Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Four Reasons I Think Jesus Really Existed


  • Please log in to reply
72 replies to this topic

#16    Zaphod222

Zaphod222

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,594 posts
  • Joined:05 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tokyo

  • When the gods wish to punish us, they answer our prayers.
    (Oscar Wilde)

Posted 20 June 2013 - 07:57 AM

View PostIrrelevant, on 20 June 2013 - 07:14 AM, said:

I'm more interested in what's going on right now on Gods timetable , and thats heart braking enough..truly it is..exactly as prophesied..

Oh yeah? So what is "prophesied" next? Tell us, and impress us with your divine knowledge.

"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." (Salman Rushdie)

#17    wingyflam

wingyflam

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 50 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2012

Posted 20 June 2013 - 10:17 AM

He was just like anyother man. Not the son of god but the son of mary and joseph. I


#18    wingyflam

wingyflam

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 50 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2012

Posted 20 June 2013 - 10:22 AM

I can imagine mary having an affair and becoming pregnant and thinking , what shall i tell joseph when he comes home from work, i know i,ll tell him that i,m going to have the son of god.


#19    Rlyeh

Rlyeh

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,574 posts
  • Joined:01 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The sixth circle

  • Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Posted 20 June 2013 - 10:31 AM

View PostIrrelevant, on 20 June 2013 - 07:14 AM, said:

I'm more interested in what's going on right now on Gods timetable , and thats heart braking enough..truly it is..exactly as prophesied..
Nothing, nothing and more nothing.


#20    Irrelevant

Irrelevant

    Apparition

  • Closed
  • PipPip
  • 357 posts
  • Joined:24 Apr 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 20 June 2013 - 10:33 AM

View PostZaphod222, on 20 June 2013 - 07:57 AM, said:

Oh yeah? So what is "prophesied" next? Tell us, and impress us with your divine knowledge.

but you dont believe what happened in the past so why should i spill secrets, infact im told not to cast such pearls ( and if i did then what is said happens to those who do cast the pearls would happen to me)..all i will say is to repeat what the Lord said and you see if that comes or is coming  to pass
" The sun will be darkened and the Moon will not give its light,  and the stars will fall from Heaven, then they will mourn as they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven"

that alone should be enough...and i have given the interpretations to the information in my main post if you dont understand the symbolism.

however since you also discount the bible with others , here is some idea of the history shown in a video ..
(please dont assosiate this find with Ron Whyatt, he was a fraud,  many knew of it before him and even wrote books)   ..yet tradition is a hard thing to break..i hope you do watch this video sometime.


Edited by Irrelevant, 20 June 2013 - 10:34 AM.


#21    Zaphod222

Zaphod222

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,594 posts
  • Joined:05 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tokyo

  • When the gods wish to punish us, they answer our prayers.
    (Oscar Wilde)

Posted 20 June 2013 - 10:41 AM

View PostIrrelevant, on 20 June 2013 - 10:33 AM, said:

but you dont believe what happened in the past so why should i spill secrets, infact im told not to cast such pearls ( and if i did then what is said happens to those who do cast the pearls would happen to me).

Bah, copout! That is kindergartern-level argument. If you claim to know something, tell us. Heck, you would convert us disbelievers into believers in a moment.

View PostIrrelevant, on 20 June 2013 - 10:33 AM, said:

.all i will say is to repeat what the Lord said and you see if that comes or is coming  to pass
" The sun will be darkened and the Moon will not give its light,  and the stars will fall from Heaven, then they will mourn as they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven"

Now what is that gobbledeegook even supposed to mean? What you mean "the moon will not give its light" -- if sunlight is blocked, well duh, the moon only reflects light. What is "the stars will fall from heaven" supposed to mean in English? The stars are billions of planets, where would they "fall"? Who is "they"? What is the "son of man" supposed to mean? What are "clouds of heaven"?

You claimed to have a prophesy. Well, discombobbled meaningless word soup is not a "prophesy". Write something intelligeble, or admit you have in fact no clue.

"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." (Salman Rushdie)

#22    Rlyeh

Rlyeh

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,574 posts
  • Joined:01 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The sixth circle

  • Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Posted 20 June 2013 - 10:50 AM

View Postwingyflam, on 20 June 2013 - 10:17 AM, said:

He was just like anyother man. Not the son of god but the son of mary and joseph. I
I think it was possible Jesus could've been based on many people and not one.


