Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,581 Year: 2,838/9,624 Month: 683/1,588 Week: 89/229 Day: 0/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The location of the Tree of Life
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 406 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 16 of 302 (215295)
06-08-2005 8:49 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by zephyr
06-07-2005 10:13 PM


explanation for everything?
He changed his mind.
But he knew he would
You hadn't noticed that the god of the Bible is very human?
No, sorry, I do not know a human that can speak the universe into existance. But I did notice that we are created in his image, so that would explain alot of what God does, to be similar to how we handle things in this demesion. We need to look no farther than ourselves to understand God.
He regrets things he does, he reverses course, he completely changes his idea of how to save his creation from the fate he assigned it... he's rather short on consistency.
Or we just don't get it, or understand how he wants us to live, so this is how it appears to you. It's real tough to love everyone, in the same mannor you love yourself.
Why do you think he has gender? Because it's easier to worship a glorified human than a really unique god, and the ultimate human was always a man in the cultural context of the author(s).
I didn't know God had a gender, even though he is refered to as a he. Do we even have gender when we go to heaven? I think mussulms are promised virgins in heaven? Or is it Virginians ? They better hope its the first one.
Most of his qualities are just exaggerated human virtues that vary from tale to tale, depending on the human inventor of the particular story in question.
Or interpretations that those paricular people need to understand God. Why even judge it for them? You can judge it for yourself though. Thats probable why Jesus said don't judge, it would get in the way of love.
Obviously, it would be better if one could simply choose the character of one's deity from the get-go and make up only stories that fit it to the tee. However, since religious traditions spring from sheer speculation, warp over time, and are kluged together as social groups assimilate, this is virtually impossible to do with genuine beliefs.
I guess there is some truth hiding in that statement. It is probably why I hate the word religion. No matter how hard my church tries to be "not religious" it happens anyway. This is the main reason why we should not search religion to find God.
Logical believers do their best to piece it all together, but we still have points of tenuous connection and transition, and this is a great example.
Well I guess this would be the same as gaps in evolution. We can just do as the evolutionists do, and throw in millions of years to the concocktion, and say, no, we don't have all the answers. But this is not acceptable, it all must make sense right?
We have a story where God places fiery guardians around a physical paradise that the humans vacated at his command (which alone is funny since he didn't need cherubim to enforce the eviction order),
Was Adam and Eve the only ones capable of eating from the tree of life at that time?
and then a story where he flushes the whole earth down the toilet anyway.
Not like he didn't warn us. A perfect example of man blaming God again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by zephyr, posted 06-07-2005 10:13 PM zephyr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Modulous, posted 06-08-2005 9:09 AM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 22 by zephyr, posted 06-08-2005 11:48 AM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 33 by arachnophilia, posted 06-08-2005 7:38 PM riVeRraT has replied

Modulous
Member
Posts: 7799
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 17 of 302 (215300)
06-08-2005 9:09 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by riVeRraT
06-08-2005 8:49 AM


Re: explanation for everything?
He changed his mind.
But he knew he would
So He knew He was going to change his mind later, but decided to protect the Tree with cherubim and a flaming sword?
Well I guess this would be the same as gaps in evolution. We can just do as the evolutionists do, and throw in millions of years to the concocktion, and say, no, we don't have all the answers. But this is not acceptable, it all must make sense right?
But evolution is science based and science is tentative. Are you suggesting that the Word of God is tentative? It's fine to not know the answers of course, I'm not disagreeing there, but I just think your comparison is erroneous.
Was Adam and Eve the only ones capable of eating from the tree of life at that time?
They were the only humans, and the only things with free will, and the only things (other than God, and perhaps the serpent) that had knowledge of good and evil. So yes, I think Adam and Eve were unique in that regard.
Not like he didn't warn us. A perfect example of man blaming God again.
I missed that part. It goes from x begat y who begat z, straight to
"Gen 6:6 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man [was] great in the earth, and [that] every imagination of the thoughts of his heart [was] only evil continually.
Gen 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them."
He then goes on only to warn Noah about the impending doom of everything. So at what point was everyone else warned?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by riVeRraT, posted 06-08-2005 8:49 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by riVeRraT, posted 06-08-2005 5:40 PM Modulous has replied
 Message 32 by arachnophilia, posted 06-08-2005 7:33 PM Modulous has replied

zephyr
Member (Idle past 4540 days)
Posts: 821
From: FOB Taji, Iraq
Joined: 04-22-2003


