Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 81 (8971 total)
187 online now:
Coragyps, dwise1, jar, marc9000 (4 members, 183 visitors)
Newest Member: Howyoudo
Post Volume: Total: 875,371 Year: 7,119/23,288 Month: 1,025/1,214 Week: 37/303 Day: 37/37 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Did Jesus teach reincarnation?
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 64 of 168 (777043)
01-25-2016 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by ringo
01-25-2016 12:21 PM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
Oh, I don't mind at all when the Bible offers me some contradictions, paradoxes.
That doesn't bother me.

You're clever. You're clever. Okay, I got it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by ringo, posted 01-25-2016 12:21 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by ringo, posted 01-25-2016 12:31 PM jaywill has responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 66 of 168 (777046)
01-25-2016 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by ringo
01-25-2016 12:31 PM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
I noticed that you looked askance at the matter of Jesus teaching reincarnation.

I already told you that Paul's word on Abraham carries a settled argument for me.
That is it would supersede my feeling just on reading the Genesis story alone

So I don't think Abraham's hope in "the God who gives life to the dead " is a weak rationale.

God's dealings with Job were His dealings with Job.
I don't expect, as I read through the Bible, God's dealings will be exactly the same with all men and women.

.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by ringo, posted 01-25-2016 12:31 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by ringo, posted 01-26-2016 10:41 AM jaywill has not yet responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 67 of 168 (777047)
01-25-2016 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by ringo
01-25-2016 10:51 AM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
quote:
If he expected God to instantly resurrect Isaac, it wasn't much of a sacrifice.

I think I'll run away if you don't mind.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by ringo, posted 01-25-2016 10:51 AM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 68 of 168 (777048)
01-25-2016 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by ringo
01-25-2016 10:51 AM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
quote:
Note that when Job went through his trials and tribulations, he got everything back except his children. That was a sacrifice.

Job was not asked by God to give up his children.
They were just taken from him.
He had no choice in the matter.

So I don't think the two experiences are alike in that regard.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by ringo, posted 01-25-2016 10:51 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by ringo, posted 01-26-2016 10:45 AM jaywill has not yet responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 69 of 168 (777049)
01-25-2016 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by ringo
01-25-2016 12:21 PM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
quote:
(For what it's worth, I agree with you that Jesus didn't teach reincarnation. I'm just saying that that one argument is weak.)

So if we just look at Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac WITHOUT the words of the Apostle Paul in Romans 4 or the description in the book of Hebrews, just as a first time reader of the book of Genesis ... Okay. we may very well overlook his hope in resurrection.

Sure, it may escape our notice even when he said they would come back after the sacrifice.

Why be hostile to what the New Testament explains about Abraham's experience? Do you have some basic reason why the NT should not be taken as legitimate discussion of the book of Genesis ?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by ringo, posted 01-25-2016 12:21 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by NoNukes, posted 01-25-2016 6:33 PM jaywill has responded
 Message 74 by NoNukes, posted 01-25-2016 10:05 PM jaywill has responded
 Message 80 by ringo, posted 01-26-2016 10:56 AM jaywill has not yet responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 71 of 168 (777075)
01-25-2016 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by NoNukes
01-25-2016 6:33 PM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
quote:
Because it is an after the fact explanation. People are skeptical for the same reason they are skeptical regarding those Nostradamus prophecies that get mapped onto events after they occur.

In this case of Genesis and Romans, usually it is not because it is an after the fact explanation. Rather some peoples' problem is that it is an after the fact explanation which is theistic.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by NoNukes, posted 01-25-2016 6:33 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by NoNukes, posted 01-25-2016 9:45 PM jaywill has responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 73 of 168 (777080)
01-25-2016 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by NoNukes
01-25-2016 9:45 PM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
quote:
If your arguments regarding your theology built on such things, it is then questionable to make accusations about why your arguments are not accepted, because the argument has an inherent weakness. Perhaps you simply need a better argument.

Naa, I need more faith.