#23    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 6,294 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 20 June 2013 - 11:07 AM

View PostR4z3rsPar4d0x, on 19 June 2013 - 08:57 PM, said:

Do you believe in god freetoroam?
No, well sort of no, not the man made one anyway. Nature is my "god"

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

#24    Zaphod222

Zaphod222

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,594 posts
  • Joined:05 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tokyo

  • When the gods wish to punish us, they answer our prayers.
    (Oscar Wilde)

Posted 20 June 2013 - 12:09 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 20 June 2013 - 11:07 AM, said:

No, well sort of no, not the man made one anyway. Nature is my "god"

Ah, a Spinoza guy :-)

"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." (Salman Rushdie)

#25    Irrelevant

Irrelevant

    Apparition

  • Closed
  • PipPip
  • 357 posts
  • Joined:24 Apr 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 20 June 2013 - 12:12 PM

View PostZaphod222, on 20 June 2013 - 10:41 AM, said:



Bah, copout! That is kindergartern-level argument. If you claim to know something, tell us. Heck, you would convert us disbelievers into believers in a moment.



Now what is that gobbledeegook even supposed to mean? What you mean "the moon will not give its light" -- if sunlight is blocked, well duh, the moon only reflects light. What is "the stars will fall from heaven" supposed to mean in English? The stars are billions of planets, where would they "fall"? Who is "they"? What is the "son of man" supposed to mean? What are "clouds of heaven"?

You claimed to have a prophesy. Well, discombobbled meaningless word soup is not a "prophesy". Write something intelligeble, or admit you have in fact no clue.

I'm not here to convert you, I respect your an Atheist, and I respect that  you and others hold that position and even why, because what your asked to believe is a difficult bridge to cross, and all this sounds strange.

Edited by Irrelevant, 20 June 2013 - 12:13 PM.


#26    Doug1o29

Doug1o29

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 5,522 posts
  • Joined:01 Aug 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:oklahoma

Posted 20 June 2013 - 04:10 PM

View Postmarkdohle, on 19 June 2013 - 08:18 PM, said:

A small handful of scholars today, and a much larger group of Internet commenters, maintain that Jesus never existed. Proponents of this position, known as mythicists, claim that Jesus is a purely mythical figure invented by the writers of the New Testament (or its later copyists.) In this post I’ll offer the top four reasons (from weakest to strongest) that convince me Jesus of Nazareth was a real person without relying on the Gospel accounts of his life.

Continue: http://www.catholic....-really-existed
IF Jesus ever existed, the proof is not in the Bible.  If one is looking for evidence, it must come from sources not now considered to be biblical (Although, some were part of the Bible at one time.).

Most "authorities" on the question are useless because of a lack of scholastic rigor.  The usual approach is to lay out the evidence, then make two or three assumptions based on the author's own "gut feeling" and use them to validate Jesus.  This is poor scholarship.  If you're trying to demonstrate that something is true, you can't use your own hunches as evidence!  Apparently, most of these "investigators" are so strongly influenced by their Christian upbringings that they are unable to think objectively and/or never learned how to use analytical reasoning in the first place.

Josephus:  the Testimonium Flavianum.  Josephus was a Pharonic Jew.  He lived and died a Pharonic Jew.  If he believed Jesus was divine, he would have been a Christian.  But he wasn't.  The Testimonium Flavianum is a Christian redaction.

Brother James:  Who was Josephus' "James the Brother of Jesus?"  James was James ben Damneus.  His brother was Jesus ben Damneus.  They were Pharisees.  James was the leading contender for High Priest.  In 62 AD, Sadducees and Pharisees were in competition for the position of High Priest (Think Conservatives vs. Liberals).  The High Priest, Ananias the Younger, took advantage of the lack of a Roman governor to convene the Sanhedrin (The Roman governor had to give consent and as there was no Roman governor at the moment, the act was illegal.).  He denounced his competition, James ben Damneus, and had him stoned.  When Alibinus, the new governor, arrived, he deposed Ananias and replaced him with:  Jesus ben Damneus, the brother of Ananias' victim.

(There is a problem here:  Jesus is brought before Pilot because, according to the Bible, it is against the law for the Jews to execute someone; Rome needs to do it.  But in Josephus, Ananias convenes the Sanhedrin and does just that.)

Does it make sense that Ananias would bother with the leader of an obscure cult when he had an opportunity to get rid of his major competitor?  The Brother James reference is about Temple politics.  The Brother James reference is a Christian redaction.

Tacitus supposedly said that Nero had Christians burned at his garden parties as retribution for the Great Fire of 64 AD.  Nobody else ever said that, including Seneca, Suetonius, Josephus or Cicero.  The event is related ONLY in Tacitus.  Cicero was Nero's advisor at the time and wrote a book about those times.  He mentioned the Great Fire, but not the torches.  Same with the others.  Josephus wrote about everything under the sun, but apparently never heard of the Christian torches.  Again, we are left unable to conclude that this story is anything other than a Christian redaction.

