Intelligent Design, the best explanation of Origins

This is my personal virtual library, where i collect information, which leads in my view to Intelligent Design as the best explanation of the origin of the physical Universe, life, and biodiversity


You are not connected. Please login or register

Intelligent Design, the best explanation of Origins » Bible / Christian faith / Apolotetics » Is the Bible Historically Accurate?

Is the Bible Historically Accurate?

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1 Is the Bible Historically Accurate? on Mon Jan 04, 2016 4:27 pm

Admin


Admin
Is the Bible Historically Accurate?

http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t1974-is-the-bible-historically-accurate

 There are 3 essential tests that researchers use to ascertain historical reliability. The Bible stands up strongly to these tests, if not more strongly than any other historical document recorded:

Internal Test: Examining linguistic, cultural, and literary context can clear away apparent contradictions in the Bible. For example, some claim that the genealogies of Christ are contradictory. Not so: Matthew lists Joseph’s family line, and Luke lists Mary’s.

External Test: Nelson Glueck, a Jewish archaeologist says, “… it may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference. Scores of archaeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or exact detail statements in the Bible.”

Bibliographic Test: Bibliographic Test: The document must contain eyewitness accounts, there must be a short amount of time between copy and original, and several copies must be made. Pass. Even many non-Christian historians who were not sympathetic to Christianity such as Flavius Josephus, Thallus and Phlegon lend support to Biblical facts.


The Bible’s Power and Influence
In some countries today, the Bible is forbidden. Bringing a Bible into Saudi Arabia, for example, or North Korea, or China, or Libya, or Burma — along with many other countries — can result in expulsion for the westerner or arrest and torture if you’re native to the country. It wasn’t that long ago that the Bible was banned in communist Eastern Europe, too; a good friend of mine was involved in Bible smuggling into places like Romania and Hungary during the 1970s and 80s and can tell hair-raising stories of near arrests and fortunate escapes.
Banned in many countries, yet desperately sought by persecuted Christians. The best selling, most widely studied piece of literature, whose influence is unquestionable, whatever you think of the book. Much of our art, law, philosophy, music and literature have drawn upon the Bible.
Yet this potency and influence aside, many people today want to ignore, rubbish, or reject the Bible. “How can you trust the Bible?” sceptics often ask. “New Atheist” writers like Richard Dawkins regularly attack the Bible, calling those who believe in it, “died in the wool faith-heads”.
Three Initial Thoughts
So how might we answer the sceptic? How can Christians show that is rational and reasonable to trust the Bible and take seriously what it says? There are numerous ways one might approach this question but this evening, I want to focus on a historical approach, as that’s my own academic background. But before that, let me start by making three general comments.
First, when somebody says “why trust the Bible?” I sometimes respond “why not trust the Bible?” One can only really doubt something if one has something more solid to believe in. Unless you merely want to be a sceptic. Whilst that’s very fashionable, it’s hard to be a consistent sceptic. Why not be sceptical about your scepticism?
Second, lots of people have bought into popular assumptions and myths about the Bible. So if somebody suggests the Bible is unreliable, ask them to be specific. How exactly? If they claim it’s full of myths, ask them which one they had in mind? Encourage them to read the Bible for themselves before passing judgement on it.
Third, there’s a lot of chronological snobbery about these days. Just because something is old or ancient, doesn’t make it false. Indeed, ancient-icity doesn’t tell us anything about whether something is true or false. Something can be ancient and true. Likewise something can be bang up to date and false.


The Internal Evidence for the Historicity of the New Testament

THE POPULAR HANDBOOK OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE, pg.142

In addition to the strong external evidence for the reliability of the Gospels, there is also very good internal evidence. In fact, if one knew nothing about the Bible or Christianity but discovered a New Testament in an antique book sale, he could get a strong sense of its credibility just by reading it. Here are several reasons why:

1. The writers did not try to harmonize their accounts, which shows they were not in collusion but were independent witnesses 
2. The New Testament retained texts that placed Jesus in a bad light. Someone trying to prove that Jesus was God would not have done this.
3. The writers also included difficult passages in the text (which a fraudulent author would not have done).
4. They wrote self-incriminating stories (fraudulent authors do not invent bad stories about themselves).
5. They distinguished Jesus’ words from their own (showing they were reporting, not creating, His words).
6. They did not deny their testimony under persecution or the threat of death (which weeds out the insincere).