Message 18 of 302 (215304)
06-08-2005 10:21 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Modulous
06-08-2005 6:44 AM


Re: plruals
Oh no, fishes is most absolutely a word - I know the fishes well. I send bad spellers to sleep with them....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Modulous, posted 06-08-2005 6:44 AM Modulous has not replied

Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 1327 days)
Posts: 712
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 19 of 302 (215309)
06-08-2005 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by ringo
06-07-2005 11:25 PM


Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:
The Scriptures also say that one will live forever if we believe in Christ -- yet we Christian people are still dying physically.
Ringo316 writes:
If "we Christian people" are still dying, maybe they aren't as Christian as they think they are.
Or maybe the passages in question are referring more importantly to a "spiritual death" -- even though physical death certainly still occured.
Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:
In God's time-frame they did physically die on that "exact" day....
Ringo316 writes:
But God was speaking to Adam and Eve. Why would He refer to His time-frame instead of theirs? If I tell you to call me at 10 PM, I mean in your time zone, don't I? After all, you don't even know what time zone I'm in.
It seems as though that "in the beginning" Adam and Eve were most likely in God's "time zone" -- but that after "the fall" they were by default trapped in their own "time zone".
This message has been edited by Mr. Ex Nihilo, 06-08-2005 11:18 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by ringo, posted 06-07-2005 11:25 PM ringo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by zephyr, posted 06-08-2005 11:08 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

zephyr
Member (Idle past 4540 days)
Posts: 821
From: FOB Taji, Iraq
Joined: 04-22-2003


Message 20 of 302 (215313)
06-08-2005 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
06-07-2005 10:33 PM


Dear Mr. Ex Nihilo:
WRT your first two points - just curious since the this thread is about the question of a literal, physical Tree of Life and what happened to it, whence have you derived your ideas about that? Do you think that all of Genesis is metaphorical, or just the trees?
I guess the issue of physical death probably distracts from the thread, and there are other topics on that one, so I should probably say "thanks for answering but I shouldna mentioned it." To be honest, I was mostly being a smartass for the rest of that post... especially about the shrooms. I did have a point but it wasn't really relevant. So we're back to my first two lines and your answers, and me wondering where you draw the line in Genesis between metaphor and literal reality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 06-07-2005 10:33 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 06-08-2005 4:20 PM zephyr has not replied

zephyr
Member (Idle past 4540 days)
Posts: 821
From: FOB Taji, Iraq
Joined: 04-22-2003


Message 21 of 302 (215314)
06-08-2005 11:08 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
06-08-2005 10:53 AM


Dammit, I really should have known better than to drag that crap in here. You'd think after 3+ years lurking and 800 posts I'd know better than to toss such an obvious source of tangents into the mix. Bad me! BAD! Somebody oughtta spank me in a way that I won't enjoy....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 06-08-2005 10:53 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 06-08-2005 4:29 PM zephyr has not replied

zephyr
Member (Idle past 4540 days)
Posts: 821
From: FOB Taji, Iraq
Joined: 04-22-2003


Message 22 of 302 (215322)
06-08-2005 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by riVeRraT
06-08-2005 8:49 AM


