Continue from Speaker's Corner

last SG · 2005-07-30T10:17:39+00:00

is it not hypocrisy if, ultimately, secular humanism is shoved down people’s throat?

stupidissmart SG

Men is special - this is reality, ever since eden when God told the couple to have dominion over nature. And throughout Bible, it is always God talking to human and human with God. You never read animals talking with God freely, or God shown to be talking with animals freely, except for a miracle. If you want to argue that animals also talk freely with God and vice versa, you have to show it.

U see, the argument is not whether does god talk to animals more frequently or not but on whether do they create animals differently from men. U CLAIMED they r not, and as such u SHOULD PROVE from the scripture WHY ? SO far, u neevr come out with any evidence and want me to do all the proving. If u can't prove the above, then it can be safely said tat NOBODY KNOWS. And NOBODY can say tat men r created in a special manner which is totally different from animals. Why should I be the one showing it ? It is your claim isn't it.

It is meaningless to discuss things which do not have a basis in Scripture. You want to think animals are special then go ahead .. I'm not stopping you. But if you want to argue about theology, then I think we need to agree on certain things.

It depend on your definition of basis in scripture. So far u never come out with any basis from the scripture to support yoru stand

on the other hand, if you take the opposite stand, you have more things to prove, and the onus is on your side. your argument now is you think all animals were breathed the neshamat, which is never explicitly mentioned and so you have to prove it.

U get it wrong. U claim tat men r created specially WITHOUT any evidence. If there is no such evidence, it should be easy to conclude tat animals may be treated the same as men and all your arguments crash. If u do not prove it, then the best conclusion is NOBODY KNOW, and as such u cannot give your sweeping statement tat animals r created different from men[/b[b]]. If u refuse to prove, then u r guilty of making sweeping statement and as such u r still labeled as wrong

rI hope we at least agree that humans are breathed the neshamat.

The argument is on whether animals r breathed the same thing, not on men

God can communicate with animals, why not He is all powerful right? But it is not mentioned animals can talk freely with God. Freely as in like Adam and Eve liddat. It is not even mentioned animals know there is God and so on.

As said before, snakes can talk with men. Snakes can talk. Therefore we can conclude snakes can talk to god since god is omnipotent. Whether God wants to listen is not important. I had shown the capability, not on god's likes, preference or desire. God prefer men more doesn't means god create men differently. U do not talk with someone u do not like doesn't means u 2 can't communicate

Do you see the problem your reasoning? 'cos I could very well say the snake is Satan

U get the wrong idea of who should be proving and not proving.

Snake means limbless scaly elongate reptile; some are venomous

Satan means The profoundly evil adversary of God and humanity, often identified with the leader of the fallen angels; the Devil

These 2 r totally different beings. Unless one is an idiot, nobody should have difficulty in seperating the 2. Throughout the bible they mention they snake as simply snake. If u say he is the devil, u have to prove it out, otherwise we should just have to take the literal meaning from the scripture tat a snake is indeed just a plain snake. If u do not prove it out, I can easily say the snake many means Icemoon, or pink unicorn or a mozilla firefox and u can't prove me wrong as well. If u do not prove snake=satan, then logical person will take the literal meaning and treat snake as snake.

My conclusion is this - let's assume the author of Genesis was sane when he wrote it. Genesis showed us animals and human both had nefesh chayah, but for human beings, the neshamat chayim was mentioned. There is a reason why this (God breathed into us the spirit of life) was mentioned for human - it is to tell us why human beings are special compared to other creations/living things. And we could see that humans are truly special, even after eden or tower of babel. From earliest times men had sought to worship God but till now we not found any concrete signs of that from animals.

The point of conflict is tat I believe animals and men r created the same. The only difference is men take the fruit of wisdom and god practise favourtism to like men more than other creatures. It does not necessary means tat animals r created differently. Why we worship etc, perhaps because we eat the fruit of "wisdom" and had some extraordinary "wisdom" and god had to guard against us.

Icemoon SG

this is exciting .. i just love talking to idiots and dummies .. don't you? I suppose you are enjoying it too, yeah? Wink

what you mean why? you mean why are men created differently?

If u can't prove the above, then it can be safely said tat NOBODY KNOWS. And NOBODY can say tat men r created in a special manner which is totally different from animals

There is no doubt that man is special, regardless of his process of creation.

