resemblances between the Psalms and the Gospels as "prophecies" in full awareness of what you are doing, then what more is there to say ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Phat, posted 01-05-2004 4:39 PM Phat has not replied

  
:æ: 
Suspended Member (Idle past 7184 days)
Posts: 423
Joined: 07-23-2003


Message 9 of 22 (76691)
01-05-2004 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Phat
01-05-2004 4:39 PM


Re: Some more food for thought
Phatboy writes:
Would it not be fair to go with the possible identities of Jesus, often quoted, of being either Lord, Liar, or Lunatic?
I think this is a false trichotomy.
Great man and just another prophet do not apply to Him.
Disagree. I think you're being too limited in evaluating all the possibilities.
If the writers were trying to make Him fit the scenario of Messiah, He must have been either a Lunatic who thought that He was God Incarnate or He was a manipulator along with the writers.
Disagree. His life and sayings may be grossly distorted, yet he himself may have been quite honest in his actual remarks. The question is whether or not his actual remarks are accurately recorded.
If Jesus was not the Son of God, who was this guy?
A manifestation of the human race's need to be reminded of its own divinity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Phat, posted 01-05-2004 4:39 PM Phat has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 10 of 22 (76694)
01-05-2004 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Phat
01-05-2004 4:39 PM


Re: Some more food for thought
HI,
We have all seen the arguments and the counter arguments. Would it not be fair to go with the possible identities of Jesus, often quoted, of being either Lord, Liar, or Lunatic?
You seem to have a liking for Josh McDowell’s work, I noticed you used his ‘ant’ analogy on another thread. Although the Lord Liar Lunatic (trilemma) began with Lewis, McDowell’s readers seem to think that this is a good argument. It is a pretty poor argument as these three choices are not the only possible options, Jesus could have simply been a figment of someone’s imagination.
Great man and just another prophet do not apply to Him.
Why not? In Islam he is just another prophet.
If the writers were trying to make Him fit the scenario of Messiah, He must have been either a Lunatic who thought that He was God Incarnate or He was a manipulator along with the writers.
So he may have been a lunatic then?
There is also the added problem that no one who wrote abut him actually knew him, there are no contemporary eyewitness reports.
If Jesus was not the Son of God, who was this guy?
What information have we to use to help us determine a conclusion?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Phat, posted 01-05-2004 4:39 PM Phat has not replied

  
grace2u
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 22 (76702)
01-05-2004 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Rei
01-05-2004 4:49 PM


Re: Some more food for thought
It is somewhat different in that one must examine what each individual taught. Christ revealed formerly hidden truths to humanity that do not appear to be man orgininated.
For example:
John 4:23 God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth
Does this have the apearance of something that is man orginated? What does it mean to worship something in spirit and in truth? I would claim that this very statement from the gospel of John is an example of how Christs teachings were and are seperate from how a mere mans teachings would appear, that is Christ taught spiritual truths that are completely different than what man typicaly thinks should be true. Wouldn't a mere man simply say something like:
God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in in truth?
Note, I removed the mention of spirit. Why would a mere man say in spirit AND in truth? This peculiar statement lends further evidence suggesting something far more powerful and meaningfull is at work here.
Even a non-Christian would concede that in fact Christ was an extremely wise teacher and highly moral(I would of course add -- perfect). For someone to examine what Christ taught in context to the culture in which he lived , they would conclude that He was in fact either lying and decieving everyone or that He was simply an irrational lunatic. Another option is that He was telling the truth.
Examine each possibility case by case.
1) Liar. If He was a liar you would have to ask what His motives were for lying? To die on a cross? To wash other peoples feet and serve? Certainly this is not likely.
2) Lunatic. The wisdom that Christ professed suggests that He was an extremely intelligent and wise teacher. His behavior is simply not consistent with this option.
3) Lord. While this is not a close book case, certainly this option is possible, that Christ was in fact who church history and theology suggests He is, that is the Son of God or the Wisdom of God.
Regards.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Rei, posted 01-05-2004 4:49 PM Rei has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Asgara, posted 01-05-2004 5:37 PM grace2u has replied
 Message 13 by Rei, posted 01-05-2004 5:41 PM grace2u has not replied

  
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2302 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 12 of 22 (76704)
01-05-2004 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by grace2u
01-05-2004 5:24 PM


Re: Some more food for thought
Hi Grace2U,
2) Lunatic. The wisdom that Christ professed suggests that He was an extremely intelligent and wise teacher. His behavior is simply not consistent with this option.
It is a fallacy to equate mental illness with lack of wisdom or intellegence.
Intellegence, morality, wisdom, charisma...these have nothing to do with mental illness, delusion or hallucination.