Re: explanation for everything?
quote:
He changed his mind.
But he knew he would
So he's inconsistent and it's okay.
quote:
Or we just don't get it, or understand how he wants us to live, so this is how it appears to you. It's real tough to love everyone, in the same mannor you love yourself.
Faith or works? "Yes."
Predestination or free will? "Yes."
If Paul and James couldn't get the story straight in their divinely inspired epistles, how are we expected to? My contention remains that their inconsistencies in doctrine and the recorded fickleness of the deity are both clear evidence of imperfect human design. In the OT days it was acceptable and common for a ruler to be capricious, arbitrary, and cruel. Today's culture deplores those qualities and thus they are no longer emphasized aspects of the deity. But the writings still show that his ancient followers ascribed those traits to him and accepted them.
quote:
No, sorry, I do not know a human that can speak the universe into existance. But I did notice that we are created in his image, so that would explain alot of what God does, to be similar to how we handle things in this demesion. We need to look no farther than ourselves to understand God.
Of course he possesses capabilities beyond our own. There's no point postulating a creator who does things his creations can already do. The point is that his personality seems modeled on a human's personality. He's just bigger, faster, stronger, and smarter, though he still second-guesses himself. He's Superman with a mean streak and no weaknesses. Of course, the later NT concepts are a lot different, but we're talking about Genesis God, not the one in the gospels or epistles.
quote:
Well I guess this would be the same as gaps in evolution. We can just do as the evolutionists do, and throw in millions of years to the concocktion, and say, no, we don't have all the answers. But this is not acceptable, it all must make sense right?
Not to be antagonistic, but this strikes me as cheap, rude, inappropriate, and way off topic. Did you insert the word "cock" on purpose or was that just a typo?
quote:
Was Adam and Eve the only ones capable of eating from the tree of life at that time?
Doesn't matter, they were compelled to do his will and so was everyone else, everywhere. Why bother with flaming guardians? Isn't he omnipresent and omnipotent? Well, later in the Bible, he is. Just not yet.
quote:
then a story where he flushes the whole earth down the toilet anyway.
Not like he didn't warn us. A perfect example of man blaming God again.
That really wasn't the idea. I was mostly restating the OP in that line, citing the simple fact that all agree upon - according to Genesis, a frustrated deity destroyed his whole creation after setting guards around the best part to keep his people away from a plant that grew in it. As I read Modulous, this is how I see the relevant questions: did a physical Tree of Life actually exist; did god destroy it along with Eden after setting guards around it; and does it make sense for an all-knowing god (as currently conceived by Christians) to make such a decision?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by riVeRraT, posted 06-08-2005 8:49 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 06-08-2005 3:51 PM zephyr has replied
 Message 39 by riVeRraT, posted 06-09-2005 8:51 AM zephyr has replied

MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6344 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 23 of 302 (215346)
06-08-2005 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Modulous
06-07-2005 12:25 PM


The Sunday Times ran a piece about this a few years ago. I haven't been able to track down the article directly but this looks like an accurate reproduction of it from what I remember.
Apparently the answer is Iran.
It all seems a bit reminiscent of the sort of stuff WILLOWTREE used to peddle (that isn't a good thing, in case you never saw any of WT's stuff ).

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Modulous, posted 06-07-2005 12:25 PM Modulous has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by lfen, posted 06-18-2005 1:11 PM MangyTiger has not replied
 Message 182 by lfen, posted 06-18-2005 1:16 PM MangyTiger has not replied

Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 1327 days)
Posts: 712
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 24 of 302 (215392)
06-08-2005 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by zephyr
06-08-2005 11:48 AM


Re: explanation for everything?
zephyr writes:
He's Superman with a mean streak and no weaknesses.
Actually, the Scriptures do seem to indicate that he does in fact have one weakness: lack of sin.
Some have even suggested that sin causes pain to God. Some have suggested that (in God's timeless nature manifested through Christ) everytime we sin we all participate in nailing the spikes into the Lord's wrists and feet.
zephyr writes:
Isn't he omnipresent and omnipotent?
In my opinion, no and no.
He apparently can't sin -- which is a limitation however strange it might seem. In otherwords, if omnipotence means being able to "do anything", then God is not omnipotent because there are apparently some things that he cannot do.
The Scriptures even go to the point to say that he can't even look upon the face of sin. While I'm not sure if its because he is "incapable" or if he's "unwilling" to do this, I'm persuaded that it's the former instead of the latter -- because it seems more consistent with my idea of a loving God.
Even in the case of omnipresense, many Christians will acknowledge that some people will be eternally separated from God in some kind of hellish afterlife. Certainly, if this is true, God would not be present with these people. Neither would he be aware anymore of what they were doing -- since all the former things will be forgotten (including sin).
So, in at least a few ways from the Scriptures, I can think of things that demonstrate that God is neither omnipresent nor omnipotent.
edit: correct former and latter.
In my opinion, if God refuses to look upon the face of sin simply because he's unwilling to do so, then he seems to be more of a vengeful God than a merciful one. So, in my opinion anyway, it seems as though it would be more accurate to say that God is incapable of doing so -- which seems to indicate more mercy than judgement (and actually jives well with the Scriptural accounts as far as I can tell).
This message has been edited by Mr. Ex Nihilo, 06-08-2005 07:38 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by zephyr, posted 06-08-2005 11:48 AM zephyr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by zephyr, posted 06-08-2005 6:57 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 1327 days)
Posts: 712
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 25 of 302 (215399)
06-08-2005 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by zephyr
06-08-2005 11:07 AM