The cumulative weight of the multiple and independent lines of testimony is overwhelming support for the historicity of the New Testament. No other book in the world has anything close to this much evidence for its authenticity.

The Historian and the Bible
Those comments aside, why trust the Bible? Well, first, many people are not aware that most historians take the Bible, especially the New Testament, very seriously indeed. The Bible has been subjected to extremely vigorous literary and historical criticism, probably more than any other ancient work, and it’s emerged unscathed. Hans Kung put it nicely:

Lay people are usually unaware that the scrupulous scholarly work achieved by modern biblical criticism … represented by scrupulous academic work over about 300 years, belongs among the greatest intellectual achievements of the human race. Has any of the great world religions outside of the Jewish-Christian tradition investigated its own foundations and its own history so thoroughly and impartially? None of them has remotely approached this. The Bible is far and away the most studied book in world literature.

In other words, the Bible doesn’t need defending or protecting from historical criticism — Christians haven’t shut themselves off from academic questions — far from it. Indeed, as the 19th century Baptist preacher Charles Spurgeon once quipped: “Defend the Bible? I’d sooner defend a lion!”
When one approaches the Bible from a historical perspective, one can approach it much as one would any other ancient work. Broadly speaking, there are three tests a historian can utilise to determine the veracity of an ancient document. The bibliographic test, the internal test, and the external test. Let’s briefly look at each of these and how they apply to the Bible.
The Bibliographic Test
The bibliographic test looks at the ancient manuscripts of the Bible and asks whether the text of the Bible we have today is the same as the original? The simple answer is “yes”. There are thousands upon thousands of ancient manuscripts of the Bible, dating from the early second century down to the middle ages. When you compare what we have for the Bible with, say, what we have in terms of manuscripts for other important works of antiquity — Plato or Thucydides — it’s striking. For the Bible, we have 5,000 Greek manuscripts, hundreds of papyri, almost 350 Syriac copies (most dating to the 400s). On top of this, virtually the entire New Testament could be reproduced from quotations in the early church fathers; 32,000 such quotations exist before the Council of Nicaea in AD325, for example.
Many of these manuscripts are staggeringly early. For example, the John Rylands fragment (P52) dates to around AD120. Codex Sinaiticus dates to about 350AD and contains virtually all of the New Testament — I remember visiting the British Library a few years ago and staring at this beautiful object, just a few centimetres away from me behind a pane of glass. One felt that one was in touch with history.
Why are these manuscripts important? Because they enable us to be confident that the text of the Bible we have today is extremely accurate and close to the original. Historian and textual critic Ben Witherington has remarked that critical scholarship is about 99% certain of all of the New Testament text now — indeed, that we’re closer to the original text of the New Testament now than anytime since the first couple of centuries, so good is the scholarship.
The Internal Test
What about the historian’s second test, the internal test? This test asks whether we can determine whether the document we have before us was written by eyewitnesses. When it comes to the Bible, especially to the New Testament, things get very interesting.
First, we have multiple witnesses. Many people who are unfamiliar with the Bible tend to think of it as one book — but, of course, the Bible contains multiple books — it’s more like a library than a book. So, when we come to the New Testament, for example, we have multiple authors writing about the life of Jesus. Critical scholars would count at least six — Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul and probably also “Q”, a collection of sayings of Jesus that Matthew and Luke referred to.
Furthermore, these sources are all very early. Most scholars date the Gospels to the 60s, 70s and 80s AD, although some argue that Mark, especially, is much earlier. British New Testament scholar James Crossley — who, I’d note, is not a Christian — believes Mark was written in the late 30s or early 40s — that’s within a decade of Jesus. Another very early witness is Paul, who is writing his letters between AD48 and AD65, well within the lifetimes of the eyewitnesses. Why is this important?
Because one thing historians get very excited about is multiple attestation and early dating.
To return to the Gospels, though, for a moment. Not merely are they very early, but it’s now fairly universally accepted in critical scholarship that the Gospel writers were trying to write history; in terms of genre, the Gospels are biographies. The seminal work that demonstrated this was a book called What Are the Gospels? by Richard Burridge. Interestingly, Burridge set out to disprove that the gospels are biographies but the evidence caused him to change his mind. Historian David Aune sums up the implications of this:


[Bios, ancient biography] was firmly rooted in historical fact rather than literary fiction. Thus while the Evangelists clearly had an important theological agenda, the very fact that they chose to adapt Greco-Roman biographical conventions to tell the story of Jesus indicated that they were centrally concerned to communicate what they really thought happened.”