Do you think Jesus taught reincarnation ?
I don't think so.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by NoNukes, posted 01-25-2016 9:45 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by NoNukes, posted 01-25-2016 11:26 PM jaywill has not yet responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 76 of 168 (777088)
01-26-2016 12:44 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by NoNukes
01-25-2016 10:05 PM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
quote:
You are ignoring some elements of the story. What Abraham told Isaac (that a sheep would be provided for sacrifice) was completely inconsistent with an expectation that Isaac would die and then be resurrected.

"And Isaac spoke to Abraham his father and said, My father! And he said, Here I am, my son. And he said, The fire and the wood are here, but where is the lamb for a burnt offering ?

And Abraham said, God Himself will provide the lamb for a burnt offering, my son. So the two of them walked together."

It was long known to Abraham that his only son Isaac would be that lamb for the offering. Now he informs Isaac that God will provide a lamb.

Isaac was probably capable of physically escaping. But what we see is not resistance but cooperation. He apparently allowed his father to tie him up. It dawned upon Isaac that the "lamb" for the offering was to be himself.

The father and the son walked on together. This was a foreshadow of the Son of God and His Father "walking together" to Golgotha where "the Lamb of God" offered Himself for the eternal redemption of sinners.

Willingly, the son allowed himself to be sacrificed by the loving father.

"And they came to the place of which God had told him. And Abraham built the altar there and laid the wood in order and bound Isaac his son and laid him on the altar on top of the wood." (v.9)

This seems not the forced tying of a baby. This seems the cooperation of a youth capable of putting up a struggle. So I think it dawned upon Isaac that he, Isaac, was going to be the lamb for the offering.

I think it would have said that Isaac struggled fiercely at realizing he had been LIED to, if that was the case. So I rather feel Abraham was speaking allegorically. And the meaning of the allegory dawned upon Isaac, who was submissive in trust in an understandably difficult circumstance.

I would say you vastly underestimate the centrality of the sacrifice of the father of his only son in the whole Bible.

quote:

Further, this story and others in Genesis tell us that Abraham was quite capable of lying if he felt the circumstances warranted it.

I agree with this about his earlier life. I think by this time and at least TWO occasions of seeing what trouble his lying caused him (Gen.12:9-20; 20:1-18) , I think he was over that weakness.

So I think the lamb provided by God explanation was his truthful speaking in an allegorical way.

quote:

One egregious example is telling King Abimelech that his wife was his sister where the clear expectation was that his wife would be raped and Abraham would be spared.

That is right. But as I said, this scheme, which he used twice, blew up in his face.
By the time we get to chapter 22 I think he had overcome that particular weakness.

Interestingly, on the second occasion, he had to pray intercessory prayers for the royal household so that the women could have children. His OWN prayers for a child still went unanswered. Yet God heard his prayers that OTHER women besides Sarah would successfully conceive. Through the irony of these lessons, Abraham's faith in God grew.

quote:

So the question becomes exactly which of Abraham's utterances we should take as being the truth.

If you want to separate the account so that it has nothing to do with the central revelation concerning the offering of the only Son of God for eternal redemption by the Father to Whom the Son meant everything, then I suppose you prefer to believe that Abraham was trying to completely deceive Isaac.

" And the Angel of Jehovah called Abraham a second time from the heavens and said, By Myself I have sworn, declares Jehovah: Because you have done this thing and have not withheld your son, YOUR ONLY SON, ... (vs.14,15)

The significance is uncanny. And some divine hindsight is okay with me. This is the Faith and Belief Forum.

My faith and belief is that when John 19:17 says, "And bearing the cross Himself, He went out to the place called the Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha." a type was given in Genesis. Isaac and his father walked the same path on the way to Mount Moriah that the Lord Jesus Christ and His Father later walked on the way to Golgotha.

A picture is worth 1,000 words. The loving and trustful communion of Isaac with his father on the way to the sacrifice foreshadows the communion Jesus had with His Father on the way to His cross. Abraham and Isaac typified the Father and the Son.