zephyr writes:
Dear Mr. Ex Nihilo:
You called?
zephyr writes:
WRT your first two points - just curious since the this thread is about the question of a literal, physical Tree of Life and what happened to it, whence have you derived your ideas about that?
Well, my thoughts could very well be wrong. I've just read a lot regarding the early church fathers, church history and the Scriptures themselves. It seems to jive with many aspects of the Catholic faith I belong to.
zephyr writes:
Do you think that all of Genesis is metaphorical, or just the trees?
Honestly, I really don't know. I tend to think that there are metaphorical literary devices being used to convey a deeper message. But, even then, these metaphorical literary devices seem to be describing something real and tangible. I've never discounted the possibility that there might be a real location.
If I'm to give some input that jives with the thoughts on this thread, I'll interject the thought that some have expressed: they tend to think that the tree of life is buried under the miles of ice of antarctica.
I realize that this sounds very similar to H.P. Lovecraft's Mountains of Madness. But, in their opinion, they tend to believe that the ice caps formed in one single catastrophic event (when all the continents are theorized to have "split apart" during the great deluge). They tend to think that antarctica fits in nicely in around the arabian sea.
In this sense, the "sword which points all ways" is symbolic of a compass pointing in all directions. The ice is the barrier that holds people back. And the tree (as well as the garden itself) sits perfectly preseved waiting to thaw when Christ returns at his second coming.
I'm not a young earth creationist, so I don't actually hold this view. I've always though it would be good for a science-fiction Christian book though. The creativity impressed me enough so that I remembered it.
zephyr writes:
I guess the issue of physical death probably distracts from the thread, and there are other topics on that one, so I should probably say "thanks for answering but I shouldna mentioned it."
oh well...sorry about that.
zephyr writes:
To be honest, I was mostly being a smartass for the rest of that post... especially about the shrooms. I did have a point but it wasn't really relevant.
Well...I think it is relevant to the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, so it wasn't a bad stab at it in my opinion. But, if you're not interested (or you feel that it will side-track the thread), I'll withdraw from explaining further if you wish.
zephyr writes:
So we're back to my first two lines and your answers, and me wondering where you draw the line in Genesis between metaphor and literal reality.
I think it's a blurry line at best (for me personally). The Scriptures often use real things to describe symbollically deeper spiritual issues. The best I can say is that it's probably a bit of both to varying degrees. I tend to think, however, that Adam and Eve were real people from which humanity contracted original sin. Likewise, even if the trees are real, they still seem to have a deeper theme -- with the tree of life pointing toward Christ while the tree of the knowledge of good and evil points toward the adversary.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by zephyr, posted 06-08-2005 11:07 AM zephyr has not replied

Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 1327 days)
Posts: 712
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 26 of 302 (215401)
06-08-2005 4:29 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by zephyr
06-08-2005 11:08 AM


Do I really have to quote it, or should I just make short reference to the "4 score virgins between the ages of sixteen and twenty" in Monty Python and the Holy Grail?
The Holy Grail writes:
"Oh you're right. We have been ever so naughty. And as punishment you must spank me."
A chorus of voices "and me! and me! then me!"
"Yes, yes, you must spank all of us. And after you have finished the spanking...then we must perform the..."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by zephyr, posted 06-08-2005 11:08 AM zephyr has not replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 406 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 27 of 302 (215418)
06-08-2005 5:40 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Modulous
06-08-2005 9:09 AM