There’s a further point here, too. If one wants to reject the Gospels as history, then one is still left with the problem of explaining the early church. It had to come from somewhere and if Jesus’ life and career didn’t play out as the Gospels claim, one has to explain where. As German historian Martin Dibelius put it: you have to posit an X big enough to explain the Y of the early church. The best explanation remains that given in the Gospels: that Jesus existed and something very remarkable happened to him.
The External Test
Finally, there’s the external evidence for the Bible, in particular archaeology. Time and time again, archaeology has confirmed that the writers of the biblical texts knew what they were talking about. Along with the writings of non-Christian historians from the first century, men like the Jewish historian, Josephus, archaeology endorses the biblical text at many points. As Millar Burrows, former professor of archaeology at Yale wrote:


On the whole … archaeological work has unquestionably strengthened confidence in the reliability of the Scriptural record. More than one archaeologist has found his respect for the Bible increased by the experience of excavation in Palestine. Archaeology has in many cases refuted the views of modern critics.

Let me give you a few fascinating examples. First, two examples from Luke. In Acts 17:6-8, Luke uses the Greek word politarchs to describe the city officials in Thessalonica. That word doesn’t appear in classical Greek literature so for many years, critics accused Luke of making a mistake. Then archaeologists discovered a first-century arch in the town that used this very term — showing that the term was in use for government officials at the very time Luke was writing. It was a similar phenomena with Acts 18:12, where Luke uses the term “proconsul” to describe a gentleman called Gallio. That word didn’t appear either in classical literature so, again, scholars questioned Luke’s accuracy. Then an inscription was found at Delphi, dating to AD51, using the same term — and amazingly, to describe the very same official, Gallio. Once again Luke was proven to be a very accurate historian.
It’s a similar story with the other Gospel writers. For example, in John 5:1-2, the fourth Gospel writer speaks of “a pool in Jerusalem, by the Sheep Gate, called in Hebrew ‘Bethesda’, which has five porticoes”. Until the 20th century, there was no evidence outside of John’s Gospel for such a place and, again, critics questioned John’s reliability. Then in the 1930s, the pool was uncovered by archaeologists — complete with four colonnades around the edges and one across the middle.
One more example will suffice and it’s perhaps the most intriguing — the so-called “James Ossuary”. According to the Gospels — and to the Jewish historian, Josephus, James was the brother of Jesus and was killed in AD62. In 2002, a mid-first century bone box or ossuary was discovered in Jerusalem, bearing the Aramaic inscription “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus”. There is very strong evidence that the box and its inscription are authentic. Ed Keall, of the Royal Ontario Museum here in Toronto, has said “we stand by our opinion that the James Ossuary is not a forgery”. As New Testament historian Ben Witherington put it:

If, as seems probable, the ossuary found in the vicinity of Jerusalem and dated to about AD 63 is indeed the burial box of James, the brother of Jesus, this inscription is the most important extra-biblical evidence of its kind.

If we had more time, numerous other examples could be listed. The key point is this: archaeology doesn’t prove the New Testament is true. But what it does do is endorse the narratives. It shows that the biblical writings are historical and geographical in character — and thus deserve to be weighed and treated as seriously as an other texts from antiquity.

Conclusions
In the short time available to us, we’ve only been able to scratch the surface of what is a fascinating and rich area of study. But I hope in this brief survey I’ve been able to show that there are very good reasons to trust the Bible. And thus very good reasons to approach it with an open mind, willing to take what it says seriously and weigh its claims seriously.

