User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 11 of 25 FirstFirst ... 78910111213141521 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 88 of 195

Thread: Which religions are represented here?

  1. #81
    Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    341
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (lavenderdawn @ Mar. 07 2004,06:15)]Odysseus,
    His name is Troy, btw, & I don't think he was calling you hypocritical - rather that the religion, i.e., LDS would be. I think he is saying that the dances & their culture is their religion. Have you ever seen liturgical dance in the US? It is a way for those in this country (christian, in my experience) to worship their god. In a similar way, the Amerindians (to use shokuchuu's term) incorporate dance into creating a worship ceremony. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html312/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/img] Just as the hula is a Hawaiian form of worship. Only the individual knows in their heart just what they are worshipping but these dances originated as a form of worship for their chosen deity.
    Hey Troy, Lavender pointed out that I called you Tony. Sorry...

    Lavendar what I quoted above from your previous point was exactly what I tried to say earlier in my post. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html312/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/img] I knew that some Hawaiin dances were originally done as a religion. That is what I believe the Balinese are doing that Troy is talking about.

    I just want everyone to know that when a Hawaiin for example joins the church, of free choice (stressed point for Skokuchu's questions) of their own free will, that they can still keep those dances because of their traditions. When they join the church no one expects them to toss their traditions out the window. They can keep their traditions. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html312/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/img] As long as their traditions don't impede or break any commandments.

    I am sorry that my earlier post raised such questions and that my original point wasn't clear. I will do better.
    Odysseus
    Wife and I in the Netherlands. Sure miss living out there.

    My growlist
    A list of beginner CPs

  2. #82

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    784
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    When people refer to God, who/what exactly do they mean? I understand the majority here refer to the Christian view of God.
    I think the main reason why I decided to remain neutral was to be able to accept other peoples' beliefs and incorporate them into my own "spiritual" understanding of certain things in life. Then again, I can embrace all kinds of Gods, whether it be the Christian God, Allah, the Hindu Gods, Aztec Gods, etc.
    Also, it seems a little scary at times when certain religions only praise one God. This very faintly reminds me of dictatorship and so-called omnipotence.

    God's Garden, I agree with you that it is easier to believe that the world was made in 7 days, but I still don't think it's as near as knowing scientifically up to a certain point that prehistoria existed. Maybe God created evolution, and/or he/she/it was the first single-celled life form to roam the face of this planet. It's the 21st century, and I believe it's time we at least attempt mixing the oil with the water.

  3. #83

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Dickinson,TX
    Posts
    191
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Lavenderdawn,