If one takes the surviving fragments of early writings and gives each a rough date, based on emperors and events mentioned, a surprising observation develops.  The earliest writings lack apocryphal events.  These get added later as more and more gospels are written.  It is not until the time of Eusebius (c. 260 - 339 AD) that apocryphal writings really get going.  And our version of the gospels are loaded with apocryphal stories.

Mr. Horn cites Irenaeus (? - 202 AD).  Irenaeus wrote "Against Heresy" in five volumes.  He is correct that Irenaeus tried to stamp out heresy and never ventured an opinion that Jesus never existed.  But Irenaeus was a Christian partisan.  If he'd said that Jesus didn't exist, he would have undermined his own version of heresy.  Irenaeus only knew what he read in the newspapers (other extant writings of the time).  He was an excellent scholar, but was severely limited by his sources.

Mr. Horn also mentions Celsus.  His work refuting Christianity was written in 177 AD.  You can't exactly say he had first-hand knowledge of events 140 years earlier.  Lucian (c. 125 to 180 AD), likewise could not claim any firsthand knowledge of Jesus and would have to base everything he claimed on stories obtained from Christian partisans.

Mr. Horn says that nobody opposed the idea of Jesus before the eighteenth century, but I note that the Atomists, Leucippidus (c. 500 - 450 BC), Democritus (460 - 370 BC) were all atheists as were Euripides, Aristophanes and the Sophists.  Then there's Diagoras of Melos who blasphemed by making public the Eleusinian Mysteries, Cyrenaic and Epicurus.  Even the Bible, Psalms 14:1-3, admits the existence of atheists.  Your source can't even read his own Bible.

Regarding the letters of St. Paul:  there is only one that has a good historical reference to support its authenticity.  That is Paul's first letter to the Corinthians (1st Corinthians in the Bible).  It is mentioned in First Clement, written about 96 AD (We think.).  But in that letter is a reference to "Blessed Judith" that would seem to place it around 117 AD.  So while 1st Corinthians may have existed before 96 AD, we can't be sure of that.  But even "authenticity" has a problem:  it only means that someone who might be Paul wrote it at about the right time.

There is also reason to believe that Paul of Tarsus may actually have been Apollonius of Tyana.  Tyana is a small town in Asia Minor, only 25 miles from Tarsus.  Apollonius was known as "Pol."  As a child his family moved to Tarsus, making him "Pol" of Tarsus.  Apollonius' travels are almost an exact duplicate of Paul's.  Some references in the Bible to "Apollos" have led to speculation that Paul and "Pol" were the same person.

One further problem with Paul:  he supposedly lived in Jerusalem when Jesus was executed, yet never mentions anything about it.  According to him, all his knowledge of Jesus came about in a vision.  Visions were rather popular in the early days of the church.  In order to be an Apostle you had to have direct knowledge of Jesus, but as Jesus was dead and gone, the only way to get a vision (and the status of being an Apostle) was to have a vision.  Lots of people had them; there's something like 70 examples in the Bible.

We know that Christians existed from at least the time of Nero (64 AD) and it is possible that Seneca wrote about them (65 AD).  But nowhere is there anything to indicate that Christianity is anything more than an urban legend.  It was and is widely believed, but people once believed the earth was flat (Some still do.).  Because a lot of people believe something doesn't make it true.

I do not claim to be a historian, but I am a lot better at it than Mr. Horn.  You need to find some new sources and do some reading.

Edited by Doug1o29, 20 June 2013 - 04:18 PM.

If I have seen farther than other men, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants. --Bernard de Chartres
The beginning of knowledge is the realization that one doesn't and cannot know everything.
Science is the father of knowledge, but opinion breeds ignorance. --Hippocrates
Ignorance is not an opinion. --Adam Scott

#27    Zaphod222

Zaphod222

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,594 posts
  • Joined:05 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tokyo

  • When the gods wish to punish us, they answer our prayers.
    (Oscar Wilde)

Posted 20 June 2013 - 04:40 PM

View PostIrrelevant, on 20 June 2013 - 12:12 PM, said:

I'm not here to convert you, I respect your an Atheist, and I respect that  you and others hold that position and even why, because what your asked to believe is a difficult bridge to cross, and all this sounds strange.

I didn´t ask you to convert me. I asked you to provide the prophesy that you claimed you had. That meaningless gobbledeegook that you posted makes no sense either way. Please post your prophesy so that we can check it out.