So why read the Bible? Because from a historian’s perspective, we have good reason to trust it. Why read the Bible? Because only by reading it can you draw your own conclusions, rather than uncritically swallow somebody else’s second-hand-scepticism. Why read the Bible? Because through the pages of the four biographies in the New Testament, the gospels, one encounters a historical figure — Jesus of Nazareth — whose powerful personality continues to resonate and impact lives two thousand years on.



http://www.rzim.eu/why-trust-the-bible



Last edited by Admin on Fri Nov 24, 2017 4:18 pm; edited 7 times in total

View user profile http://elshamah.heavenforum.com

2 Re: Is the Bible Historically Accurate? on Mon Jan 04, 2016 4:28 pm

Admin


Admin
“Critics have claimed that the Bible contains all kinds of factual errors. Is the Bible trustworthy when it speaks of historical matters?”
The Bible contains two kinds of information. Some of it can be checked; some of it cannot. For example, it is not possible to “check” scientifically the accuracy of Genesis 1:1 — “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” While the affirmation is not in any way inconsistent with available scientific data, at the same time the statement is one of pre-human history and therefore does not lend itself to empirical investigation.
On the other hand, the Scriptures contain hundreds of references that arise out of the background of human history. These may be tested for accuracy. If it is the case that the Bible is demonstrated to be precise in thousands of historical details, it is not unreasonable to conclude that its information in other matters is equally correct.
In fact, one of the most amazing features of the Bible is its uncanny reliability in the smallest of details. Let us note a few examples of biblical precision.
(1) During His personal ministry, Jesus once passed through the region of Samaria. Near Sychar, the Lord stopped for a brief rest at Jacob’s well. He engaged a Samaritan woman in conversation, during which He suggested that He could provide the woman with water that could perpetually quench her thirst. Misunderstanding the nature of the Master’s instruction, the woman, alluding to Jacob’s well, declared: “Sir, you have nothing to draw with, and the well is deep” (Jn. 4:11). The statement is quite correct, for even now, some twenty centuries later, Jacob’s well is approximately 80 feet deep — the equivalent of an eight-story building!
(2) Reflect upon another example. In Acts 10 there is the account of Peter’s visit in the city of Joppa. Luke declared that Peter was staying in the home of Simon, a tanner of animal hides. Then the historian said, almost as an afterthought, “whose house is by the seaside” (Acts 10:6). Hugh J. Schonfield, author of the infamous book, The Passover Plot (and certainly no friend of Christianity), has commented on this passage as follows:


“This is an interesting factual detail, because the tanners used sea water in the process of converting hides into leather. The skins were soaked in the sea and then treated with lime before the hair was scraped of” (The Bible Was Right, New York: The New American Library, 1959, p. 98).


(3) Consider another interesting case of Bible precision. When Paul was en route to Rome for trial, the ship upon which he sailed became involved in a terrible storm. When it eventually became apparent that the vessel was in a very dangerous circumstance, the crew cast the ship’s anchors into the water. At the same time, they “loosed the rudder bands, hoisted up the foresail, and aimed the ship towards the beach” (Acts 27:40 ).
There is an interesting and subtle point in the Greek text that is not apparent in the King James Version. The original language actually says that they “loosed the bands of the rudders” (plural – see ). This is amazingly precise, for in ancient times, ships actually possessed two paddle-rudders, not a single rudder as with modern vessels. In 1969, a submerged ancient ship was discovered in the Mediterranean Sea off the coast of Cyprus. An examination of the ruins gave evidence of dual rudder-oars by which the boat was steered (see National Geographic, November 1974), thus demonstrating the remarkable accuracy of Luke’s record.
The Bible can be tested — historically, geographically, scientifically, etc. And it always passes the test. Its incredible accuracy can be explained only in light of its divine inspiration.

https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/690-is-the-bible-historically-accurate

View user profile http://elshamah.heavenforum.com

3 TOWER OF BABEL STELE on Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:34 pm

Admin


Admin
TOWER OF BABEL STELE

http://www.schoyencollection.com/history-collection-introduction/babylonian-history-collection/tower-babel-stele-ms-2063

The ziggurat in Babylon was originally built around the time of Hammurabi 1792-1750 BC. The restoration and enlargement began under Nabopolassar, and was finished after 43 years of work under Nebuchadnezzar II, 604-562 BC.

View user profile http://elshamah.heavenforum.com

Admin


Admin

View user profile http://elshamah.heavenforum.com

Admin


Admin
THE POPULAR HANDBOOK OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE



View user profile http://elshamah.heavenforum.com

Admin


Admin
The Internal Evidence for the Historicity of the New Testament

THE POPULAR HANDBOOK OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE, pg.142

In addition to the strong external evidence for the reliability of the Gospels, there is also very good internal evidence. In fact, if one knew nothing about the Bible or Christianity but discovered a New Testament in an antique book sale, he could get a strong sense of its credibility just by reading it. Here are several reasons why:

1. The writers did not try to harmonize their accounts, which shows they were not in collusion but were independent witnesses 
2. The New Testament retained texts that placed Jesus in a bad light. Someone trying to prove that Jesus was God would not have done this.
3. The writers also included difficult passages in the text (which a fraudulent author would not have done).
4. They wrote self-incriminating stories (fraudulent authors do not invent bad stories about themselves).
5. They distinguished Jesus’ words from their own (showing they were reporting, not creating, His words).
6. They did not deny their testimony under persecution or the threat of death (which weeds out the insincere).

The cumulative weight of the multiple and independent lines of testimony is overwhelming support for the historicity of the New Testament. No other book in the world has anything close to this much evidence for its authenticity.

View user profile http://elshamah.heavenforum.com

Admin


Admin
Jerusalem reference found on ancient wine ledger

The Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) seized the 2,700-year-old papyrus from thieves who had taken it from a desert cave near the Dead Sea.
Two lines in Hebrew detail the shipment of wine from the king's household.
"From the king's maidservant, from Na'arat, jars of wine, to Jerusalem," it reads.
"The document represents extremely rare evidence of the existence of an organized administration in the Kingdom of Judah," said Dr Eitan Klein of the IAA.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2016/december-web-only/biblical-archaeology-top-ten-discoveries-of-2016.html?start=1

Archaeologists link remains of destroyed palace to reign of King Solomon


A MONUMENTAL palace from the era of Israel’s King Solomon has been uncovered in the ancient royal city of Gezer, sparking new hope of evidence for the elusive biblical king.

http://www.news.com.au/technology/science/archaeology/archaeologists-link-remains-of-destroyed-palace-to-reign-of-king-solomon/news-story/3240eb29a19f8b09e5377c72f15ab0d1

View user profile http://elshamah.heavenforum.com

Admin


Admin
Archaeological Evidence Which Proves the Bible is True

https://planetzion.wordpress.com/2014/08/18/archaeological-evidence-which-proves-the-bible-is-true/

Professor Adam Zertal, chairman of Archaeology Department of the University of Haifa, found this altar on April 6, 1980 on Mt. Ebal while doing an archaeological survey of the area. He was once an atheist, when asked about his find he replied, “We discovered this place, all covered with stones, in April 1980. At that time I never dreamt that we were dealing with the altar, because I was taught in Tel Aviv University – the center of anti-Biblical tendencies, where I learned that Biblical theories are untrue, and that Biblical accounts were written later, and the like. I didn’t even know of the story of the Joshua’s altar. But we surveyed every meter of the site, and in the course of nine years of excavation, we discovered a very old structure with no parallels to anything we had seen before. It was 9 by 7 meters, and 4 meters high, with two stone ramps, and a kind of veranda, known as the ‘sovev,’ around.” This altar is described to us in the following scriptures:

Joshua 8:30, 31
Then Joshua built an altar unto the LORD God of Israel in mount Ebal,
As Moses the servant of the LORD commanded the children of Israel, as it is written in the book of the law of Moses, an altar of whole stones, over which no man hath lift up any iron: and they offered thereon burnt offerings unto the LORD, and sacrificed peace offerings.

Deuteronomy 27:4, 5
Therefore it shall be when ye be gone over Jordan, that ye shall set up these stones, which I command you this day, in mount Ebal, and thou shalt plaister them with plaister.
And there shalt thou build an altar unto the LORD thy God, an altar of stones: thou shalt not lift up any iron tool upon them.

Exodus 20:25, 26
And if thou wilt make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone: for if thou lift up thy tool upon it, thou hast polluted it.
Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon.

Adam quickly changed his beliefs and became a Christian a few years after he fully realized what he had found. Adam says that there is actually two altars on the same site, the one visible dates back around 1250 B.C. based on the pottery found, which puts it at the time of Deborah of Judges 4, during the period of the Judges. Beneath this altar, Adam found a circular altar made from unhewn stone about 6.5 feet across. This circular altar has been dated to be about 1405 B.C. which puts it just about 40 years after the time of the Exodus, which took place around 1446 BC. This circular altar has been found with the remains of kosher animals and thus eliminates any idea of it being a pagan altar. The date of 1405 B.C. was determined by the discovery of an Egyptian scarab of Tuthmose III (the scarab shown to the left in the picture below), dated to around the time of the Exodus. The scarab to the right below is actually quite rare, only five known parallels exist- one from Egypt, three from Israel and one from Cyprus. These two Egyptian scarabs found at the site are quite telling as they indirectly confirm the Exodus story exactly as the Bible says, because Mt. Ebal was one of the first settlements of the Israelites once they left Egypt, finally crossed the river Jordan and came into the promised land.

Frank Paine states convincingly that the Exodus from Egypt was 1639 BC (Not around 1446)
The 2,000 years from Adam to Abram

Solar Years BC Years of Scripture Event Age Scripture Reference
4075 Creation and fall of Adam Gen. 1-3
4028 49 Abel born at 1st Jubilee Gen. 4: 2
3995 82 Abel's death Adam 82 yrs Gen. 4: 8
3949 130 Seth born Adam 130 yrs Gen. 5: 3
3847 235 Enosh born Seth 105 yrs Gen. 5: 6
3760 325 Cainan born Enosh 90 yrs Gen. 5: 9
3692 395 Mahalaleel born Cainan 70 yrs Gen. 5: 12
3629 460 Jared born Mahalaleel 65 yrs Gen. 5: 15
3472 622 Enoch born Jared 162 yrs Gen. 5: 18
3409 687 Methuselah born Enoch 65 yrs Gen. 5: 21
3228 874 Lamech born Methuselah 187 yrs Gen. 5: 25
3052 1056 Noah born Lamech 182 yrs Gen. 5: 28
2565 1558 Shem born Noah 502 yrs Gen.11: 10
2470 1656 The Flood Noah 600 yrs Gen. 7: 11
2468 1658 Arphaxad born Shem 100 yrs Gen.11: 10
2434 1693 Salah born Arphaxad 35 yrs Gen.11: 12
2405 1723 Eber born Salah 30 yrs Gen.11: 14
2372 1757 Peleg born Eber 34 yrs Gen.11: 16
2343 1787 Reu born Peleg 30 yrs Gen.11: 18
2312 1819 Serug born Reu 32 yrs Gen.11: 20
2283 1849 Nahor born Serug 30 yrs Gen.11: 22
2255 1878 Terah born Nahor 29 yrs Gen.11: 24
2129 2008 Abram born Terah 130 yrs Gen.11: 32 & 12: 4

The 500 years from Abram to the Exodus

Solar Year BC Years of Scripture
Event
Age/Comment Scripture Reference
2129 2008 Abram born Terah 130 yrs Gen.11:32,12:4
2056 2083 Abram leaves Haran Abram 75 yrs Gen.12:1-4
2047 2093 Abram marries Hagar Ishmael conceived Gen.16:3
2046 2094 Ishmael born Abram 86 yrs Gen.16:16
2032 2108 Isaac born Abram 100 yrs Gen.21:5,17:17
2027 2113 Isaac weaned Ishmael cast out Gen.21: 8 & 14
1996 2145 Sarah's death Sarah 127 yrs Gen.23: 1
1993 2148 Marriage of Isaac Isaac 40 yrs Gen.25:20
1974 2168 Esau & Jacob born Isaac 60 yrs Gen.25:26
1848 2298 Jacob & his sons enter Egypt Jacob 130 yrs Gen.47: 9
1639 2513 The Exodus of Israel from Egypt Exodus 12:41

View user profile http://elshamah.heavenforum.com

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum