Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evangelical Support Group
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 6 of 331 (397664)
04-27-2007 1:03 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Pete OS
04-26-2007 11:45 PM


Re: Looking for a discussion
No Problem Pete. The issues you raise have been addressed within Christianity for a long, long time. The idea of a literal reading of Genesis, of Biblical Creationism is actually pretty new and somewhat of an aberration.
You will find that the vast majority of Christianity have no problems with Evolution or the Theory of Evolution, of an old Earth and even older Universe. The Phenomena of YEC or Biblical Creationism is mostly a US led cult and frankly, a pretty new one, mostly driven by a few people such as Henry Morris.
You can find a pretty good history of the Creationist movement Here.
Another source you should look at is the Catechism of Creation and for a good view of much of the Christian Clergy in the US, read the Clergy Project Letter which is an open appeal to school boards to teach the Theory of Evolution and has currently been signed by over 10,000 US Christian Clergy.
Biblical Creationism is a great moneymaker and you cannot expect folk like the Televangelists, AIG, ICR, Discovery Institute and others who have profited from it to abandon that cash cow willingly.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Pete OS, posted 04-26-2007 11:45 PM Pete OS has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Phat, posted 04-27-2007 2:03 AM jar has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 44 of 331 (398316)
04-30-2007 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by Phat
04-30-2007 8:08 AM


Re: Basic Loosely Defined Belief Statement for this Group
There is a second issue that also needs to be addressed.
6. We believe that all the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the Word of God, fully inspired and without error in the original manuscripts, and that they are the infallible rule of faith and practice.
Since there are no original manuscripts, what difference does it make if they were "fully inspired and without error?"
We are clueless what was in those original manuscripts anyway.
In addition, other than being a feel-good collection of words with no meaning, what is the point?
What does "Fully inspired" mean?
What does "without error" mean?
What does "the infallible rule of faith and practice" mean?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Phat, posted 04-30-2007 8:08 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Phat, posted 04-30-2007 10:54 AM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 45 of 331 (398317)
04-30-2007 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Admin
04-30-2007 10:19 AM


Phat opened the floor.
see Message 37

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Admin, posted 04-30-2007 10:19 AM Admin has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 48 of 331 (398337)
04-30-2007 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by Phat
04-30-2007 10:54 AM


Re: Don't dismantle the belief statement through critical analysis
Again, you provided lots of words, but no information or content.
If you actually read the supporting assertions you posted all they say is that if you are willfully ignorant you will not find problems.
It says that there is No Error if you can possibly makeup some explanation for the contradictions regardless of how conv.
I thought your response to what Spong said were just more willful ignorance.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Phat, posted 04-30-2007 10:54 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Phat, posted 04-30-2007 4:09 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 51 of 331 (398349)
04-30-2007 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by iceage
04-30-2007 12:27 PM


Re: Listening To Radio Preachers and Teachers
Spong is one somewhat extreme example, but just one.
There actually is searching and questioning going on in "contemporary Christianity" and I would be more than happy to point you towards such sources.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by iceage, posted 04-30-2007 12:27 PM iceage has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Phat, posted 04-30-2007 4:20 PM jar has not replied
 Message 200 by Phat, posted 06-17-2013 10:00 AM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 55 of 331 (398385)
04-30-2007 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by PaulK
04-30-2007 1:43 PM


Re: Don't dismantle the belief statement through critical analysis
2 Timothy 3:16-17, refers to "Scripture" without making it clear what it means. If the writer really is Paul (something widely doubted) then he would be unlikely to have included any of the NT books. Even today - as Jar often points out - there is no universally agreed Christian canon. So it is certainly open to doubt whether the works referred to are "the Bible".
At the time Timothy and Corinthians were written there was NO BIBLE or even the thought of creating a Bible.
Scripture simply referred to those general Epistles, Gospels and other inspirational writings and most definitely did not refer to the "Bible". It would also include all of those works that never made it into one of the Canons and even those works specifically excluded.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by PaulK, posted 04-30-2007 1:43 PM PaulK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by dwise1, posted 04-30-2007 3:12 PM jar has replied
 Message 58 by iceage, posted 04-30-2007 3:23 PM jar has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 59 of 331 (398399)
04-30-2007 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by dwise1
04-30-2007 3:12 PM


