Life after death? This can mean heaven or hell. A true story...

lux77 · Post by **lux77** » Tue May 02, 2006 11:19 pm

Hey stop picking on KINGDAVID:-6 There is an old saying that misery loves company those who are miserable will always try to make others miserable also. KINGDAVID There will always be miserable people at forums who try to make others as miserable as they are.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Wed May 03, 2006 1:52 pm

What nonsense.

Shalom

Ted:-6

lux77 · Post by **lux77** » Wed May 03, 2006 10:35 pm

WHAT NONSENSE TO YOU TOO.........

shalom....:wah:

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Thu May 04, 2006 1:09 am

Kingguy, you are like the Seventh-Day Adventists here. When you are asked questions for which you have no answers, you simply ignore them, abandon the thread, and move on to a different one. Not very impressive, convincing, or supportive of your claims and positions. I suggest that you return to the two threads that you started several weeks ago and continue the discussion there. No one is 'out to get you', at least I'm certainly not, I'd just like to see you defend your assertions rather than ducking and dodging.

Regarding the 144,000, Mrs. White, the SDA's great 'prophetess' once claimed to have had a vision in which she saw the 144,000 of Revelation 'assembled before God in a perfect square', which would be quite a trick since the square root of 144,000 is an irrational number.

Post by **spot** » Thu May 04, 2006 2:48 am

Bronwen wrote: Regarding the 144,000, Mrs. White, the SDA's great 'prophetess' once claimed to have had a vision in which she saw the 144,000 of Revelation 'assembled before God in a perfect square', which would be quite a trick since the square root of 144,000 is an irrational number.Eee, Bronwen, where's thi' faith lass?

The assembly area is 1200 by 1200, and the Annointed occupy every tenth column.

Stands to reason. They'd not want to be crushed up tight side by side, or they'd not see what was going on.

lux77 · Post by **lux77** » Thu May 04, 2006 9:52 am

Hey don't know where the king guy went but i did some bible study in my days toooo...........

anyways you guys missed the point of the bible the bible was never really meant to be taken literally alot of it is really symbolic . Too bad today it is interpreted literally hence all the confusion.

Post by **spot** » Thu May 04, 2006 10:03 am

lux77 wrote: anyways you guys missed the point of the bible the bible was never really meant to be taken literally alot of it is really symbolic . Too bad today it is interpreted literally hence all the confusion.Spot winces, burrows into the blanket in the corner, covers his ears with his paws and waits for Ted to CHECK THE GUY'S POSTCOUNT BEFORE SPEAKING!

And then make a pot of tea while counting to a hundred, Ted, just to be on the safe side. Matthew 5, old man, especially the end bit.

lux77 · Post by **lux77** » Thu May 04, 2006 10:09 am

ah like what...........................:-2 now i'm the one confused

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Fri May 05, 2006 2:27 am

spot wrote: Eee, Bronwen, where's thi' faith lass?Now I'm confused. That sounds Scottish, but I see y ddraig goch on your banner.

Guess I'll have to look up Brigstowe on a map.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Fri May 05, 2006 2:33 am

lux77 wrote: anyways you guys missed the point of the bible the bible was never really meant to be taken literally alot of it is really symbolic . Too bad today it is interpreted literally hence all the confusion.It's interpreted that way only by a small minority, and the motive has much more to do with politics than with religion.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Mon May 08, 2006 1:45 am

Pinky wrote: Please don`t think I`m knocking Christians here, I`m not. I know an awful lot of christians who are lovely people and I certainly wouldn`t wish any of them to be offended! As usual, I`ve totally digressed, but I thought some people may be interested in the historical side of this.Pinkstress, I'm not offended at all, but your allegations are way off. Satan is certainly not the invention of Christianity; he appears several times in the more recent (1 Chronicles and later) books of the OT, hundreds of years before Christ.

The concept of a 'chief adsversary' seems to have originated in Judaism as a borrowing from Persian dualism (Zoroastrianism) during the Exile.

The identification of the serpent in Eden with Satan is merely an afterthought. Genesis, in fact, does not describe the serpent as a supernatural being at all, merely as 'the most cunning creature in the garden'.