The loving fellowship between the Father and His only Son on the way to accomplish eternal redemption for sinners is typified in the talking of Abraham with Isaac, his only son on the way to have him slain.

I believe in this neither Isaac resisted as the Son of God did not resist but was obedient unto death (Phil. 2:8). Jesus had said "Not as I will, but as You will." (Matt. 26:39)

quote:

A second question is whether Abraham was expecting that "the Lord would provide" a sheep or a resurrection.

I think he expected both. In the former case he knew the "lamb" for the slaughter that God was going to provide, up to the point before seeing the ram stuck in the thorns, was his only son.

Somehow, God would have to have a living Isaac in order for God to fulfill His own purpose. So I think he truthful expected to return sometime from the sacrifice with a living son.

But there is something even more in the typology. That is the provided ram with its horns caught in the thicket.

"And Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked, and there behind him a ram, caught in the thicket by its horns. And Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up for a burnt offering in place of his son." (v.13)

Some may be able to receive this. This too is probably a symbol of the Son of God to come. He came from heaven and had the fighting power. He could well have called twelve legions of angels to rescue Him from the mob and the execution. But in His incarnation as a man he was, so to speak, tangled up by the horns. His love for us in whose likeness and nature He took on in incarnation, limited Him.

His fighting power, (horns) were tangled in the thorns. Thorns speaking of fallen man (Gen. 3:17,18). Jesus as God incarnate came " ... in the likeness of the flesh of sin and concerning sin ... (Rom. 8:3b)

The capable fighting God became a man, locked in His joining our fallen race. Instead of warring and fighting as He was capable of doing, was held in limitation. So there is some correspondence for me in the obedience of Isaac and the ram being caught by its horns in the thicket.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by NoNukes, posted 01-25-2016 10:05 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by NoNukes, posted 01-26-2016 9:21 AM jaywill has responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 81 of 168 (777130)
01-26-2016 1:50 PM


Lord of the Rings and Nostradamus not withstanding, I see nothing wrong with a Christian like myself looking for indications of the New Testament's analysis of Genesis 22. And that even if the evidence seems questionable.

You fellas are welcomed to have another opinion about it. But the bottom line for me is the whole revelation of Scripture in its unity.

Hebrews 11:17 - 19

"By faith Abraham, being tested, offered up Isaac; indeed he who gladly received the promises was offering up his only begotten.

Of whom it was said, 'In Isaac shall your seed be called':

Counting that God was able to raise men even from the dead, from which he also received him back in figure. "

As I said, after the fact explanation is not a stumbling block to most people.
Rather it is after the fact explanation which involves God.

Abraham counted ... that God was able to raise men even from the dead - period.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by NoNukes, posted 01-26-2016 5:23 PM jaywill has responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 86 of 168 (777183)
01-27-2016 8:13 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by NoNukes
01-26-2016 5:23 PM


quote:
Perhaps you should not take a poll of yourself and a few buds and then expand that to other folks. That's even less persuasive exposition that the one we are criticizing you for.

Maybe some people come to the Faith and Belief room kind of like the Ghostbusters extermination team to morph it into Lack of Faith and Disbelief Room.

Just in case you didn't know I regard the Bible as God's speaking to man.
In its unity and harmony it says Abraham believed in the God of resurrection.
And I can see why.

If that is not legitimate conversation to you here, sorry.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by NoNukes, posted 01-26-2016 5:23 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-27-2016 8:16 AM jaywill has responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 88 of 168 (777185)
01-27-2016 8:37 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by LamarkNewAge
01-27-2016 7:44 AM


Re: I will keep this short.
You have a lot to read here of which I took only a portion to comment on:

quote:
The Baghavad-Gita is the classical text for teaching the supremacy and uniqueness of Krishna. He is the puru shottama, the Supreme Spirit, manifested but identical with the eternal Brahman. Yet he appears in different ages, to restore order and harmony, and to bestow grace on his devotees. And the repeated Avatars are set in the context of the doctrine of reincarnation, for that is clearly stated.