Re: Don't dismantle the belief statement through critical analysis
Would it have included those? A large number of those writings never made into the Bible, many of them being rejected as either heretical or apocryphal. Would they still be considered "Scripture"? And if not, then, without the foresight of the future Council of Nicea, how could the writer(s) of those epistles know what "Scripture" was supposed to be?
We often forget that Judaism was a dynamic, evolving religion even past the time of Jesus. The Tanakh was still in flux during the first century CE and accounts of the period seem to show that it had only 22 Books and not the later 24 Books we are all familiar with.
In addition, if you read all of the passage from 2 Timothy 3, what is being discussed is most definitely both the older texts that all would have been familiar with but also the teachings of the writer and others.
14But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, 15and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
It is an exhortation to continue learning and to look critically at EVERYTHING presented. It is basically saying, "Be all you can be!"

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by dwise1, posted 04-30-2007 3:12 PM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Phat, posted 04-30-2007 4:11 PM jar has replied
 Message 65 by Asgara, posted 04-30-2007 4:27 PM jar has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 72 of 331 (398431)
04-30-2007 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Phat
04-30-2007 4:09 PM


Re: Ignorance presupposes perfect knowledge
let me start with the sub-title that you added to your message; "Ignorance presupposes perfect knowledge".
That is a silly statement with inane worth at best, and far more likely simply a false one. As written, it makes no sense. Ignorance does not presupose anything accept that something is unknown. In addition, willful ignorance can be positively identified as I will try to do in the next few paragraphs.
I had said, referring to the statement of your sources in Message 47...
If you actually read the supporting assertions you posted all they say is that if you are willfully ignorant you will not find problems.
That seems to upset you, but if we actually parse what you quoted, I believe I can show that is ALL they contained.
Let's look at them. The first was:
source writes:
Question: "What does it mean that the Bible is inspired?"
Answer: When people speak of the Bible being inspired, they are referring to the fact that God divinely influenced the human authors of the Scriptures in such a way that what they wrote was the very Word of God. In the context of the Scriptures, the word inspiration simply means “God-Breathed.” Inspiration communicates to us the fact the Bible truly is the Word of God, and makes the Bible unique among all other books.
While there are different views as to what extent the Bible is inspired, there can be no doubt that the Bible itself claims that every word, in every part of the Bible, is inspired by God (1 Corinthians 2:12-13; 2 Timothy 3:16-17). This view of the Scriptures is often referred to as “verbal plenary” inspiration. What that means is that the inspiration extends to the very words themselves (verbal inspiration), not just concepts or ideas; and that the inspiration extends to all parts of Scripture and all subject matters of Scripture (plenary inspiration).
There are some people who believe that only parts of the Bible are inspired, or only the thoughts or concepts that deal with religion are inspired, but these views of inspiration fall short of what the Bible itself claims. Full verbal plenary inspiration is an essential characteristic of the Word of God.
The first thing to note is that the person speaking is simply wrong. It could be that the person was simply ignorant, but they are proclaiming themselves as an authority, so that makes them appear dishonest. Timothy and Corinthians cannot refer to the Bible because no such thing existed at the time they were speaking. Further, reading 2 Timothy 3 in context, we see that Scripture is what these people had been taught since childhood, and so could not include anything now in the New Testament.
Nothing in the Bible says that the Bible is inspired or without error.
Sorry, that is NOT an opinion, that is fact.
So your first source is at best being willfully ignorant, but more likely intentionally dishonest.
Let's look at the next source.
Your source said:
If you read the Bible, at face value, without a preconceived bias for finding errors - you will find it to be a coherent, consistent, and relatively easy-to-understand book. Yes, there are difficult passages. Yes, there are verses that appear to contradict each other.
We must remember that the Bible was written by approximately 40 different authors over a period of around 1500 years. Each writer wrote from a different perspective, to a different audience, for a different purpose. We should expect some differences! However, a difference is not a contradiction or an error. It is only an error if there is absolutely no conceivable manner in which the verses or passages can be reconciled.
Now the first sentence is simply wrong. Again, it is possible that the writer had simply never read the Bible, but from the very beginning there are inconsistencies and contradictions.
So how could this person miss those? Let's read further.
Ah, here is the answer:
somebody writes:
However, a difference is not a contradiction or an error. It is only an error if there is absolutely no conceivable manner in which the verses or passages can be reconciled.
The person says that if there is what seems to be contradiction or error, you can get around it if you can figure out any conceivable (not even reasonable or plausible) way of reconciling them.
So getting around the obvious contradictions in Genesis 1 & 2 is simply matter of making up something, two creations, ignoring the fact that each lays out an ordered list, bringing in considerations not in the actual material.
That is called willful ignorance. You are intentionally saying that you will ignore the facts if you can possibly think of ANY way to get around them.
You then go on:
Phat writes:
Have you ever had a personal encounter with God? Are you saying that because you have or have not, I must fall into your paradigm and world view for how things are? None of us have experienced the same things in our lives.
I would respond the same way I have in the past; "How would I know that it is GOD?"
How would I know it is GOD?
Lots of mystics have had personal encounters with God, Charles Manson, Jim Jones, Marshall Applewhite, Benny Hinn, Kent Hovind, Fred Phelps, Mary Baker Eddy, John Wilson, David Koresh, Chuck Smith, William Miller, Joseph Smith and A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada who is the actual incarnation of God.
Lots have been wrong.
So again:
How do you tell it is an encounter with God?
To go into detail of why I thought your response related to Spong were inane would take this far off topic, but if you wish I will gladly go into detail on those as well.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Phat, posted 04-30-2007 4:09 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Hyroglyphx, posted 05-01-2007 1:22 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 73 of 331 (398436)
04-30-2007 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Phat
04-30-2007 4:11 PM