You are correct, however, that certain aspects of Christianity are borrowed from pagan religions.

Post by **spot** » Mon May 08, 2006 1:55 am

Bronwen wrote: Pinkstress, I'm not offended at all, but your allegations are way off. Satan is certainly not the invention of Christianity; he appears several times in the more recent (1 Chronicles and later) books of the OT, hundreds of years before Christ.Come now, Bronwen, we're not discussing a name, we're discussing a concept. The "Satan", if you like, of Job, is a perfectly respectable chap that drops in for tea and a chat weekly with the Almighty. The Christian "Satan" is that caricature from, for example, South Park The Movie (which may well be studied in Sociology classes a hundred years from now, it's that pertinent). You can *equate* the two by handing them the same name, which has the benefit that you can then say "hey, he's not an invention - look, he's in the Bible as far back as Job". The invention is what we've constructed in medieval times, and it's not the Adversary or Tester.

lux77 · Post by **lux77** » Mon May 08, 2006 10:41 am

Nice............... interesting points Pinky and bronwen makes a lot of sense. Some of the mysteries of christianity were not original concepts but existed with many of the so called pagan religions of the past.

Post by **spot** » Mon May 08, 2006 12:16 pm

lux77 wrote: Nice............... interesting points Pinky and bronwen makes a lot of sense. Some of the mysteries of christianity were not original concepts but existed with many of the so called pagan religions of the past.Come on Lux, you can't get away with simply implying that the Satan whose demons torment souls in hell for all eternity pre-exists Christianity without supplying a bit of evidence. I called it a medieval construct. Where do you see it originating? You can't deny that the notion was widespread in Christianity for much of its existence and still is. Where does it exist outside of Christianity?

lux77 · Post by **lux77** » Mon May 08, 2006 10:41 pm

I was not necessarily relating to satan I was referring primarily to mysteries within the christian faith for example the mystery of the trinity, the christ being the son of god, the virgin birth..... etc...etc...

As for Satan you may actually be right i do believe it was a creation of midevil times. The main thing as I mentioned before is that some of these doctrines had more of a symbolic meaning than a literal one so to really get the picture may require knowledge of the initiatic tradition.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Tue May 09, 2006 1:49 am

spot wrote: Come now, Bronwen, we're not discussing a name, we're discussing a concept. The "Satan", if you like, of Job, is a perfectly respectable chap that drops in for tea and a chat weekly with the Almighty. The Christian "Satan" is that caricature from, for example, South Park The Movie (which may well be studied in Sociology classes a hundred years from now, it's that pertinent). You can *equate* the two by handing them the same name, which has the benefit that you can then say "hey, he's not an invention - look, he's in the Bible as far back as Job". The invention is what we've constructed in medieval times, and it's not the Adversary or Tester.spot, I understand what you're saying, but I don't see the difference between the OT and NT Satan to the extent that you do. They are both concepts that attempt to explain evil in a world created by an all-good God. Whether they are called by the same or different names is of little consequence.

Post by **spot** » Tue May 09, 2006 2:45 am

Bronwen wrote: spot, I understand what you're saying, but I don't see the difference between the OT and NT Satan to the extent that you do. They are both concepts that attempt to explain evil in a world created by an all-good God. Whether they are called by the same or different names is of little consequence.I see them acting very differently though. One's a reasonable rational necessary force for good, the other's a pantomime dame.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Tue May 09, 2006 3:21 am

spot wrote: I see them acting very differently though. One's a reasonable rational necessary force for good, the other's a pantomime dame.Can you give examples?

Also, what is a 'pantomime dame'? I've never heard the expression.

Post by **spot** » Tue May 09, 2006 3:33 am

Bronwen wrote: Can you give examples?

Also, what is a 'pantomime dame'? I've never heard the expression.We mentioned Job - I described that aspect of Satan as "a perfectly respectable chap that drops in for tea and a chat weekly with the Almighty" and the frame in which he appears is exactly that:

the Lord said to the Satan, Where do you come from? And the Satan said in answer, From wandering this way and that on the earth, and walking about on it. And the Lord said to the Satan, Have you taken note of my servant Job, for there is no one like him on the earth, a man without sin and upright, fearing God and keeping himself far from evil? And the Satan said in answer to the Lord, Is it for nothing that Job is a god-fearing man?