"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." (Salman Rushdie)

#28    Doug1o29

Doug1o29

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 5,522 posts
  • Joined:01 Aug 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:oklahoma

Posted 20 June 2013 - 04:44 PM

View PostIrrelevant, on 20 June 2013 - 10:33 AM, said:

however since you also discount the bible with others , here is some idea of the history shown in a video ..
(please dont assosiate this find with Ron Whyatt, he was a fraud,  many knew of it before him and even wrote books)   ..yet tradition is a hard thing to break..i hope you do watch this video sometime.

Gebel el Lawz has a lot of problems if one is going to claim it as Mt. Sinai.  First of which is a mountain in Sinai named Gebel Saniya.  Gebel Saniya is part of the same massif as Gebel Ghorabi (Mount Horeb), on top of which is a Temple to Hathor, thus providing "Moses" with the opportunity to go up the mountain, talk to the god, and come down carrying some stone tablets.  At the foot of Gebel Ghorabi are numerous broken stelae with writing on them, which, if you are an illiterate nomad, look a lot like they might be the Ten Commandments.  As a matter of fact, what's written on them does contain information like what is a proper sacrifice to the gods.  So they might very well be the original version of the Ten Commandments.  There's a lot more, but I haven't got the time.

Nobody has ever brought back a sample of rock from Gebel el Lawz that would show why its rocks look like they have been burned.  Maybe it's a carbonized layer, but maybe they're Andesite.  Evidence is available - all the supporters have to do is go get it - but they don't.

In the biblical version of events, the "Israelites" traveled from Ramses to the Red Sea in about two week's time.  That's doable if you mean the Red Sea at Suez.  But if you mean the Gulf of Arabia, then octogenarians have to travel close to 15 miles a day - something impossible in Sinai's fierce April heat.  And if they do this, the only place there is to cross the Gulf is at an ocean deep with water depths of 3000 feet and slopes of 60%.

A lot of people choose to investigate one little detail of the Bible and fill in what they don't know with hunches and assumptions.  I think that's what these guys have done.
Doug

Edited by Doug1o29, 20 June 2013 - 04:46 PM.

If I have seen farther than other men, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants. --Bernard de Chartres
The beginning of knowledge is the realization that one doesn't and cannot know everything.
Science is the father of knowledge, but opinion breeds ignorance. --Hippocrates
Ignorance is not an opinion. --Adam Scott

#29    Irrelevant

Irrelevant

    Apparition

  • Closed
  • PipPip
  • 357 posts
  • Joined:24 Apr 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 20 June 2013 - 10:45 PM

View PostDoug1o29, on 20 June 2013 - 04:10 PM, said:


IF Jesus ever existed, the proof is not in the Bible.  If one is looking for evidence, it must come from sources not now considered to be biblical (Although, some were part of the Bible at one time.).

Most "authorities" on the question are useless because of a lack of scholastic rigor.  The usual approach is to lay out the evidence, then make two or three assumptions based on the author's own "gut feeling" and use them to validate Jesus.  This is poor scholarship.  If you're trying to demonstrate that something is true, you can't use your own hunches as evidence!  Apparently, most of these "investigators" are so strongly influenced by their Christian upbringings that they are unable to think objectively and/or never learned how to use analytical reasoning in the first place.

Josephus:  the Testimonium Flavianum.  Josephus was a Pharonic Jew.  He lived and died a Pharonic Jew.  If he believed Jesus was divine, he would have been a Christian.  But he wasn't.  The Testimonium Flavianum is a Christian redaction.

Brother James:  Who was Josephus' "James the Brother of Jesus?"  James was James ben Damneus.  His brother was Jesus ben Damneus.  They were Pharisees.  James was the leading contender for High Priest.  In 62 AD, Sadducees and Pharisees were in competition for the position of High Priest (Think Conservatives vs. Liberals).  The High Priest, Ananias the Younger, took advantage of the lack of a Roman governor to convene the Sanhedrin (The Roman governor had to give consent and as there was no Roman governor at the moment, the act was illegal.).  He denounced his competition, James ben Damneus, and had him stoned.  When Alibinus, the new governor, arrived, he deposed Ananias and replaced him with:  Jesus ben Damneus, the brother of Ananias' victim.

(There is a problem here:  Jesus is brought before Pilot because, according to the Bible, it is against the law for the Jews to execute someone; Rome needs to do it.  But in Josephus, Ananias convenes the Sanhedrin and does just that.)

Does it make sense that Ananias would bother with the leader of an obscure cult when he had an opportunity to get rid of his major competitor?  The Brother James reference is about Temple politics.  The Brother James reference is a Christian redaction.