Re: explanation for everything?
But evolution is science based and science is tentative. Are you suggesting that the Word of God is tentative?
No, man's interpretation of his word, and how he tries to carry it out.
They were the only humans, and the only things with free will, and the only things (other than God, and perhaps the serpent) that had knowledge of good and evil. So yes, I think Adam and Eve were unique in that regard.
I think that is incorrect.
quote:
Genesis 3:22
And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."
Who's the us that the bible refers to?
I think there was humans outside the garden.
Genisis 4 says:
15 But the LORD said to him, "Not so ; if anyone kills Cain, he will suffer vengeance seven times over." Then the LORD put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him. 16 So Cain went out from the LORD's presence and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden.
17 Cain lay with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch. 18 To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad was the father of Mehujael, and Mehujael was the father of Methushael, and Methushael was the father of Lamech.
Where did cains wife come from?
Why did he need a mark on him so no-one would kill him?
Who else was there?
The serpent sounded like he had some free will also, when he convinced Eve to eat the fruit.
Why does Genesis have to be absolute? Can't we just learn from the morals? Isn't that where we find the word of God, in the morals of the story?
I missed that part. It goes from x begat y who begat z, straight to
What part? Where he told them not to do something, and they did?
Wasn't everyone in the time of Noah living in sin, against the way God intended us to live. Didn't he warn them. Noah had 100 years or so to build the ark, he knew, he told others. They were all banging on the door, after the Lord shut it, but it was too late.
He then goes on only to warn Noah about the impending doom of everything. So at what point was everyone else warned?
Noah was the only righteous man. The only one living God's way. So there was a God way, and a wrong way.
First warning:
quote:
The Flood
1 When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. 3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal ; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."
That should have told them something was up, but no!
quote:
12 God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways.
The word corrupted in that verse indicates that it was once good. There was a good way that became corrupted, and no longer worthy of life, according to God. Only one walked with God, Noah.
I just caught something else too. We now know where the water came from:
Genesis 8:2
Now the springs of the deep and the floodgates of the heavens had been closed,
God turned off the big faucet in the sky, lol.
*edited to fix a bad bracket*
This message has been edited by riVeRraT, 06-08-2005 05:41 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Modulous, posted 06-08-2005 9:09 AM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by ringo, posted 06-08-2005 6:34 PM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 35 by Modulous, posted 06-09-2005 12:59 AM riVeRraT has replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 28 of 302 (215431)
06-08-2005 6:34 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by riVeRraT
06-08-2005 5:40 PM


Who is "us"?
Suppose I agreed with you that there were other people "outside the garden" and that that's where Cain's wife came from.
God couldn't have been refering to them in Genesis 3:22 when He used the word "us". "Like one of us" would suggest that the people "outside the garden" had already eaten of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. So, why would God single out Adam and Eve?
Since Adam and Eve were singled out to bear the burden of their sin, I think they have to be taken as a metaphor for all mankind. (Please note that this has nothing to do with whether or not Adam and Eve literally existed. I am only saying that the story of the tree is a metaphor in which they appear.)
So, if the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is a metaphor for mankind's arising consciousness, then the Tree of Life would also be a metaphor.

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by riVeRraT, posted 06-08-2005 5:40 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by arachnophilia, posted 06-08-2005 7:30 PM ringo has not replied
 Message 40 by riVeRraT, posted 06-09-2005 9:03 AM ringo has not replied

zephyr
Member (Idle past 4540 days)
Posts: 821
From: FOB Taji, Iraq
Joined: 04-22-2003


Message 29 of 302 (215445)
06-08-2005 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
06-08-2005 3:51 PM


Re: explanation for everything?
Hmm... you sound so very reasonable. Had I been raised in your world rather than as a self-flagellating YEC, I'll speculate that I might still believe at least a little bit.
I'll be late for my kung fu class if I try to say more, but I'll be back....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 06-08-2005 3:51 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1334 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 30 of 302 (215455)
06-08-2005 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Modulous
06-08-2005 6:11 AM


Re: kabbalah
Yeah - I couldn't stop thinking about that when I was writing this all up. The link I posted, mentioned the Tigris/Euphrates link (and even provided a nice little map too...bless 'em.
yeah, but they make up explanation about the flood and changing geography. which kind of ruins the story.
the myth itself is about the explusion of a garden into the desert. it establishes eden as a very real place, whether or not they intend the story to be factual (that's another debate.)
similarly, the OTHER source of the hebrew people, abraham, comes from babylon, which would be between those two rivers, and wanders off into a desert. same theme, really, slightly different message.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Modulous, posted 06-08-2005 6:11 AM Modulous 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