Re: Human attempts to understand God
Did it ever occur to you that your inclination to know everything may just be the very thing keeping you from knowing God?
How would I know it is GOD?
You yourself have said that it matters not if Jesus was actually a real person if the stories and lessons themselves were true. (Right?) The belief that God expects us to be all that we can be without need of Him is, in my opinion, a lie from the enemy.
If that is true, then it means your God created intentionally crippled creatures, that he created critters that must remain dependent on Her.
Why would your God create crippled critters?
I have said that the lessons can be tested and if they are true, it does not matter if the story is.
What I have said is that the Gospel we are to carry to the world is really very simple:
The Gospel is that it is okay to fail, but it is not okay not to try.
GOD has given all forgiveness. That is a done deal. But we are also charged to try to do what is right, try not to do what is wrong, to honestly evaluate and question our behavior, to acknowledge when we screw up, try to make amends and try to do better in the future.
BUT...
we will be judged on what we do, not what Jesus does not do.
The belief that God expects us to be all that we can be without need of Him is, in my opinion, a lie from the enemy.
That would be convenient, wouldn't it. It would be nice if GOD didn't really expect YOU to actually have to do it.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Phat, posted 04-30-2007 4:11 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 85 of 331 (398558)
05-01-2007 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Phat
05-01-2007 9:39 AM