Pantomime Dames are described on http://www.its-behind-you.com/pantodames.html - the sense I was trying to invoke was of caricature being incapable of generating fear once it becomes unbelievably lunatic. And again, I bring "South Park: The Movie" into the discussion, and again I think their portrayal of Satan reflects - in a comic environment - the medieval Christian attitude to Satan which exists in no other religion under any other name.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue May 09, 2006 6:20 pm

According to a recent PBS production called "The Origin of Satan" he was a concept borrowed from Mesopotamia to explain evil.

I also recall without looking it up at the moment reading a commentary on Job and the commentator had the same view as spot.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Wed May 10, 2006 5:08 am

spot wrote: [T]he medieval Christian attitude to Satan...exists in no other religion under any other name.I don't think that's correct; on the contrary, most religions have some version of the 'bogeyman'. Such beliefs seem to a normal part of human nature, perhaps going back to the days before artificial lighting, when the night was full of frightening sights and sounds.

Post by **spot** » Wed May 10, 2006 5:25 am

Bronwen wrote: I don't think that's correct; on the contrary, most religions have some version of the 'bogeyman'. Such beliefs seem to a normal part of human nature, perhaps going back to the days before artificial lighting, when the night was full of frightening sights and sounds.Were Satan a mere bogeyman then I'd agree happily. What Medieval Christianity made that name into is the fallen Rebel who has absolute dominion over an eternity of torment for (most mediaval Christians would have said unhesitatingly) the majority of humankind and no, this sort of deliberate terrorising of the faithful doesn't exist in any other religion under any other name. This imagery is unique to Christianity, and it's mostly called Satan, and there's a stack of pulpits which still rely on it.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Wed May 10, 2006 5:38 am

spot wrote: Were Satan a mere bogeyman then I'd agree happily. What Medieval Christianity made that name into is the fallen Rebel who has absolute dominion over an eternity of torment for (most mediaval Christians would have said unhesitatingly) the majority of humankind and no, this sort of deliberate terrorising of the faithful doesn't exist in any other religion under any other name. This imagery is unique to Christianity, and it's mostly called Satan, and there's a stack of pulpits which still rely on it.Well, sorry, this is something on which we'll just have to agree to disagree. That certain modern fundamentalists tend to blame everything on Satan I do not dispute, but I'm not sure how that 'terrorizes the faithful', as such admonitions seem to be rather directed at the UNfaithful.

If you'd like to document the history of the invention, or re-invention of Satan by the Church of the Middle Ages, please do so. I'm not saying your position is entirely without merit, but that Christ Himself was tempted by Satan before beginning His public ministry is a belief that goes back far prior to the Middle Ages.

Post by **spot** » Wed May 10, 2006 5:45 am

Bronwen wrote: If you'd like to document the history of the invention, or re-invention of Satan by the Church of the Middle Ages, please do so. Good God, Bronwen, go and re-read Paradise Lost, that lays the entire medieval point of view out in short easy-to-understand sections. Of course "Christ Himself was tempted by Satan before beginning His public ministry" but just because you have the same NAME for the tempter doesn't make the imagery or power or function or identity of the beast that he became a thousand years later apply to him, or to any other biblical appearance.

The question isn't can I find evidence of that medieval mindset (as I say, put Milton on the witness stand and I need no other) - it's whether you can point out any alternative non-christian monster capable of standing comparison with him in the Diabolically Evil stakes. Absolute dominion over an eternity of torment for the majority of humankind? I think not.

Post by **spot** » Wed May 10, 2006 5:52 am

Bronwen wrote: I'm not sure how that 'terrorizes the faithful', as such admonitions seem to be rather directed at the UNfaithful.Let me just deal with that too, while it's in front of me. You've obviously not worshiped in a Calvinist outpost on the Outer Hebrides - I have. The imagery and the admonitions are addressed solely to the faithful, who know themselves sinners and who quake in consequence. Most of the faithful go to church there to be told they're damned, to know the truth that they're damned, to go home shaking with the certainty that they're damned, and still to persevere with living a godly life. It's one of the most admirable manifestations of Godly living that I've met, but I'd hate to be born into it.

lux77 · Post by **lux77** » Wed May 10, 2006 10:25 am

Pinky wrote:

Most of the `bad deities` were merely natural destructive forces personified.