Tacitus supposedly said that Nero had Christians burned at his garden parties as retribution for the Great Fire of 64 AD.  Nobody else ever said that, including Seneca, Suetonius, Josephus or Cicero.  The event is related ONLY in Tacitus.  Cicero was Nero's advisor at the time and wrote a book about those times.  He mentioned the Great Fire, but not the torches.  Same with the others.  Josephus wrote about everything under the sun, but apparently never heard of the Christian torches.  Again, we are left unable to conclude that this story is anything other than a Christian redaction.

If one takes the surviving fragments of early writings and gives each a rough date, based on emperors and events mentioned, a surprising observation develops.  The earliest writings lack apocryphal events.  These get added later as more and more gospels are written.  It is not until the time of Eusebius (c. 260 - 339 AD) that apocryphal writings really get going.  And our version of the gospels are loaded with apocryphal stories.

Mr. Horn cites Irenaeus (? - 202 AD).  Irenaeus wrote "Against Heresy" in five volumes.  He is correct that Irenaeus tried to stamp out heresy and never ventured an opinion that Jesus never existed.  But Irenaeus was a Christian partisan.  If he'd said that Jesus didn't exist, he would have undermined his own version of heresy.  Irenaeus only knew what he read in the newspapers (other extant writings of the time).  He was an excellent scholar, but was severely limited by his sources.

Mr. Horn also mentions Celsus.  His work refuting Christianity was written in 177 AD.  You can't exactly say he had first-hand knowledge of events 140 years earlier.  Lucian (c. 125 to 180 AD), likewise could not claim any firsthand knowledge of Jesus and would have to base everything he claimed on stories obtained from Christian partisans.

Mr. Horn says that nobody opposed the idea of Jesus before the eighteenth century, but I note that the Atomists, Leucippidus (c. 500 - 450 BC), Democritus (460 - 370 BC) were all atheists as were Euripides, Aristophanes and the Sophists.  Then there's Diagoras of Melos who blasphemed by making public the Eleusinian Mysteries, Cyrenaic and Epicurus.  Even the Bible, Psalms 14:1-3, admits the existence of atheists.  Your source can't even read his own Bible.

Regarding the letters of St. Paul:  there is only one that has a good historical reference to support its authenticity.  That is Paul's first letter to the Corinthians (1st Corinthians in the Bible).  It is mentioned in First Clement, written about 96 AD (We think.).  But in that letter is a reference to "Blessed Judith" that would seem to place it around 117 AD.  So while 1st Corinthians may have existed before 96 AD, we can't be sure of that.  But even "authenticity" has a problem:  it only means that someone who might be Paul wrote it at about the right time.

There is also reason to believe that Paul of Tarsus may actually have been Apollonius of Tyana.  Tyana is a small town in Asia Minor, only 25 miles from Tarsus.  Apollonius was known as "Pol."  As a child his family moved to Tarsus, making him "Pol" of Tarsus.  Apollonius' travels are almost an exact duplicate of Paul's.  Some references in the Bible to "Apollos" have led to speculation that Paul and "Pol" were the same person.

One further problem with Paul:  he supposedly lived in Jerusalem when Jesus was executed, yet never mentions anything about it.  According to him, all his knowledge of Jesus came about in a vision.  Visions were rather popular in the early days of the church.  In order to be an Apostle you had to have direct knowledge of Jesus, but as Jesus was dead and gone, the only way to get a vision (and the status of being an Apostle) was to have a vision.  Lots of people had them; there's something like 70 examples in the Bible.

We know that Christians existed from at least the time of Nero (64 AD) and it is possible that Seneca wrote about them (65 AD).  But nowhere is there anything to indicate that Christianity is anything more than an urban legend.  It was and is widely believed, but people once believed the earth was flat (Some still do.).  Because a lot of people believe something doesn't make it true.

I do not claim to be a historian, but I am a lot better at it than Mr. Horn.  You need to find some new sources and do some reading.

I'm going to counter all this with this link that does , and once again I apologise for using wiki, but this is a forum not a University submission so I feel its acceptable in this aspect : http://en.wikipedia....ricity_of_Jesus

Please note the info stated about Josephus is incorrect , he was not a Christian ,  also 7 Pauline letters, not just Corinthians as you mention.




#30    Irrelevant

Irrelevant

    Apparition

  • Closed
  • PipPip
  • 357 posts
  • Joined:24 Apr 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 21 June 2013 - 12:41 AM

Josephus was not a Christian redaction, and you make sweeping claims of redactions all through your post to  justify your own " gut feeling".  If you think he never existed your in the minority, as the simple quoted link above would show.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users