Re: TOPIC SYNOPSIS I
jar writes:
Timothy and Corinthians cannot refer to the Bible because no such thing existed at the time they were speaking.
To which Phat responded:
quote:
No, but they very well could refer to the Holy Spirit speaking through human personalities. People did not need the book. What they needed and still need, IMB, is the Spirit and the personal character of God behind the book!
No, not really. There you go using the old "Make up any conceivable excuse" tactic. Read the passages. They are talking about "Scripture" in the part we are discussing. They also talk about teachings but that is irrelevant to the question of what they mean by "Scripture".
The question was in reference to the assertions in the belief statement, and they are simply false.
jar writes:
How would I know it is GOD?
to which Phat replied:
quote:
Oh thats right...you seem to think that God is unknowable. Perhaps I am too quick to assume that I understand Him, but it could well be that you are too quick to continually question and test whether or not you actually believe in Him.
Again, just a non-anser. No where in that do you explain "How you would know it is GOD?"
So again, the question stands until answered, "How would I know it is GOD?"
jar writes:
I have said that the lessons can be tested and if they are true, it does not matter if the story is.
To which Phat responded:
quote:
Jesus told Pilate that He was truth. Apart from that standard, what standard do we use to test the lessons as to validity. Let me turn your question back on you....when you study something "spiritual" written by another human author, how do you know that you are studying the right map to the right territory? IMB, the reality of a personal relationship with God is not some hodgepodge mystical journey into esoteric questioning
That again is not an answer, just an assertion with no support.
You test against the world we live in, Phat. There is no other possible test unless you can provide one, and so far all you have done is try to misdirect the readers attention and palm the pea.
jar writes:
It would be nice if GOD didn't really expect YOU to actually have to do it.
to which Phat replied:
quote:
I know that I am a spoiled child in regards to my relationship with God. Human kids are expected to grow up so as to not need their parents. I do not believe that we are expected to grow up and not need communion in a practical non ritualistic sense, however. Communion is more than some church ritual or symbol. Communion is the daily reality of conversation with God and prayer. IMB we all could partake in it a bit more often.
Sorry, all you are saying there is that you do not want to grow up. That's understandable, it's nice not to have to take responsibility for your actions.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Phat, posted 05-01-2007 9:39 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 89 of 331 (398573)
05-01-2007 1:47 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by Hyroglyphx
05-01-2007 1:22 PM


Re: Hostility and judgementalism
The point is that the term Scripture in those passages does NOT refer to the Bible. Nothing like a Bibles existed at the time they were written.
It really is very simple.
Even the Tanakh was still evolving through the first century CE.
Scripture is referring to ALL inspired writings, not to the Bible which just plain didn't exist.
AbE:
The issue is that the author of the supporting quotes Phat provided was demonstrably wrong, wrong on very basic factual matters just as you are wrong on the very same grounds.
I'm not sure why you are being so hostile with Phat seeing that he is simply sharing his beliefs on the matter. He's not saying anything that should illicit such a response from you.
That is yet another characteristic of the Christian Cult of Ignorance. They see anyone that actually asks questions about their beliefs as hostile.
Is it because their beliefs really have no foundation and so they are unable to explain why they hold them?
Edited by jar, : No reason given.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Hyroglyphx, posted 05-01-2007 1:22 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Phat, posted 05-01-2007 2:43 PM jar has replied
 Message 92 by GDR, posted 05-01-2007 2:53 PM jar has replied
 Message 95 by Hyroglyphx, posted 05-01-2007 3:30 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 93 of 331 (398581)
05-01-2007 3:01 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by Phat
05-01-2007 2:43 PM


Re: May The Source Be with You
How do you know when a writing is inspired? What is the source of the inspiration?(in your opinion or belief)
All you can do is test it against reality, the world you live in. The source is simply projected, we can not really know the source.
But the source is irrelevant. It is the validity of the testing that is important.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Phat, posted 05-01-2007 2:43 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 94 of 331 (398584)
05-01-2007 3:19 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by GDR
05-01-2007 2:53 PM


Re: Hostility and judgementalism
Please actually read what I write. I said that Phat's source is likely lying.
It is starting to be a bit much jar. Phat, as NJ says, shares his belief and you accuse him of "willfully ignorant, but more likely intentionally dishonest". Intentionally dishonesty translates into lying.
I specifically said Willfully Ignorant. If that term offends some, I'm sorry but it is an honest evaluation of what they do.
NJ calls you on it and you say accuse Phat of being part of the Christian Culture if Ignorance and of being hostile to anyone who disagrees. There is only one person in this discussion who's being hostile and it ain't Phat and it ain't NJ.
Cult, not even culture.
Again, please read what I write. I said that the people in the Christian Cult of Ignorance see any who simply asks why they believe something, who asks for the reasoning behind their beliefs, as hostility.
Labelling and name calling doesn't make a very effective argument, and I haven't read the guidelines lately, but isn’t accusing people of lying against the rules of this forum.
I'm sorry if your feathers get ruffled, but I actually supplied the reasoning behind my statements which is something the Christian Cult of Ignorance does not do.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by GDR, posted 05-01-2007 2:53 PM GDR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Phat, posted 05-01-2007 6:28 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 96 of 331 (398592)
05-01-2007 3:52 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by Hyroglyphx
05-01-2007 3:30 PM


Re: Logical fallacies
Let's stop and look at the points.
It is impossible for the passages to refer to the Bible, the Bible did not exist at the time of their writing, no Bible existed for several hundreds of years AFTER those passages were written, and even today there is no single identifiable "Bible", rather there are several canons each containing different collections of writings.
Sorry, those are all facts.
How could you presume to know that inspired writings can't exist, or any inspiration from God at all, for that matter, and refer to yourself as a Christian?
LOL.
Where did I say inspired writing can't exist?
See, that is part of the problem in the Christian Cult of Ignorance. It appears that the members are unable to read what is actually written.
then you asked the two nonsense questions:
* If God is unknowable, then how do you know Him/believe in Him?
* If you believe Jesus is the Son of God, but don't believe the veracity of Scripture, then how have you deduced He is who He claimed to be?
There is a difference between "knowing" and "believing". I can believe in GOD while acknowledging that the most I can ever know of GOD while living is the Map that I create. I can also believe but must in honesty acknowledge that it is but a belief and I might well be wrong.
The second question can be addressed this way. While I believe that Jesus actually existed and the stories told of him have some basis in truth, it is unimportant whether in fact they are true. Further, I have never said that there was not some lessons to be learned from Scripture, what I said is the the passages quoted do not refer to the Bible. I believe that all Scripture is inspired, including Alice through the Looking Glass, Archy and Mehitabel, Mysterious Stranger and particularly, Pogo.
BUT, the fact is still that the passages do not refer to "The Bible" which does not even exist today.
Making slanderous remarks about Phat, or anyone else for that matter, is making a statement, not asking a question. Again, why are you being so hostile to Phat, of all people?
Again, if the shoe fits, wear it. I have tried to be quite clear as in this response to outline why I use the term Christian Cult of Ignorance. I speak out to Phat in the hope of saving his immortal soul, in hope that I can get him to actually think about the quotes such as he used to support his position.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Hyroglyphx, posted 05-01-2007 3:30 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by Hyroglyphx, posted 05-02-2007 12:44 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 105 of 331 (398632)
05-01-2007 8:33 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Phat
05-01-2007 6:21 PM


Re: TOPIC SYNOPSIS II
Keep reading Matthew and he goes on to explain "HOW" you love GOD.
You do not love GOD by worship, or praise or belief. You love GOD by what you do, and by what you don't do.
It really is that simple.
So the test is whether we can love our neighbor as ourself, right?
That is part of it. You also test the lessons against reason and logic, you look at the lessons and ask questions, such as "What does this say about God?"
The problem was that the people you quoted were either very ignorant, totally deluded or lying. I examined what they said and presented you the reasons they were wrong.
When you or I make a mistake, it could well just be ignorance, but when someone in a position of authority speaking from a position of authority says things that are patently and obviously false, or patently and obviously encouraging willful ignorance, then it looks like just flat lying.
The quotes you provided failed the test against reality and honesty. The term Scripture in the passages can not refer to the Bible since a Bible did not exist until hundreds of years later. In fact, even today there is no one "Bible" but rather many different Canons specifying different contents for "The Bible".
And to say that there is no error or conflict is you can conceive of any way around contradictions is simply insulting. All it says is that if you can make up anyway around the problem then the problem is not there.
That is willful ignorance. There is no other possible description.
I still accept him as a brother In Christ, although for the life of me I never see him describing his own relationship with God to us very often. (Jar? Ball in your court! )
Why would I, it is totally irrelevant. That seems to be yet another characteristic of the Christian Cult of Ignorance, that spoken Testimony is of any value what so ever.
Mt relationship with GOD is between me and GOD. It is of no value or relevance to anyone else.
If I did tell you, I would hope you would ask "How do you know it was GOD?"

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Phat, posted 05-01-2007 6:21 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by truthlover, posted 05-01-2007 10:52 PM jar 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