Man was not created with the animals. He was last in the creation. His hierarchy in the creaton process is already special somewhat. And Scripture records for us the infusion of the holy breath into the man formed from dust. Ask yourself why is this mentioned if it is not mentioned in the creation of animals?

There is a lot of theology and hebrew interpretation behind the issue. Hermeneutics is involved also. I'll address your interpretation later on.

It depend on your definition of basis in scripture. So far u never come out with any basis from the scripture to support yoru stand

mine is the common interpretation. Christians and Jewish theologians all agree that there is something special about that holy breath. if you claim otherwise, then your whole framework must be evaluated.

U get it wrong. U claim tat men r created specially WITHOUT any evidence. If there is no such evidence, it should be easy to conclude tat animals may be treated the same as men and all your arguments crash.

but scripture did record the infusion of the holy breath into human. Even if there is no hard evidence, you also cannot conclude man and animals must be treated the same.

As said before, snakes can talk with men. Snakes can talk. Therefore we can conclude snakes can talk to god since god is omnipotent.

For the million time, you have no shown me snakes could talk. I repost my earlier reply:

Allow me to quote Gen 3:1 (NIV) - Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"

The verse tells us the serpent was more crafty and not "serpents were more crafty". And the "he" obviously refers to one serpent, that crafty serpent in the front part.

These 2 r totally different beings. Unless one is an idiot, nobody should have difficulty in seperating the 2.

I don't mean a snake is a satan and a satan is a snake that kind of thing. I mean the snake could be satan in disguise. Meaning there are some snakes that weren't satan in disguise.

The point of conflict is tat I believe animals and men r created the same.

You must explain why scripture records the infusion of the holy breath then. Why wasnt it recorded for the animals?

The only difference is men take the fruit of wisdom and god practise favourtism to like men more than other creatures. It does not necessary means tat animals r created differently.

if you accept God practise favouritism, then can you imagine God creating human differently?

Why we worship etc, perhaps because we eat the fruit of "wisdom" and had some extraordinary "wisdom" and god had to guard against us.

huh what God guard against us?

Icemoon SG

hmm .. should I break all my points into replies?

can push the activity rating up a bit. Rolling Eyes

plo30360 SG

Originally posted by earthlings73:
[b]

and singaporemacross also highlighted that there was indeed a teaching within the catholics that encouraged tolerance.. but somehow, most priests do not follow such a teaching..

b]

And how would you define this tolerance?

stupidissmart SG

this is exciting .. i just love talking to idiots and dummies .. don't you? I suppose you are enjoying it too, yeah?

ah... I feel tat talking with dummies and idiots is a pain to the a$$. Recently I am debating with one and trust me, explaining things to him can't be more difficult

what you mean why? you mean why are men created differently?

I mean where from the scripture does it say men were created differently

There is no doubt that man is special, regardless of his process of creation.

Man was not created with the animals. He was last in the creation. His hierarchy in the creaton process is already special somewhat. And Scripture records for us the infusion of the holy breath into the man formed from dust. Ask yourself why is this mentioned if it is not mentioned in the creation of animals?

There is a lot of theology and hebrew interpretation behind the issue. Hermeneutics is involved also. I'll address your interpretation later on.

If u say men is special, I agree to a certain extent but not to the point tat animals r totally disregarded. Men was created the last or him being given a breath doesn't means he is created differently from animals and tat animals r still considered to be loved by god and animals r the pure form tat god desire them to remain as such

mine is the common interpretation. Christians and Jewish theologians all agree that there is something special about that holy breath. if you claim otherwise, then your whole framework must be evaluated.

U know, the common interpretation used to include the earth is flat, sun revolves around the earth, prosecute lefthander, support slavery, start crusaders and inquisition. Their interpretation had proven to be wrong many times. They r probably only guessing and tat saying the breath is special is really just sweeping statement

but scripture did record the infusion of the holy breath into human. Even if there is no hard evidence, you also cannot conclude man and animals must be treated the same.

But they didn't record tat animals were not given the same breath nor say tat the breath is special. Therefore we cannot conclude they should be treated differently

For the million time, you have no shown me snakes could talk. I repost my earlier reply:

Is tat snake made by god ? It can talk. It is an animal. So wat is the problem ? In fact no one can proves tat there r more than a snake at tat time

I don't mean a snake is a satan and a satan is a snake that kind of thing. I mean the snake could be satan in disguise. Meaning there are some snakes that weren't satan in disguise.

Tat is no evidence tat even remotely suggest as such. Therefore we cannot conclude tat it is satan in disguise. If no evidence is neede, I might claim tat he is actually god in disguise and he purposely wanna find an excuse to make adam fall.

You must explain why scripture records the infusion of the holy breath then. Why wasnt it recorded for the animals?

Then u should explain why god never mention how animals r created nor claim tat the breah is specially for men. Otherwise the best conclusion is really, no conclusion

if you accept God practise favouritism, then can you imagine God creating human differently?

No. Your parents could make u and your sibling the same way but they could inevitably practise favourtism to one of them. These r 2 different issues

huh what God guard against us?

like how he guard us against tower of babel

iveco SG

That seems like a typical divide & rule tactic to me. Jumble up the languages into various linguistic families, and make each ethnic group suspicious of one another. But, thanks to globalisation these days, the world is getting somewhat more united.

Icemoon SG

Scripture says that man was created in the image of God while animals were created according to their kinds.

If u say men is special, I agree to a certain extent but not to the point tat animals r totally disregarded .. .. and animals r the pure form tat god desire them to remain as such

We never totally disregard animals. If we do, we will violate God's commandments to "rule over" nature (Gen 1:26-27). We should not rule like a tyrant but like a benevolent king.

What animals pure form? Haha .. the bible is not about animals but mankind.

U know, the common interpretation used to include the earth is flat, sun revolves around the earth, prosecute lefthander, support slavery, start crusaders and inquisition. Their interpretation had proven to be wrong many times. They r probably only guessing and tat saying the breath is special is really just sweeping statement

You can't use the flat-earth or geocentric example as counter-argument since it is very clear those theologians were making "scientific comments" which was not their speciality.

Ok, if you say the start crusades and all the shit were wrong, then kindly tell me how were their interpretation proven wrong?

You say they are probably guessing and making sweeping statement .. pls you need to substantiate your claim .. or they can sue you for slander. Mr. Green

But they didn't record tat animals were not given the same breath nor say tat the breath is special. Therefore we cannot conclude they should be treated differently

Nay .. the bible is still fundamentally a literature and not a mathematical manuscript. So i ask you again - why was the infusion of the holy breadth recorded?

Is tat snake made by god ? It can talk. It is an animal. So wat is the problem ? In fact no one can proves tat there r more than a snake at tat time

That snake could talk. Doesn't mean all snakes could talk.

Tat is no evidence tat even remotely suggest as such. Therefore we cannot conclude tat it is satan in disguise. If no evidence is neede, I might claim tat he is actually god in disguise and he purposely wanna find an excuse to make adam fall.

There is evidence from the NT. Jesus' triumph over Satan's temptation was an allusion to the Fall of man. Jesus succeeded where Adam failed.

Then u should explain why god never mention how animals r created nor claim tat the breah is specially for men. Otherwise the best conclusion is really, no conclusion

God never mentions 'cos the creation of animals was unimportant. The holy breath is special, so it warrants a mention.

No. Your parents could make u and your sibling the same way but they could inevitably practise favourtism to one of them. These r 2 different issues

God is eternal, so from our perspective using your analogy, God practised favourtism before Adam was even created.

laoda99 SG

The more I study linguistics at uni, the more convinced i am that they are all from the same source....

stupidissmart SG

Scripture says that man was created in the image of God while animals were created according to their kinds

Again tat doesn't means they were created differently. Much like there isn't any difference in making a human like doll and a teddy bear.

We never totally disregard animals. If we do, we will violate God's commandments to "rule over" nature (Gen 1:26-27). We should not rule like a tyrant but like a benevolent king.

What animals pure form? Haha .. the bible is not about animals but mankind.

Now the issue is on animal. Regardless of whether they r well-liked or emphasised etc, they r in the form tat god had intended them to be when they r just created. If god make these animals gay, then we should really ponder on why tis is so

You can't use the flat-earth or geocentric example as counter-argument since it is very clear those theologians were making "scientific comments" which was not their speciality.

I am talking about them making wrong statement. Whether it is science or watever, they are shown to be wrong. And they r shown to be wrong many times

Ok, if you say the start crusades and all the $$#% were wrong, then kindly tell me how were their interpretation proven wrong?

No they r not wrong. It is the bbile tat is wrong. So u happy about tis conclusion ? BTW wat hapen to slavery and prosecuting lefthanders ? WHy aren't they mentioned ?

Nay .. the bible is still fundamentally a literature and not a mathematical manuscript. So i ask you again - why was the infusion of the holy breadth recorded?

U r avoiding the question again. They didn't record tat animals were not given the same breath nor say tat the breath is special. Therefore we cannot conclude they r created differently. As said before, the best conclusion is no conclusion unless u prove otherwise

That snake could talk. Doesn't mean all snakes could talk.

I don't need all snakes to talk to prove my point. As long as a snake talk, it prove god created an animal tat can communicate

There is evidence from the NT. Jesus' triumph over Satan's temptation was an allusion to the Fall of man. Jesus succeeded where Adam failed.

Com'on, why link tat story to adam and eve ? Jesus trump over satan doesn't have anything to do with eve and the snake

God never mentions 'cos the creation of animals was unimportant. The holy breath is special, so it warrants a mention.

Animals r not recorded because they r not emphasised. However it doesn't means they were created any differently. If it is so special, it would have given a great emphasis on it instead of just a brief mention. The bible itself never claim the breath is a big deal

God is eternal, so from our perspective using your analogy, God practised favourtism before Adam was even created

And tat is why god should never be consider as fair

Icemoon SG

Can't you see it? If mankind is created in the image of God, then the holy breath part is not essential liao (but still important). This is supporting evidence to show why man behaves differently from animals. So what if mankind is just moulded from clay and so are animals? We don't care about physicial differences.

Now the issue is on animal. Regardless of whether they r well-liked or emphasised etc, they r in the form tat god had intended them to be when they r just created. If god make these animals gay, then we should really ponder on why tis is so

Prove to me god made these animals gay?

If you see a child with Down's Syndrome, does it mean the symptom existed in Adam or Eve?

I am talking about them making wrong statement. Whether it is science or watever, they are shown to be wrong. And they r shown to be wrong many times

They made the wrong statement cos they werent supposed to make those statements. If SIS made a wrong statement in science, ok let's say he keep on making wrong statements in science, do we automatically dismiss his views on religion? ah ha .. Wink

No they r not wrong. It is the bbile tat is wrong. So u happy about tis conclusion ? BTW wat hapen to slavery and prosecuting lefthanders ? WHy aren't they mentioned ?

Where is the bible wrong with regards to those issues?

Slavery and prosecuting lefthanders .. what's wrong with them?

U r avoiding the question again. They didn't record tat animals were not given the same breath nor say tat the breath is special. Therefore we cannot conclude they r created differently. As said before, the best conclusion is no conclusion unless u prove otherwise

God did mention "let us make man in our image, in our likeness .. ". If mankind and animals were created the same way, then there is no way to achieve the distinction. Note that man and animals are quite similar physically (we are > 90% similar with the chimps). If animals also have the neshamat chayim, then we would all be the same.

I repeat the bible is still primarily a literature and not presented as a rigorous proof manuscript. As such, the way they present the information should be subjected to literature analysis rather than [strict] logicial analysis. I maintain the holy breath verse is there cos it is to tell us there is a spiritual creation in us as well, compared to the "created from dust" - a physical creation.

I don't need all snakes to talk to prove my point. As long as a snake talk, it prove god created an animal tat can communicate

Trivial point. How does this help you in your argument?

Com'on, why link tat story to adam and eve ? Jesus trump over satan doesn't have anything to do with eve and the snake

Jesus is often compared with Adam. I'm sure you know this is Christian theology. The temptation of Jesus is to show the triumph over the devil, which Adam had failed.

Animals r not recorded because they r not emphasised. However it doesn't means they were created any differently. If it is so special, it would have given a great emphasis on it instead of just a brief mention. The bible itself never claim the breath is a big deal

Well the breath may not be a big deal, but do you agree that mankind is special?

And tat is why god should never be consider as fair

God never promised you fairness. This is a misconception. If God is considered as "fair", then beautitudes lines like "blessed are the poor .." would not exist. Wink [/b]

stupidissmart SG

I don't know why am I still talking about such a stupid topic

And the point tat animals remains the state they r created remains the same. God make animals gay. Whether is it different or same the fact still remain tat god made animals gay.

Prove to me god made these animals gay?

If you see a child with Down's Syndrome, does it mean the symptom existed in Adam or Eve?

God created animals. If he doesn't make them gay, who did ? Tis is especially true since god is suppose to hate homosexual acts, christian believe everything has a cause, animals remains the state they r in from the moment they r created.

A child with down's syndrome may means tat god created some bacteria tat can onyl live by attacking the nerve of men.

They made the wrong statement cos they werent supposed to make those statements. If SIS made a wrong statement in science, ok let's say he keep on making wrong statements in science, do we automatically dismiss his views on religion? ah ha ..

They made those statement and frankly most of them r popes or bishop etc. They fact remains tat they made many wrong statements before, officially broadcast it and worse still they r not wrong from their interpretation from the bible. The problem lies with the bible. Is tat wat u wanna conclude ?

Where is the bible wrong with regards to those issues?

Slavery and prosecuting lefthanders .. what's wrong with them?

If u think it is right, then u should start slavery system again and prosecute left handers now

I repeat the bible is still primarily a literature and not presented as a rigorous proof manuscript. As such, the way they present the information should be subjected to literature analysis rather than [strict] logicial analysis. I maintain the holy breath verse is there cos it is to tell us there is a spiritual creation in us as well, compared to the "created from dust" - a physical creation.

The bible itself try to play the role of a science textbook by explaining how certain phenomenons come about. But nevertheless, if u wanna compare by "literature", then in it there never states anything about the breath being important. They just casually mention it briefly. U r putting words into tat statement by saying it is very important and tat animals don't have it

Jesus is often compared with Adam. I'm sure you know this is Christian theology. The temptation of Jesus is to show the triumph over the devil, which Adam had failed.

Trivial point. This does not means the snake is satan

God never promised you fairness. This is a misconception. If God is considered as "fair", then beautitudes lines like "blessed are the poor .." would not exist

Good. tell tat to people who claim he is a just god.

Icemoon SG

cos you are stupid, that's why.

you shouldn't have argued in the first place. why don't you accept mankind has a spiritual creation while animals don't?

Icemoon SG

Animals don't remain .. they can evolve .. use your brain dude Laughing

Prove to me from scripture God made them gay? Ok, try to prove to me from science also.

God created animals. If he doesn't make them gay, who did ? Tis is especially true since god is suppose to hate homosexual acts, christian believe everything has a cause, animals remains the state they r in from the moment they r created.

You are self contradicting. If God hates homosexual acts, why did He made animals gay?

A child with down's syndrome may means tat god created some bacteria tat can onyl live by attacking the nerve of men.

what is down's syndrome caused by?

Are you going to tell us God created radiation to cause mutation sickness in mankind? Laughing

They made those statement and frankly most of them r popes or bishop etc.

Yah .. they are not darwins or newtons, just popes and bishops.

They fact remains tat they made many wrong statements before, officially broadcast it and worse still they r not wrong from their interpretation from the bible. The problem lies with the bible.

Huh .. are you saying WE are all wrong with our interpretation of Scripture now? Since virtually everyone believe in heliocentricity now.

The bible itself try to play the role of a science textbook by explaining how certain phenomenons come about.

You are mistaken. Did God say how He created animals? You maintained there is no description on the process right?

Similarly if God created Adam from dust, doesn't mean He did that after a pottery lesson. Bible is literature. Created from dust can mean created from elements in nature, from organic elements etc. the point is to show mankind has a physical creation. But the holy breath obviously doesnt come from nature - it came from God. God brought something out of nothing, so to speak, only in the beginning. This agrees with the big bang theory. After that everything is formed from the initial elements (hydrogen?) present.

But nevertheless, if u wanna compare by "literature", then in it there never states anything about the breath being important. They just casually mention it briefly. U r putting words into tat statement by saying it is very important and tat animals don't have it

Mankind is special. The author told us we are so 'cos we had the holy breath in us. You have to read it from the author/bible's perspective, and not your own theory. The point is we had a spiritual creation (we had something personal from God, so to speak) while animals don't.

Trivial point. This does not means the snake is satan

Jesus is often labelled as the second Adam, correct me if i'm wrong? The NT likes to parallel events in the OT, to boost their claim that Jesus is the Messiah.

I suppose most Christians agree that the snake is Satan.

Good. tell tat to people who claim he is a just god.

Bingo .. I was driving at that precisely! Christians always say God is just .. when do you hear them say God is fair?

There is a difference. In chinese, "just" is gong1 yi4, whereas "fair" is gong1 ping2. We always say God is a "gong1 yi4 de shen2".

stupidissmart SG

Animals don't remain .. they can evolve .. use your brain dude

Prove to me from scripture God made them gay? Ok, try to prove to me from science also.

Com'on man ! If u believe in evolution u wouldn't believe adam is created from dust Laughing

I say the bible neevr states any changes with animals. They never rebel them they never really change according to wat bible states. So they r really in the original form tat god intended them to be

You are self contradicting. If God hates homosexual acts, why did He made animals gay?

U can come out with 2 conclusion. The bible is wrong or god doesn't really hate homosexual act as u think

what is down's syndrome caused by?

Are you going to tell us God created radiation to cause mutation sickness in mankind

Com'on, u know the bulk of sickness is created by bacteria and viruses Laughing If u believe god created all life than he also created these bacteria and started sickness

Yah .. they are not darwins or newtons, just popes and bishops.

Yup, they r all just human and they can err, smoke and guess.

Huh .. are you saying WE are all wrong with our interpretation of Scripture now? Since virtually everyone believe in heliocentricity now

I am saying they r all guessing and so just take their words like a pinch of salt. U don't need to cap it u know. THEY R ALL WRONG when they say earth is flat. THEY R ALL WRONG when they say sun revolves aroudn earth

Similarly if God created Adam from dust, doesn't mean He did that after a pottery lesson. Bible is literature. Created from dust can mean created from elements in nature, from organic elements etc. the point is to show mankind has a physical creation. But the holy breath obviously doesnt come from nature - it came from God. God brought something out of nothing, so to speak, only in the beginning. This agrees with the big bang theory. After that everything is formed from the initial elements (hydrogen?) present.

I think u r getting a bit off point. U still can't say tat the breath does not coem to animals and tat the breath is so important. Whether got big bang or no big bang, it seems off point and obviously I don't see any link between big bang and hydrogen with god

Mankind is special. The author told us we are so 'cos we had the holy breath in us. You have to read it from the author/bible's perspective, and not your own theory. The point is we had a spiritual creation (we had something personal from God, so to speak) while animals don't.

The point is, as said many times before, u can't say the breath is unique to men only. The bible itself never say it is unique as well. The only conclusion is no conclusion. Reading it from the author perspective I can only see it is mention so breifly it doesn't seems to be important.

Jesus is often labelled as the second Adam, correct me if i'm wrong? The NT likes to parallel events in the OT, to boost their claim that Jesus is the Messiah.

I suppose most Christians agree that the snake is Satan.

So in the end u still can't prove satan is the snake, much like adam isn't jesus. If u say satan is snake then I can use the same reasoning to say adam is jesus.

Bingo .. I was driving at that precisely! Christians always say God is just .. when do you hear them say God is fair?

Lets put it tis way. How can an unfair god be just ? If someone is not fair, tat is he side with his friends and family, how can he be just ?

from oxford dictionary: morally right and fair
dictionary .com: Honorable and fair in one's dealings and actions

ahpeh SG

well if i remember correctly, the specific quote in the bible would be "man should not lay with man as he does with woman" or something like that.

Apparently exclusive homosexuals dont lay with women at all, so i guess that point is moot.

ahpeh SG

I believe god made everything. Its stated in the bible.

Icemoon SG

before SIS tries to attack you .. let me remind him that you are only stating your belief, you aren't trying to convince anyone here.

Must pre-empt his strike. So if he goes into a long tirade again, we know who is the xiao3 ren2. Heh.

laurence82 SG

icemoon, lets say i just take ur statement alone, so if i were to argue on the theology and doctrines of the faith, i must at least have the faith first? or that i must do so on the ground of belief?

u are a rational person urself, u noe many times, but not all the times, belief can be blind faith or even defy logic...

Icemoon SG

huh?

jnwk SG

I’m wondering if logic can explain everything. If not, how they gonna explain those unexplainable. Would be enlighted if good answers are posted.

« Previous Page Next Page »