    I was simply taking something with a smaller numerical value I.E. 216, and contrasting it with the much larger # of sub-atomic matter necessary for life to exist on the most basic of levels I.E. single celled orginisms. It was my intention to state the odds of evolution occuring by chance. Yes the bones will crumble into dust eventually. However, for one to believe in life by chance would also be to state that at one point in time millions of inert cells much like the bones
    Being void of life them-selves came together to create life. The single celled orginism would have been the result, and everything would have evolved from that. But, to paraphrase a section from” The savage Garden” page xix (I think)
    “Darwin was hoping in time that the fossil record would show evidence of the gradual mutations into other orginisms…. Most scientist today agree that there were no gradual mutations as hoped for….. maybe evidence will come in a new theory no one has thought of yet”. Yes or may one that is about 4,000 years old.
    Shokchuu,
    I mentioned that I was taught that the earth was created in 7 day not that I believe it now. Many fellow Christians may have a problem with my beliefes on this, and to them I would say “ does it matter how long it took us to get here as long as I know Who put us here, and as long as His Son’s name is written on my heart. “I also know many many Christians are not happy with the rubber stamp half answers we get. It's even worse to be put into the position of repeating or teaching beliefs we don't quite believe... or at least doubt. No one who is inquisitive likes these untidy loose ends. Further, none of us like to advertise that fact that we have troubling questions... we don't want to be perceived as doubting or ignorant... so by the multitudes we suffer in silence. How many times have I heard "well one day we will know", "we are not supposed to know that now", or something similar. I am not promising all the answers here - but quite a few of them are right in front of us, we just don't see them or want to accept them”.
    Current theory holds that all the matter (and space and time) in the universe originated at the same spot. In my opinion, in layman's terms if all the matter (and space and time) of the universe was compressed into a single spot (a singularity as it is called in mathematical terms) of infinite density of non measurably incredibly small size - does not this equate to all the matter in the universe simply springing into existence out of nothing? Is not this a perfect description of creating the universe where there was nothing? It just "exploded" into existence - the Big Bang!
    Did you know that the Bible describes the universe? These Bible passages describe the "kingdom of heaven":
    Matthew 13:31-33
    "Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field: Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof. Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened."
    Mark 4:30-32
    "And he said, Whereunto shall we liken the kingdom of God? or with what comparison shall we compare it? It is like a grain of mustard seed, which, when it is sown in the earth, is less than all the seeds that be in the earth: But when it is sown, it groweth up, and becometh greater than all herbs, and shooteth out great branches; so that the fowls of the air may lodge under the shadow of it."
    Luke 13:18-19
    "Then said he, Unto what is the kingdom of God like? and whereunto shall I resemble it? It is like a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and cast into his garden; and it grew, and waxed a great tree; and the fowls of the air lodged in the branches of it."
    Can not a grain of mustard seed be compared to a singularity (in Biblical layman's terms)? A grain of mustard seed would be among the smallest if not THE smallest piece of matter they would have been familiar with. And as you can see - it's in several passages of the Bible - not a single verse taken out of context, but a repeated concept in three gospel accounts. Could we not also be likened to fowls lodged in the branches (expanse of space)? It speaks of the seed growing, could it mean expanding?
    I think it's fascinating that the passage in Matthew above uses the analogy of leaven. Even today, in modern science classes and books, bread rising is used to illustrate the concept of an expanding universe!
    Some think this has nothing to do with describing the physical universe... They say "it's a parable". Well one of the beautiful attributes of a parable is it's multiple meanings and applications. And to those of you who think that Biblical writings could not deal with the universe... I would encourage you to read the apocryphal book of Enoch. The book of Enoch is even quoted from in the new testament book of Jude! The book of Enoch was banned for over a thousand years because of it's depiction of the acts of fallen angels. I believe it is probably correct and lends clarification to the giants (nephilum) of Genesis chapter 6 (that's another topic though). Fragments of the book of Enoch were even found among the dead sea scrolls.
    Current theory also holds that the universe is still exploding/expanding. Edwin Hubble is the man who discovered that the universe is expanding. He deduced this by noticing the now famous "red shift". Red shift refers to the light of the galaxy becoming red (actually "shifted" slightly to the red end of the spectrum). This is like slowly adjusting the hue on your color TV until the whole image is red. Only this "red shift" is caused by a galaxy receding from us at an incredibly fast rate (approaching the speed of light 186,000 miles per second). It is similar to the following analogy:
    Take a rope and have a friend hold one end. Take the other end and swing it up and down (producing waves in the rope). Now run backwards while swinging the rope - can you visualize in your mind how the "waves" would stretch out? This is very similar to red shift. You have shifted the frequency of the "waves" in the rope. Light travels in waves, and you change its color by changing the wavelength. Wavelength takes on new understanding in this analogy. The rope is light, you are the receding galaxy, and you friend represents fixed observers on earth!
    The following scriptures depict what could be expanding space:
    Isaiah 40:22
    "It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:"
    Isaiah 45:12
    "I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded."
    Isaiah 51:13
    "And forgettest the LORD thy maker, that hath stretched forth the heavens, and laid the foundations of the earth; and hast feared continually every day because of the fury of the oppressor, as if he were ready to destroy? and where is the fury of the oppressor?"
    Jeremiah 10:12
    "He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion."
    Jeremiah 51:15
    "He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heaven by his understanding."
    Job 9:8
    "Which alone spreadeth out the heavens, and treadeth upon the waves of the sea."
    Job 26:7
    "He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing."
    Psalm 104:2
    "Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain:"
    Zechariah 12:1
    "The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him."
    As you can see there is abundant scripture referring to this "spreading out" of the heavens. The Bible is VERY consistent with this description. The key word in Hebrew here is "raquia". Young's concordance defines "raquia" as "expanse" and "raqa" as "spread out or over". The Bible could have just said only "created the heavens" would this not be adequate? Why the need for "stretch out"? He didn't "stretch out" man. Granted it could simply be a reference to its expanse. But at it's best it's a confirmation of our expanding universe, and at its worst it cannot be used to argue against it!
    Some have questioned me "What will you do when the big bang is refuted"? Well, that's a valid criticism... My answer is that it's the prevailing theory, It was predicted by Einstein's theory of relativity, the background radiation was predicted by it before it was discovered, confirmations of the big bang are continuing to come in, and many of the so called "alternate" theories are still based on some form of an expanding universe - which is really still a big bang model (just one example is the inflationary theory). There are alternate non "Big Bang" theories out there, but they have little support and no predictions that have come about. My personal belief is that the Big Bang (expanding universe) is very safe.
    For those who think that the Big Bang is about to collapse or that young earth creation scientists Setterfield or Humphreys have solved all young Earth problems with the universe... you are advised to read this paper by young Earth astronomer Danny Faulkner: http://www.icr.org/research/df/index.html
    I would challenge you (especially if you are a young Earth advocate) what you will/would do if a very old Earth and universe was proven beyond all reasonable doubt. Or what you will do when/if the Big Bang type beginning is similarly proven? I encourage you not to put God in a box of your making. There are numerous instances where the Hebrew word for day DOES NOT mean a literal 24-hr day. See the entire section Those infamous days:
    The use of the Hebrew expression "evening and morning" in Genesis 1 forces the twenty-four-hour interpretation:
    Since it specifically states an evening and a morning, these must be regular solar days.
    Rebuttal: Let's look at this logically... Sunrise and sunset are visual experiences. No one was here to see (visualize) the creation except God himself. For someone to see or experience night or day (evening and morning) requires that an observer be in a fixed position on the earth. God is not fixed in time or space. His sunrise is perpetual, just as His sunset is perpetual. He sees the earth continuously half in darkness - half in light - at the same time. It is also highly unlikely that even solar days were 24 hours in duration at the time of the creation. The days were probably longer (as the earth got up to speed). It is noteworthy that Genesis records that the Sun, Moon, and stars were not appointed to be time keepers until the fourth day. Further, you can't pick just any one place on the earth, and apply the "evening and morning" routine to get 12-hrs of each - and then use that for six 24-hour days. Look at Alaska, places there have 6 months of daylight and 6 months of night (so much for two 12-hr periods making up days). If that were not enough, the amount of light and dark is totally dependent on your latitude (distance from the equator). It even changes throughout the year (hence daylight savings time). The longest day is around June 22 for us (in the northern hemi-sphere). There have even been humans who have witnessed light and darkness on the earth at the same time - astronauts have witnessed many evenings and mornings (in less than 24-hrs) while orbiting the earth. See how silly the light/dark 24-hour thing is? It's all relative.
    On a purely scientific note... we also know thanks to Einstein, that time itself is not absolute - but variable. Time does not pass at the same rate everywhere in the universe. It is dependent on your motion, and proximity (or lack of it) to a large gravity source. I know this is a difficult concept - but this (relativity) is now the most tested, and proved theory in existence. For us to force our concept of time on the creator is shear arrogance.
    Evening to morning itself does not dictate 24 hours - it's only 12 hours. It would require an evening to an evening - think about it!
    Now, let's consider it Biblically. There is another common Bible study concept like the former one we looked at (the reference frame of the observer) - it's to let scripture interpret scripture. Let's apply this. Just like the Hebrew word for "day" ("yom"), the Hebrew words for "evening" and "morning" ("erev" and "boqer") both have very flexible definitions and uses. Moses is the author of Genesis... If we had no other example of Moses' language, and his concept of God's time, this passage might be taken as evidence for a 24-hr creative day, however, we have Scriptural evidence that Moses made a explicit and very significant distinction between God's time and man's time.
    Consider Psalm 90:4 (written by Moses)
    "For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night."
    Here Moses is telling us just like in 2 Peter 3:8 that God's time passes much more slowly than ours.
    Consider Psalm 90:6 (written by Moses)
    "In the morning it flourisheth, and groweth up; in the evening it is cut down, and withereth."
    Here Moses is making an analogy of us to grass... it clearly does not imply a 24-hr day. Morning refers to a period of growth... where evening refers to a period of death.
    Consider Psalm 90:14 (written by Moses)
    "O satisfy us early with thy mercy; that we may rejoice and be glad all our days."
    The English word "early" in this verse is the same Hebrew word "boqer" used for "morning" in Genesis 1... it can also clearly be seen that "boqer" has a meaning, which cannot be tied to a 24-hr day.
    As you can see from these last 2 verses a better general translation for the Hebrew words "erev" and "boqer" would be "begin(ing)" and "end(ing)".
    The Exodus 20:9-11 (the 10 Commandments) reference back to creation:
    Since God mentions the creation "days" and our six days of work here, it proves creation was in 24-hour days.
    "Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."
    Rebuttal: This still does not prove that God's days are our days. We have already seen how Moses explicitly explained to us the difference between His time and ours. Further the Bible itself (again in verses written by Moses) speaks of the Sabbath in terms of a whole year. Consider Leviticus 25:3-4 " Six years thou shalt sow thy field, and six years thou shalt prune thy vineyard, and gather in the fruit thereof; But in the seventh year shall be a sabbath of rest unto the land, a sabbath for the LORD: thou shalt neither sow thy field, nor prune thy vineyard." Here we see what the Sabbath period of rest would be for a crop!
    The Bible says the sun and moon were not created until the 4th day:
    The point being that it blows a Big Bang scenario out of the water, as God created the earth first, then the other heavenly bodies.
    Rebuttal: Actually this poses far more problems for a young earth than it solves. Some of which should be obvious, such as how did life exist without it? How did you have 24-hr solar days? Actually the original Hebrew in Genesis is a help here... consider Genesis 1:16 "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also." The Hebrew word for "and made" the verb "asah" would better translate to "Now God had made..." as opposed to the simple past tense "And God made...". This hints to their prior creation. Remember that God created "light" during the first "day". The best explanation being they merely became clearly visible and received their assignment as timekeepers on the 4th day.
    Further, most young earth creationists fail to recognize that their order of events in Genesis actually contradicts the Bible's own statements concerning the creation's order of events. Genesis 1:1 in Hebrew says: "In beginning [there is no Hebrew article] God created the heavens [a dual noun in Hebrew] and the earth." The fact that the heavens and earth were created in verse one is inescapable in the text itself... for if the earth is not created in Genesis 1:1 - then the origin of planet earth is never discussed. Note that in verse two - earth not only exists... but already is covered by water and is shrouded in darkness.
    The earth is not the only thing created in verse one. The heavens are also created. It is a firmly entrenched conclusion among most Biblical fundamentalists that Genesis 1:14-19 teaches that the sun, moon and stars were not created until the fourth "day" of creation. As a result, they postulate a light source that is utterly unrelated to the earth's required solar system. Scripture neither teaches nor allows this position. It also contradicts another major source of information in Scripture concerning the order of events during creation - namely Psalm 104:1-5