Many births have passed for Me,
And for you, Arjuna.
I know all of these
But you do not know them. (4, 5)

The divine manifestation appears to be the same as that of men, in happening many times; the difference is that Krishna knows the details of all his previous births, which the man Arjuna did not.


I think I have an idea about Avatars from this. Moving the conversation forward, perhaps we could just draw some lines of demarcation or distinction, if there are, concerning my Faith and Belief and what you present.

Just to highlight what I would propose as differences from what I would certainly call the Bible's revelation and what you present above may be constructive.

I don't expect you to "back down" from what you believe about this.
Some people reading along might find the exchange interesting.

Because these matters involve personal beliefs we may get touchy at times.
I think these matters take time - even sometimes many years.
Before I really got to know Jesus Christ I did study Zen Buddhism for awhile.

Now, NT textural criticism I probably will not get into as deep as you'd like.
Suffice it to say I have no problem with the so called "disputed" epistles as to Paul's authorship. And I certainly don't excise John from the New Testament.

What we both are interested in, I think, is oneness between God and human beings. What I think we both are interested in is God manifesting Himself within humanity. Would I be right about that ?

So you believe Jesus taught everybody is being reincarnated or just some special agents of God are ?

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-27-2016 7:44 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-27-2016 9:00 AM jaywill has responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 90 of 168 (777187)
01-27-2016 9:04 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by LamarkNewAge
01-27-2016 8:16 AM


Re: But you reject Hebrews 11 jaywill.
LNA, This kind of post is more manageable and frankly has sufficient impact.

quote:
Romans 4 doesn't say Abraham believed in resurrection.

What do you think giving life to the dead means ?

" ... in the sight of God whom he believed, who gives life to the dead ... " (v.17b)

quote:

Hebrews 11 covers 2 Maccabees and beliefs there.
You reject Maccabees and its afterlife teachings.

I don't know much about Maccabees.
I know its concerns is in the enter-testamental time.

I go from Malachi to Matthew. Sure many great things may have been written in-between those books.

"Afterlife" is not a term that I use.
I do use the term resurrection. And it would not be true that I do not believe in resurrection.

quote:

You aren't being consistent.

Because I don't take Maccabees as part of the inspired oracles of God, I am not consistent ? I don't see that that follows as far as my belief in the Bible's utterances about resurrection.

quote:

Your rejection of 2nd Maccabees cancels out your belief in Hebrews 11, and that cancels out your belief that Abraham believed the resurrection.

I have no familiarity with 2nd Maccabees. I hardly have enough time for all the unsearchable riches of Genesis to Revelation. My whole life could easily be spent in digging into this gold mine.

I do not "REJECT" the book of Maccabees as of historical interest or even as having some pious or devotional or spiritual material in it.

But I cannot recall anything from Maccabees. Can you show me my disbelief in resurrection from the book of Hebrews chapter 11 ?

You don't need a lot of documentation of a bibliographical type. How am I rejecting resurrection from my reading of Hebrews 11 ?

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-27-2016 8:16 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by NoNukes, posted 01-29-2016 2:28 PM jaywill has responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 91 of 168 (777193)
01-27-2016 9:54 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by LamarkNewAge
01-27-2016 9:00 AM


Re: I will keep this short.
quote:
If people have no respect for what Jesus said, and what the early Jewish-Christian communities (associated with James the Just) believed, then it is tough to have a conversation.

You may have written more things then I took the time to read.
But the above doesn't make sense to me.

Things you write that make sense, I can respond to.
I know James as a respected leader of the church in Jerusalem, kind of had his foot in two covenants - the age old testament covenant and the new. It is quite understandable that the brother of Jesus would be looked to as a leader of a new religion, so-to-speak. We probably would have done similarly - grab the brother of Jesus to take the community of faith onward.

However, God used James to write one book in the New Testament but used Paul to write about 13 or 14.