Interesting concept. I agree with this idea these mystical forces still exits but now modern science has reclassified and demystified them. I guess back in the old days when man possed the ability to percieve the Astral or Hidden world he lacked the scientific tools to explain what he percieved. Today science have now given scientific names to these forces wheras the shamans and mystics of old refered to them as spirits,ghosts ,dieties and gods.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Thu May 11, 2006 1:13 am

Pinky wrote: 1. It`s fact that most of the old testament was written more than 50 years after Jesus died.

2. So where exactly did `Satan` exist before this?

3. You know, the one who presides over a huge furnace and tortures people?

1. Uh, no, hon, that's when most of the NEW Testament was written.

2. Well, we touched on that before. When the Jews were in exile they were exposed to the Zoroastrian religion, which is dualistic, having a god of light and a god of darkness, and they adapted the concept to Judaism, which was too firmly established by that time as monotheistic to admit a second God, so Satan became rather a 'chief adversary'. It's a very useful concept.

3. I think spot already answered that. Milton deserves much of the credit or blame for that and other similar characterizations. That is called 'literature'.

Marie5656 · Post by **Marie5656** » Thu May 11, 2006 10:22 am

I remember reading Stephen King's book The Stand. One character, a sociology professor was having a conversation with another characther. They were discussing the basic concept of good versus evil..the premis of the book. Anyway, the professor said that if you believe that one exists, then it has to reason that the other exists also.

I agree with that. I am not a religeous person, but I am not sure I entirely want to believe that *nothing* happens after we die. But I am not sure what I want it to be.

In an earlier post, someone mentioned the movie What Dreams May Come I saw it too. I enjoyed the movie, but found many of the images of Hell disturbing.

But I guess, it has to be true that if there are people who do see the "bright positive light" there have to be people who see and experience the negative.

I have not read every entry in this thread yet, but plan to do so as soon as I post this. I find the discussion very interesting and thought provoking.

chrisb84uk · Post by **chrisb84uk** » Thu May 11, 2006 12:32 pm

Pinky wrote: [quote=Bronwen]1. Uh, no, hon, that's when most of the NEW Testament was written.

Oh yeah, my mistake! Oops

Hehehe obviously all that chocolate is getting to you. Here have a hanky!

Post by **spot** » Thu May 11, 2006 1:07 pm

Bronwen wrote: 3. I think spot already answered that. Milton deserves much of the credit or blame for that and other similar characterizations. That is called 'literature'.Not at all, Bronwen - you keep wriggling on this. Milton's a grand literary representation of the pre-existing medieval mentality that manifested all over the place. Don't you remember watching The Seventh Seal, and the flagellants? Have you never seen frescoes in English churches from the 15th century showing Judgement Day? Where did Heironymus Bosch come from - he's not abnormal for the time, just very talented at doing what lots of others were doing.

You ignored my Outer Hebrides Calvinists too.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Fri May 12, 2006 2:36 am

spot wrote: 1. Bronwen - you keep wriggling on this.

2. Milton's a grand literary representation of the pre-existing medieval mentality that manifested all over the place.

3. Don't you remember watching The Seventh Seal, and the flagellants? Have you never seen frescoes in English churches from the 15th century showing Judgement Day? Where did Heironymus Bosch come from - he's not abnormal for the time, just very talented at doing what lots of others were doing.

4. You ignored my Outer Hebrides Calvinists too.1. At this point I wreally have no wreason to wriggle because I haven't yet discerned your POINT. Also, if you read my other posts on these forums you'll find that I wrarely wriggle. Wrather, it is my opponents who tend to do so, notably those of the SDA persuasion.

2 & 3. Well, that was my question to you. If all that wasn't carried over from the OT, when and where did it originate? It's not a rhetorical question; I'm asking 'cause I don't know. Here's your chance to fill us in. Milton and Dante POPULARIZED those concepts in much the same way that C. C. Moore popularized the concept of St. Nicholas bringing toys to children on Xmas eve. The concepts were already there, the authors just expanded and expounded on them, with great success.

4. God bless 'em. Calvinism requires a thread all its own.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Fri May 12, 2006 1:12 pm

Olh no! Not Calvinism. God help us. LOL

Shalom

Ted:-6

Post by **spot** » Fri May 12, 2006 1:18 pm

Ted wrote: Olh no! Not Calvinism. God help us. LOLWe're all doomed, I tell you. - that about sums it up in a nutshell.

Nicole1624 · Post by **Nicole1624** » Sun May 14, 2006 1:49 am

No it's not! for me it's another journey after life so we must maximize of living our lives today to the fullest. Life is short, look for your partner as early in life as possible. Look anywhere easy and possible like on wealthymen dot com and maybe you'll meet him there soon enough.

BabyRider · Post by **BabyRider** » Sun May 14, 2006 2:00 am

Nicole1624 wrote: No it's not! for me it's another journey after life so we must maximize of living our lives today to the fullest. Life is short, look for your partner as early in life as possible. Look anywhere easy and possible like on wealthymen dot com and maybe you'll meet him there soon enough.

Ummm....wealthy men dot com??? Is there actually such a site? How incredibly shallow that makes us women sound. How does money and a soul mate have anything whatsoever do with the other?

The thought of that actually makes me a bit queasy.

Post by **spot** » Sun May 14, 2006 2:04 am

And I quote:

Wealthy Men is the one and only online personals dating site dedicated to those men & women seeking a higher caliber online dating experience.

Women: Thank You for visiting Wealthy Men, where you will find professional men making over $100k a year. WM makes it fun and easy to find your prince. sign up here.It would be an ideal site to accidentally find the full membership list from and inadvertently post to a thread here.

Marie5656 · Post by **Marie5656** » Sun May 14, 2006 7:43 pm

BabyRider wrote: Ummm....wealthy men dot com??? Is there actually such a site? How incredibly shallow that makes us women sound. How does money and a soul mate have anything whatsoever do with the other?

The thought of that actually makes me a bit queasy.

I can outshallow that one, Baby Rider. I saw a news piece on a dating site called something like Beautiful People dot com. One must submit an aplication to join..and are only allowed to join if they meet the criteria of the administrators of what is beautiful enough. Aparently the feeling is that the beautiful people of the world have a "right" to only seek out and date other beautiful people. Well, la dee da. Forget brains, forget stimulating conversation or anything in common...the cover of the book is what sells here. OK, anyone who has seen the picture I posted of my husband and myself will realize that neither of us qualify as "beautiful", but some of the folks they interviewed who did NOT make the cut were pretty good looking. Guess just not pretty enough./

stroganoff07 · Post by **stroganoff07** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:47 pm

Suresh Gupta;8250 wrote: Yes one can say that religion is about mind control. But this is self control.

Controlling masses through hate, torture, suffering and death is not religion. If it is said that a particular religion preaches this then it is a wrong interpretation of teachings of that religion.

Agreed SG , the teaching of hate,torture are the results of a controlling force of people who will use religion or any ideology to manipulate people into doing what they want them to.Ex. communism uses promises of a utopian society yet it is irreligious,nazism preached a 1000 year reich based on super-nationalism.America preaches the equal right of all men to enjoy and express themselves insofar as they are not encumbering others.Yet all are false,because deceptive people have always managed to undermine those who are not wary of the underlying motivations of an elite chosen few,particularly in America where feedom and indiviuality is worshipped to such an extant that the common good of all is diverted to the backround.

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:42 pm

stroganoff07;443434 wrote: Agreed SG , the teaching of hate,torture are the results of a controlling force of people who will use religion or any ideology to manipulate people into doing what they want them to.Ex. communism uses promises of a utopian society yet it is irreligious,nazism preached a 1000 year reich based on super-nationalism.America preaches the equal right of all men to enjoy and express themselves insofar as they are not encumbering others.Yet all are false,because deceptive people have always managed to undermine those who are not wary of the underlying motivations of an elite chosen few,particularly in America where feedom and indiviuality is worshipped to such an extant that the common good of all is diverted to the backround.

You are so right. I fully agree with you.

Trin815 · Post by **Trin815** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 8:39 am

Hi! Good news for all of you who are scared to death of death. You don't have to be! Why? Because Jesus took your place. All of the wrath of God (which is Hell and eternal seperation from God) has been poured out on His only Son which is Jesus Christ.

Jesus loves you and in Him you can find rest for your souls!

No matter how good you try to be, it will never be good enough. Thats why God sent His Son Jesus to die on the cross for all who would believe in Him. He is the Way, the Truth, and the Light! It is a free gift. You can't earn it, you don't have to earn it. Just believe!

When Adam sinned, we were all doomed and destined to hell. Sin reigned in our bodies. Even now that is why we can't seem to do right no matter how hard we try. But because of what Jesus did for us, we can live, in this life and in the next (Heaven). Put your trust in Him today! God says

Isaiah 1:18

“Come now, let’s settle this,

says the Lord.

“Though your sins are like scarlet,

I will make them as white as snow.

Though they are red like crimson,

I will make them as white as wool.

Luke 5:32

I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."

John 3:16

“For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life

Mark 16:16

Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

Isaiah 53

1 Who has believed our message?

To whom has the Lord revealed his powerful arm?

2 My servant grew up in the Lord’s presence like a tender green shoot,

like a root in dry ground.

There was nothing beautiful or majestic about his appearance,

nothing to attract us to him.

3 He was despised and rejected—

a man of sorrows, acquainted with deepest grief.

We turned our backs on him and looked the other way.

He was despised, and we did not care.

4 Yet it was our weaknesses he carried;

it was our sorrows that weighed him down.

And we thought his troubles were a punishment from God,

a punishment for his own sins!

5 But he was pierced for our rebellion,

crushed for our sins.

He was beaten so we could be whole.

He was whipped so we could be healed.

6 All of us, like sheep, have strayed away.

We have left God’s paths to follow our own.

Yet the Lord laid on him

the sins of us all.

7 He was oppressed and treated harshly,

yet he never said a word.

He was led like a lamb to the slaughter.

And as a sheep is silent before the shearers,

he did not open his mouth.

8 Unjustly condemned,

he was led away.

No one cared that he died without descendants,

that his life was cut short in midstream.

But he was struck down

for the rebellion of my people.

9 He had done no wrong

and had never deceived anyone.

But he was buried like a criminal;

he was put in a rich man’s grave.

10 But it was the Lord’s good plan to crush him

and cause him grief.

Yet when his life is made an offering for sin,

he will have many descendants.

He will enjoy a long life,

and the Lord’s good plan will prosper in his hands.

11 When he sees all that is accomplished by his anguish,

he will be satisfied.

And because of his experience,

my righteous servant will make it possible

for many to be counted righteous,

for he will bear all their sins.

12 I will give him the honors of a victorious soldier,

because he exposed himself to death.

He was counted among the rebels.

He bore the sins of many and interceded for rebels.

Trin815 · Post by **Trin815** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 8:41 am

Also I just wanted to say that the Lord does not and will not force Himself on you. He loves you that much that if you would rather live without Him, then He will allow it. He will love you to the very end...I promise!:)

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:28 pm

Trin:-6

The substitutionary doctrine of the death of Jesus is highly questionable.

The story of Adam is of course a myth and not real history.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Redtail · Post by **Redtail** » Thu May 01, 2008 5:04 am

I'm new to this place and gotta say i love love love all the great topics in it!! As far as this one........has anyone read "90 minutes in heaven"? WOW.........it's an autobiography of a man who died in a car crash for 90 minutes and journals his agony in survival and wish to return to heaven instead. I'm not done with it, but I'm guessing the Lords reason for sending him back is revealed throughout the ending chapters of the book.

I used to fear death, but now truly believe there's a better place for me, should I continue to live as He would like....to please Him. I'm not per say "religious" but He is in my heart and I speak to him on a daily basis, both asking Him for help, and thanking Him for whatever the outcome is.

Trin815 · Post by **Trin815** » Thu May 01, 2008 9:55 am

God Bless you Redtail :-6