    "Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain: Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters: who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind: Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire: Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever."
    If this were not enough - try this simple thought experiment using only simple logic. I don't think any reader will doubt that the earth's rotation provides for our day/night cycle - even in the context of a simplistic ultra literal interpretation of Genesis 1. That being the case, the universe including the Sun and Earth had to be created in Genesis 1:1. How so you ask? For if not, not only does the Sun not exist until the 4th day - but the earth is not created until the first 24 hour day! Remember in this scenario Genesis describes a day which begun with evening and proceeded on to morning as the earth allegedly rotates before the light. How could you possibly have a night/day cycle? How could earth rotate to produce the 24 hr day (demanded by young earth creationists) before it and the Sun existed? Both (and more) are required to provide the celestial mechanics needed to produce the 24hr/solar day. I hope I didn't loose you, here's the bottom line - It is impossible for the earth to be created in the solar day which its own rotation produced!
    It further contradicts Psalm 104 in verse 19 concerning what actually happened on the fourth "day" of creation (their mere appointment as time keepers).

    Psalm 104:19
    "He appointed the moon for seasons: the sun knoweth his going down."
    And my final argument against the Sun, Moon and stars being created on the 4th day would be an obvious contradiction with Job 38:1-7 which says:

    "Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" This is only the tip of the iceburg. If you find it interesting go to the live link Scottychaos posted for me on page 6 I think. I love this kind of stuff for the simple fact that I view God as the creator. I believe that since God is the author of life, and the Bible His infallible Word That an education in the science can only lend clarity to what He has done.
    I always suspect everything is a trap....thats why I'm still alive

    Times fun when you're having flys

  4. #84

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    North Central Ohio
    Posts
    394
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi shokuchuu,

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]My question is, do Christians today realise the pain and suffering many (not all) Missions have inflicted on "uncivilised" peoples during colonial times? And if you do realise this, do you feel it was wrong?
    So are you asking if Christians believe it's ok to hurt/kill people in order to spread Christianity?? I find it absolutely ridiculous that you even ask this. Did you ask Muslims if they thought it was ok that some of the members of their religion flew into the World Trade Centers and killed thousands of Americans in the name of Allah?? This is basically the same thing. Every religion has extremists and anyone who is an actual member of a religion realizes that these individuals are crazy and not a true member of their religion.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Also, it seems a little scary at times when certain religions only praise one God. This very faintly reminds me of dictatorship and so-called omnipotence.
    Why exactly do you find it scary that a person worships The God rather than many gods??

    A dictator is someone who is ruthless, unloving and a tyrant. All three of these are complete opposites of what God is. Some examples of God's love: John 3:16, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not parish but have eternal life."; I John 4:8, "Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love."; I John 4:16, "And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him."

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]God's Garden, I agree with you that it is easier to believe that the world was made in 7 days, but I still don't think it's as near as knowing scientifically up to a certain point that prehistoria existed.
    Why do we have to know scientifically?? God is perfect, science is not even close. I think I'll choose believing God over believing what scientists say any day.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Maybe God created evolution, and/or he/she/it was the first single-celled life form to roam the face of this planet. It's the 21st century, and I believe it's time we at least attempt mixing the oil with the water.
    Alright, I think it’s necessary to tell you how highly offensive and angry your statement that “he/she/it was the first single-celled life form to roam the face of this planet” has made me. God did not crawl out of the ocean as some piece of single cell scum. God has always been and will always be. God is: "… the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.", Revelations 22:13



    -buckeye

  5. #85
    Capslock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    3,088
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Statements of difference of opinions on these matters should not cause anger. I sense a little bit of tension entering this discussion, and I hope that we all can keep the utmost respect for all the beliefs voiced here. Nobody's beliefs are more sacred than others, and all are legitimate and valid, even those that contradict yours or mine.

    I think Odysseus has been exemplary in his statement of belief and respect for others. He is polite, positive, and respectful, despite espousing beliefs that both controversial and part of a distinct minority of people. I admire that, though I don't share those beliefs!

    Capslock
    Malo Periculosam Libertatem Quam Quietum Servitium

    My photos are copyright-free and public domain

  6. #86
    Tropical Fish Enthusiast jimscott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Western New York
    Posts
    18,768
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The bottom line is that God created. That is the single most important aspect of the Genesis 1 account.

  7. #87
    Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    341
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I agree with Capslock. (Thanks btw, for the compliment [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html312/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/img] ) I began this thread thinking I had access to beginning a poll to just simply see on paper what religions are represented by all of us who have a love/Addiction for CPs. Yet, I have found everyone so positive and willing to share without the slightest bit of animosity that it encouraged me to take part! However, a couple of recent comments are starting to lean towards ambigous allegations. I had enjoyed this very much, but I don't want to get involved much further. I am pulling out of participation for this thread. If a MOD wants to post the poll for Religions REpresented, I would appreciate it, but other than that. It's been good talking with you! [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html312/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/img]

    Any of you who still have questions for me about my Church please feel free to PM me.

    Take care everyone and good luck with the oncoming of SPRING! My S. Flava is growing very fast! I love the growing season!
    Odysseus
    Wife and I in the Netherlands. Sure miss living out there.

    My growlist
    A list of beginner CPs

  8. #88

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    central upstate New York
    Posts
    439
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Arrow

    Yep, I'm in agreement, too. I would sort of be interested in what that kind of poll would show, too. We'll have to see about doing that. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html312/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/img]
    Restore our biosphere, create a new culture of kindness.

Page 11 of 25 FirstFirst ... 78910111213141521 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •