Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - The Christian Thread
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedThe Christian Thread
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 6667686970 92>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Ambient Hurricanes View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 25 2011
Location: internet
Status: Offline
Points: 2549 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2012 at 10:38
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

that's not what presumptuous means.



I know, but that's what Pat's accusation of presumption basically came down to.
I love dogs, I've always loved dogs
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2012 at 10:43
Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

that's not what presumptuous means.



I know, but that's what Pat's accusation of presumption basically came down to.
That's not how I read it.
What?
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2012 at 11:25
Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:



True.  If the beings in other worlds could somehow observe us, or even if we could communicate with them without traveling to their world, we could influence them (maybe without even knowing it).


Well physically it would be even more subtle. But you probably have no interest in going off on that tangent.

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:


Then anyone who says "there is no God" is also presumptuous,


I didn't say this for one. I also would argue this even if I did make this claim. I mean you would say, presumably, that there's no Zeus right?


Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

because, since I have found meaning in my life only in Jesus Christ, anyone who denies Christ is essentially saying, "you have not found meaning in your life." 


No. For one this statement supposes that you can only find meaning through real entities. Literature often has profound effects on people despite the fact that Ishmael never really chased that whale.

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

They might not be saying that explicitly or intentionally, but it follows logically from their argument, and if they denied it they would be going back on their words.


Not true. See above.


Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:


If it's "presumptuous" to state a hard truth that some people may not like, then, by golly, I want to be presumptuous.

The insignificance of my opinion to you means little to me, also.  I know that your statement was a fact, but it sounded like you were trying to make an argument with it, and if you were, it would have been very invalid.


That's not what presumptuous means. Making a statement and asserting it to be true could fit the definition though.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2012 at 11:26
Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:



I don't think I did.  I was talking about death, after which no one can remember or be influenced by anything anymore.  If I emphasized the memory, it wasn't to exclude an influence whose source is unremembered.


I'm failing to see how that would be different from a collective amnesia.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Ambient Hurricanes View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 25 2011
Location: internet
Status: Offline
Points: 2549 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2012 at 13:15
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:



True.  If the beings in other worlds could somehow observe us, or even if we could communicate with them without traveling to their world, we could influence them (maybe without even knowing it).


Well physically it would be even more subtle. But you probably have no interest in going off on that tangent.

Yeah, let's not, I'll be totally lost once we get into any complex theoretical science Confused.

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:


Then anyone who says "there is no God" is also presumptuous,


I didn't say this for one. I also would argue this even if I did make this claim. I mean you would say, presumably, that there's no Zeus right?

I know you didn't say it, but I don't see you or anyone else calling anyone presumptuous for making that claim.  I don't consider anyone presumptuous for denying God's existence and, likewise, I don't think I'm presumptuous for denying the existence of meaning in life without God.


Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

because, since I have found meaning in my life only in Jesus Christ, anyone who denies Christ is essentially saying, "you have not found meaning in your life." 


No. For one this statement supposes that you can only find meaning through real entities. Literature often has profound effects on people despite the fact that Ishmael never really chased that whale.

You're misunderstanding me.  I find meaning, not in a character of literature, but in the true, historical Son of God, Jesus Christ.  If someone denies Jesus to my face, he effectively says that I have not found meaning in my life but not that I cannot.  My statements don't imply that there is no meaning in your life; only that you have not found that meaning.  The one who denies God does the same to me.

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

They might not be saying that explicitly or intentionally, but it follows logically from their argument, and if they denied it they would be going back on their words.


Not true. See above.

Ditto


Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:


If it's "presumptuous" to state a hard truth that some people may not like, then, by golly, I want to be presumptuous.

The insignificance of my opinion to you means little to me, also.  I know that your statement was a fact, but it sounded like you were trying to make an argument with it, and if you were, it would have been very invalid.


That's not what presumptuous means. Making a statement and asserting it to be true could fit the definition though.

I know, see my reply to Dean above.  Perhaps I misunderstood you. 

However, "making a statement and asserting it to be true" is not presumption, and if it is then presumption cannot be understood as a negative concept.  
I love dogs, I've always loved dogs
Back to Top
thellama73 View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2012 at 13:21
If I say to you "You have found meaning in something you believe to be true. In fact, it's not true, but that doesn't diminish the meaning you've found in it." that is not presumptious in the same way as "You believe that you have found meaning in your life, but in fact you have not" is.
Back to Top
Ambient Hurricanes View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 25 2011
Location: internet
Status: Offline
Points: 2549 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2012 at 13:26
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:



I don't think I did.  I was talking about death, after which no one can remember or be influenced by anything anymore.  If I emphasized the memory, it wasn't to exclude an influence whose source is unremembered.


I'm failing to see how that would be different from a collective amnesia.

It's far in the future and a mutant monster is on the loose to destroy humanity.  The only person who knows how to kill it is a famous scientist who has observed it in its habitat and figured out its weakness.  The scientist stops the monster, but dies in the attempt, and everyone mourns his death and praises his bravery.

Now consider two possible endings:
1.  Ten days later, humanity experiences a collective amnesia, and no one remembers anything about the scientist and the monster.
2.  Ten days later, a massive epidemic strikes the planet and everyone dies.

See the difference?
I love dogs, I've always loved dogs
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2012 at 13:35
no.
What?
Back to Top
thellama73 View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2012 at 13:38
Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:



It's far in the future and a mutant monster is on the loose to destroy humanity.  The only person who knows how to kill it is a famous scientist who has observed it in its habitat and figured out its weakness.  The scientist stops the monster, but dies in the attempt, and everyone mourns his death and praises his bravery.

Now consider two possible endings:
1.  Ten days later, humanity experiences a collective amnesia, and no one remembers anything about the scientist and the monster.
2.  Ten days later, a massive epidemic strikes the planet and everyone dies.

See the difference?



Isn't the whole point that you've been arguing that they are all going to die eventually anyway so both outcomes are equally meaningless?
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2012 at 13:44
Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:


If it's "presumptuous" to state a hard truth that some people may not like, then, by golly, I want to be presumptuous.

The insignificance of my opinion to you means little to me, also.  I know that your statement was a fact, but it sounded like you were trying to make an argument with it, and if you were, it would have been very invalid.


That's not what presumptuous means. Making a statement and asserting it to be true could fit the definition though.

I know, see my reply to Dean above.  Perhaps I misunderstood you. 

However, "making a statement and asserting it to be true" is not presumption, and if it is then presumption cannot be understood as a negative concept.  
"Presumptuous" is not the act of making a "presumption", that word is "presumptive"
What?
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2012 at 13:46
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:


I'm failing to see how that would be different from a collective amnesia.

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:


It's far in the future and a mutant monster is on the loose to destroy humanity.  The only person who knows how to kill it is a famous scientist who has observed it in its habitat and figured out its weakness.  The scientist stops the monster, but dies in the attempt, and everyone mourns his death and praises his bravery.

Now consider two possible endings:
1.  Ten days later, humanity experiences a collective amnesia, and no one remembers anything about the scientist and the monster.
2.  Ten days later, a massive epidemic strikes the planet and everyone dies.

See the difference?



I see the physical difference. I don't see the philosophical one.

Even so that's not what I'm saying.

1) Human is born. He does stuff. He dies. He has no soul. He's dead. Finite. His actions affected nobody and are a product of a finite world. They have no meaning.
2) Human has always existed. He has always done stuff. At some point t', he forgets all actions which occurred t<t'. His actions affected nobody. The actions are no longer remembered. Having no affect and not being remembered, they do not different from Huamn's actions in (1). Therefore they have no meaning.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2012 at 13:56
Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:


I know you didn't say it, but I don't see you or anyone else calling anyone presumptuous for making that claim.  I don't consider anyone presumptuous for denying God's existence and, likewise, I don't think I'm presumptuous for denying the existence of meaning in life without God.