I probably didn't read something you wrote about James adhering to reincarnation. So I really don't get your scolding me about James. And I don't get the scolding about not believing Jesus. I'm sorry.

quote:

Somebody earlier wrote Jesus, James, the Ebionites, and the Elkesaites as simply a bunch of "new age mystics" (if I quoted them correctly) and instead preferred the later traditions of the Greco-Roman church as the pre-eminent authority.

No comment. I didn't write that.

quote:

I will listen to you, but you have to have respect for the earliest evident communities of the family of Jesus.

I am not sure what it is you want me to notice about the church in Jerusalem under the leadership of the elder James as far as it pertains to reincarnation.

I could write a lot about James. I don't know what this brother has to do with reincarnation. In fact, his one epistle has no hint at all about reincarnation. And if we went through it, I think you would see that it says things quite differently.

There is no hope put in successive lives, reincarnated moving towards some ideal.

He does say that the word of God implanted into the soul will save the soul.
He does say that God brought the believers forth as firstfruits of his creatures.

It is not a moving from lifetimes to lifetime to lifetime as different people towards oneness with God.

The salvation in James pertains to an individual's ONE given life on this earth.
Do you disagree? If so show me in James why you do.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-27-2016 9:00 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 92 of 168 (777194)
01-27-2016 10:08 AM


LNR,

quote:

Nobody has responded to the issue of the early communities at all.

I do find that offensive when I see people who call themselves "Christian" totally disrespect the James (associated) community of Ebionites by ignoring them and their (identifiably) early offshoots (like the Elkesaites). It bears the mark of outright indifference. And I have witnessed it by self-professed "Christians" in this thread.


You're going to get hit from all sides on this Forum. Better get use to it

Now, I think some questions to you, I have not noticed answers to yet.
If I come back as Mr. B, Miss C, Mr. D, Mr. E and so on for many new incarnations of me, whose life will I be responsible for before God ?

Do you recall ANY benefit you have now OVER the last two or three incarnations of your soul ? You don't know anything about you supposed past life. It wasn't YOURS. That is why you have no remembrance.

You cannot claim someone else's life as your own.
There is with ONE tremendous exception. We can receive Jesus Christ to blend, mingle, and live in us in an incorporated way. God can dispense Jesus' life and nature into your being in new birth.

Remember, I referred to Paul's words about Christ living in the believers.
And that was in one of your undisputed Pauline epistles, I think, - Second Corinthians.

He was being 100% consistent with what Jesus taught.

" Abide in Me and I in you. " (John 15:4a)

That is a mingling of Jesus Christ with the person in whom abides in the sphere and realm of Jesus. We are called to live in Him. And in turn He lives His life in and through us.

Here he said He and His Father as the Triune God, would come to make an abode in those lovers of Him.

" Judas, not Iscariot, said to Him, Lord, and what has happened that You are to manifest Yourself to us and not to the world?

Jesus answered and said to him, If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make an abode with him." (John 14:22,23)

Jesus and the Father as the Divine "We" through the Holy Spirit come to make an abode in those who love Him and keep His word.

Jesus is available. He came to make an abode with me many years ago.
He is still moving into more and more chambers of my being as it is a lifelong process.

So if I had 100 lives, I would not want to waste one of them not having Jesus and His Father as the Spirit come as the Divine "We" to make an abode with me. I only need ONE LIFE to turn over all my heart and inner being to Him.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.


  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 93 of 168 (777198)
01-27-2016 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by NoNukes
01-26-2016 9:21 AM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
quote:
I am a Christian, and I don't find the after the fact prophecy to be compelling. It is small wonder that others feel it same way.

After the fact explanations of Jesus' life by Himself and His apostles, you do not find compelling ?

Do you mean you are a Christian who does not find Peter's message about Jesus in Acts 2 compelling ?

How about the after the fact interpretation of His death and resurrection given by Himself ?

"And He said to them, O foolish and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken !

Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and enter into His glory ? " (Luke 24:25,26)

I find these and other "after the fact" explanations of Jesus compelling.
You don't as a Christian ? That would be surprising to me.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by NoNukes, posted 01-26-2016 9:21 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by NoNukes, posted 01-27-2016 12:59 PM jaywill has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020