Asgara
"An unexamined life is not worth living" Socrates via Plato

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by grace2u, posted 01-05-2004 5:24 PM grace2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by grace2u, posted 01-05-2004 6:35 PM Asgara has not replied

  
Rei
Member (Idle past 7012 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 13 of 22 (76705)
01-05-2004 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by grace2u
01-05-2004 5:24 PM


Re: Some more food for thought
quote:
For example:
John 4:23 God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth
Does this have the apearance of something that is man orginated? What does it mean to worship something in spirit and in truth?
You have to ask what this line means, but then you assert that this line is an example of something that is beyond human teaching. What about this is beyond human teaching? That God is a spirit? You've got almost every religion with that. That you need to worship him with your spirit? Again, almost every religion. Don't lie? Again, almost every religion. That truth is a form of worship? That's hardly even Zen. There's nothing unusual about that line.
quote:
I would claim that this very statement from the gospel of John is an example of how Christs teachings were and are seperate from how a mere mans teachings would appear
Many Muslims will say the same thing about Mohammed's.
quote:
Note, I removed the mention of spirit. Why would a mere man say in spirit AND in truth? This peculiar statement lends further evidence suggesting something far more powerful and meaningfull is at work here.
There's 1000 times more depth in every line of "Lost In The Funhouse" than that minimally-zen religious teaching.
quote:
Even a non-Christian would concede that in fact Christ was an extremely wise teacher and highly moral(I would of course add -- perfect).
If you were to add "perfect", that already quite tenuous assertion falls down dead. Even Muslims wouldn't accept that, and they think of Christ as a prophet.
quote:
For someone to examine what Christ taught in context to the culture in which he lived, they would conclude that He was in fact either lying and decieving everyone or that He was simply an irrational lunatic.
1) "Everyone"? Why isn't *anyone* at the time even mentioning him?
2) Actually, they would conclude that he either didn't exist since there doesn't seem to be any sort of a record until his early cult wrote a biography (see PaulK's example of a Scientology-approved biography of L. Ron Hubbard), or that he is like Mohammed and all other religious founders.
quote:
Another option is that He was telling the truth.
Equally an option for Mohammed et al.
quote:
1) Liar. If He was a liar you would have to ask what His motives were for lying? To die on a cross? To wash other peoples feet and serve? Certainly this is not likely.
To get a worldwide following? To achieve fame that he never could have dreamed of otherwise? There are many self-sacrificing religious "cult" leaders out there, even some in present day. Want examples?
quote:
Lunatic. The wisdom that Christ professed suggests that He was an extremely intelligent and wise teacher. His behavior is simply not consistent with this option.
I see you've never met a schizophrenic.
quote:
3) Lord.
Self delusional. Nonexistant. Existant, but not what the bible claims. And a whole host of other options not in the trichotomy.

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."
[This message has been edited by Rei, 01-05-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by grace2u, posted 01-05-2004 5:24 PM grace2u has not replied

  
grace2u
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 22 (76711)
01-05-2004 6:35 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Asgara
01-05-2004 5:37 PM


Re: Some more food for thought
Fair enough, I grant this.
Perhaps the desire to keep with the L's makes the arguement appear oversimplified. The point that the argument is making is that Christ either was lieing, or He thought He was telling the truth when in fact He wasn't (and was therefore mad) or He was telling the truth. While we could argue all day on what other possibilities there are, it ultimately boils down to these three options(if we do have accurate reflections of His teachings as I would suggest we do- gospel records and current testimonials).
My point was simply that Christ did not behave in a manner consistent with how one would expect someone who inappropriately thought they could command nature (or at the risk of sparking another discussion, even claim to be God) to act.
Thanks and regards.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Asgara, posted 01-05-2004 5:37 PM Asgara has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 01-05-2004 8:21 PM grace2u has not replied
 Message 16 by Dr Jack, posted 01-06-2004 4:35 AM grace2u has not replied

  
ConsequentAtheist
Member (Idle past 6238 days)
Posts: 392
Joined: 05-28-2003


Message 15 of 22 (76727)
01-05-2004 8:21 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by grace2u
01-05-2004 6:35 PM


Re: Some more food for thought
grace2u writes:
Christ either was lieing, or He thought He was telling the truth when in fact He wasn't (and was therefore mad) or He was telling the truth. ..., it ultimately boils down to these three options(if we do have accurate reflections of His teachings as I would suggest we do- gospel records and current testimonials).
That is a remarkable "if", for which there is zero evidence.
[This message has been edited by ConsequentAtheist, 01-05-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by grace2u, posted 01-05-2004 6:35 PM grace2u has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024