Why would I call someone else that for not believing in God?

pre·sump·tu·ous/priˈzəmpCH(o͞o)əs/

Adjective:
(of a person or their behavior) Failing to observe the limits of what is permitted or appropriate.

I don't see how that applies to someone stating that they don't believe in a specific entity.

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:


You're misunderstanding me.  I find meaning, not in a character of literature, but in the true, historical Son of God, Jesus Christ.  If someone denies Jesus to my face, he effectively says that I have not found meaning in my life but not that I cannot.  My statements don't imply that there is no meaning in your life; only that you have not found that meaning.  The one who denies God does the same to me.


No it's not.  You could think someone is real and still find meaning regardless of the actual situation. Since you believe in the biblical story of redemption, if I were to write an exact reproduction of the New Testament but set it on Mars 20,000 years from now, that would be fictional. However, someone could still read that and then have the same experiences as you with regards to meaning, etc.  Yet you would admit that the story granting them these feelings is fictional.

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:


Ditto


Double ditto.


Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:



I know, see my reply to Dean above.  Perhaps I misunderstood you. 

However, "making a statement and asserting it to be true" is not presumption, and if it is then presumption cannot be understood as a negative concept.  


See Dean's response to your response above this response.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Epignosis View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32552 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2012 at 17:03
Thank God school is back in session.  LOL
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays
Back to Top
AlexDOM View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 02 2011
Location: Indianapolis
Status: Offline
Points: 775 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 16 2012 at 16:28
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Thank God school is back in session.  LOL

Excited to be back at college and serving in Cru
Back to Top
Ambient Hurricanes View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 25 2011
Location: internet
Status: Offline
Points: 2549 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 22 2012 at 19:15
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:



Originally posted by Matthew 17:3-5 Matthew 17:3-5 wrote:



When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders.  “I have sinned,” he said, “for I have betrayed innocent blood.”

“What is that to us?” they replied. “That’s your responsibility.”

So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.


Originally posted by 1 John 1:9 1 John 1:9 wrote:


If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

I wonder if John's promise applies to the grief-stricken, repentant Judas.  Question





I've always heard that Judas wasn't saved because he believed in his own sin but not the mercy of God to forgive him; all law and no Gospel.  He didn't put his trust in Christ for forgiveness, but believed that he was beyond redemption.


I don't see anything in the text that shows that (it may be there- I have not studied Judas in depth).  But he spent the final years of his life with Jesus- surely he understood something.


Every single one of the disciples lost faith when Jesus died.  I don't see why Judas would be any different. 

Jesus says about the one who betrayed him, "it would be better for him if he had not been born."  This wouldn't apply to Judas if he had been saved in the end, and he was definitely sorry for his sin, so I think we can infer based on the text that he lacked faith in the forgiveness Christ had won for him.


1. You are (evidently) a Calvinist.  You surely don't believe they "lost faith" in any meaningful sense. 

2. You believe in an eternal fiery hurtful hell.  Isn't then what Jesus said to Judas true of all unbelievers at one point in their lives?

2a.  Jesus also says "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe to stumble, it would be better for him if, with a heavy millstone hung around his neck, he had been cast into the sea." (Mark 9:24)

Does your response imply then, that (however you interpret the initial clause) "causing one of" the "little ones" "to stumble" is an unforgivable thing?


I'm not a Calvinist.  I'm a Lutheran, but I used Calvinism as the example in my post in the thread this originated in because it's most identified with predestination and because the Lutheran doctrine of soteriology is incomprehensible and I didn't think it would be the best example.

I don't believe that God predestines people to Hell, but I do believe that he knows who will end up there.  So what Jesus said would be true for one He knew would not come to faith, but not for someone who He knew would come to faith (I'm not at all sure about the fire and physical pain, either; I think there's a strong possibility that Hell is a place of spiritual, not physical, torment.  I don't know either way, really).

I think that passage means that, though causing someone to stumble isn't unforgivable, it would be better to die before committing that sin because it could endanger someone else's salvation.
I love dogs, I've always loved dogs
Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 22 2012 at 23:05
Figured I'd respond here instead.

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:


14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion,[b] but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21  Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— 


Give me your in interpretation of the passage, because I cannot for the life of me find anything worth calling good in it. I parsed through and saw this gem, though. This is just an odious, life-denying philosophy to me, and its passage like this that make me wonder why some Christians would see the value in seeing they are nothing without God. And I take issue as well with the "believing in him and not being put to shame" nonsense. This passage, to my eyes is terrible, soul-crushing nonsense. I am wondering if I am missing something, because I don't think a person could choose to believe this kind of faith is a good thing, which makes me all the more firm in my statement that belief is not a choice, but a conclusion based on experience and subconscious thought.

I get that you think this passage reflects the reality of the world in some way, but...do you actually want that to be true? Sounds horrible to me.


Edited by stonebeard - August 22 2012 at 23:06
My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!
Back to Top
Ambient Hurricanes View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 25 2011
Location: internet
Status: Offline
Points: 2549 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 23 2012 at 09:55
Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:

Figured I'd respond here instead.

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:


14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion,[b] but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21  Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— 


Give me your in interpretation of the passage, because I cannot for the life of me find anything worth calling good in it. I parsed through and saw this gem, though. This is just an odious, life-denying philosophy to me, and its passage like this that make me wonder why some Christians would see the value in seeing they are nothing without God. And I take issue as well with the "believing in him and not being put to shame" nonsense. This passage, to my eyes is terrible, soul-crushing nonsense. I am wondering if I am missing something, because I don't think a person could choose to believe this kind of faith is a good thing, which makes me all the more firm in my statement that belief is not a choice, but a conclusion based on experience and subconscious thought.

I get that you think this passage reflects the reality of the world in some way, but...do you actually want that to be true? Sounds horrible to me.


What ever does it matter if I want it to be true?  Do my desires determine truth?  Should my idea of God determine what he is really like?  Should my desire for free will in my salvation determine whether I have it?  I don't believe this because I think it's nice, or because I want to, or because it makes me feel good.  I believe it because I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that His word is truth.

My interpretation of the passage is that it means exactly what it says.  No one receives injustice from God.  We all deserve death, and yet some, by the grace of God, receive eternal life.  I don't know why He chooses some and not others.  I don't know why He desires all people to be saved but only chooses some.  I do know, however, that God is Love, that He is perfect, righteous, just, and merciful, and that whatever He wills is what is good, and I know this because He has sent His Son, Jesus Christ, into the world, and that this Jesus Christ died for the sins of the world out of love for His Father and for us, and that God proved that Jesus was His own Son by raising Him from the dead.
I love dogs, I've always loved dogs
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 23 2012 at 10:14
Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:



What ever does it matter if I want it to be true?  Do my desires determine truth?  Should my idea of God determine what he is really like?  Should my desire for free will in my salvation determine whether I have it?  I don't believe this because I think it's nice, or because I want to, or because it makes me feel good.  I believe it because I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that His word is truth.



You believe because you believe? I'm sure that's true, but it's a bit tautological, circular, and does not explain much.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Ambient Hurricanes View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 25 2011
Location: internet
Status: Offline
Points: 2549 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 23 2012 at 10:28
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by Ambient Hurricanes Ambient Hurricanes wrote:



What ever does it matter if I want it to be true?  Do my desires determine truth?  Should my idea of God determine what he is really like?  Should my desire for free will in my salvation determine whether I have it?  I don't believe this because I think it's nice, or because I want to, or because it makes me feel good.  I believe it because I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that His word is truth.



You believe because you believe? I'm sure that's true, but it's a bit tautological, circular, and does not explain much.


I believe one thing because it follows from another thing that I believe for other reasons.
I love dogs, I've always loved dogs
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 23 2012 at 10:30
I see. I did not understand that part. 
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 6667686970 92>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.438 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.