Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Why were 14 books ripped out of the King James Bible in 1885?

page: 5
31
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 31 2012 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by stayhuman011
 

But that's without looking at what John said about himself:
Here: So either your text was about John being the literal Elijah reincarnated, or due to these verses being in unity, a man like Elijah was coming before the Messiah. What was Elijah known for? He was known for living apart from society, like John.

Now, does reincarnation really affect the way we look at scriptures? Not really. There's going to be an end to your life, eventually, so hoping on reincarnation doesn't do much good.




posted on May, 31 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by CynicalDrivel
 


How do you know there will be an end eventually? Is that not an assumption? I assume we will end up perfecting back to God eventually but never be " lost" without an individual soul. This is again, my assumption.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 


Even as a "Creationist" I'm not lacking in awareness that scientifically, this world will eventually end, as will this Universe. If reincarnation deals with living again and again in a dying body, eventually it's going to be well worth a change of pace for an incorruptible one what will not face the end of all existence. Even with reincarnation, there's no such thing as forever, when subjugated to how this reality works.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by CynicalDrivel
reply to post by MamaJ
 


Even as a "Creationist" I'm not lacking in awareness that scientifically, this world will eventually end, as will this Universe. If reincarnation deals with living again and again in a dying body, eventually it's going to be well worth a change of pace for an incorruptible one what will not face the end of all existence. Even with reincarnation, there's no such thing as forever, when subjugated to how this reality works.


I never assumed you were lacking anything.

All you have is an opinion based on what you perceive reality is. What if younare wrong with your perception and opinion?

I think I know energy never ends but what if im wrong?

I think I know change is the only constant, what if im wrong?

I think there is reincarnation, but what if im wrong and all there is ...is void.... Nothing?

See what I mean? Opinions are just ..... Opinions.

I dont know much, but I think I know a lot. Lol



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by CynicalDrivel
 


The idea of reincarnation absolutely affects how we view the scriptures if you understand that it takes many lifetimes for a soul to learn what it needs to learn in order to work it's way back to it's source, the creator. That is what the earth realm is for, to test and to teach. Soul growth.

With that in mind, many of the scriptures take on new meaning and a lot of things that didn't make sense before, will.

Especially a lot of what Jesus was saying.

I believe the Soul of Christ, was the pattern to show us the way out of the reincarnation cycle. As the first Soul, Adam and through subsequent reincarnations, showed how to be free of the cycles as his last incarnation as Jesus. (Jesus - the son of Man - the physical body, Christ - the son of God that spoke through him - the higher consciousness.)

Peace



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by PuRe EnErGy
 


Ahh yes, so I have been messing the spelling up a hair. Oh well, the idea I havent been messing up however. And what you find "funny" I dont really care. The truth of the matter is for the next few weeks Im without the use of my PC and Im utelizing the website via my Droid Razr and Im not too inclined to type more than a few sentences on a touch screen phone. Sorry, but you're going to have to just deal with that fact that I have big hands and it sucks to type out more than a few quick sentences. You acted shocked that the Gnostics believed Christ wasnt really flesh and blood, that He didnt really die on the cross yada yada. If you're the expert now on DOCETISM (is that satisfactory?) then all apologies, dont Google anything. But at the same time dont act or post like this is all of a sudden new information to what they believed and how it's fundamentally antibiblical.

edit on 31-5-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


The Gnostic Bibles were removed because they observed the flesh-and-blood mortality of Jesus.

Again, Constantine was responsible for the blending of all faiths into Christianity. Most of modern Christianity isn't even originally Christian. That's why the Church demonized them.

He tried to stop the war. He failed.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by halfoldman
reply to post by FortAnthem
 

Sure, I read that the Catholic and Orthodox churches keep the books in the Bible.
If I may ask somebody from those faiths, in what form are they kept?
Are they between the Testaments (which is apparently where Luther put them in his translations, but I'm not quite sure), or somehow spread amongst the other chapters?
But then again Luther supposedly also wanted to do away with the book of Revelations at a stage.
It must have been hellish to translate, one can imagine.

Despite some sects, the main church in England kept the books however, and when they were removed in 1885 I'm not sure what specific anti-Catholic sentiment or war existed at the time to make their removal specifically "anti-Catholic"?

I'm not saying it wasn't so, I'm just wondering why at that time?

And why did it then also happen to German Lutherans and so forth?

We're told these societies removed it all of a sudden, but not really why.


Well, I'm an Orthodox Christian. I don't know if someone else has answered it, but if not, I'll take a stab at it.

Luther wanted all OT scriptures removed that weren't in Hebrew. He insisted on the Deuterocanon being removed because of the first century Jewish Council of Jamnia (A.D. 100), where they only gave precedence to scriptures written in Hebrew over the Greek. Never mind that the NT quotes the Deuterocanon numerous times, and that recently some of these books were found in Hebrew (and date to the correct time). Prayers for the dead can be found in the Deuterocanon, so it makes them particularly on the radar when it comes to anti-Catholic views. He also wanted what he considered Deuterocanon to be removed from the NT (The Apocalypse of John/Revelation), likely because it was a book that was never read in the Church. (We don't read from Revelation in the Orthodox Church during our services, though we believe in its validity.)

As far as removal from Protestant bibles in the 1880s, I think this stems from the fact that in the RCC, there was debate about the Deuterocanon- something we didn't have in Orthodoxy. Also, other churches such as the Orthodox Church, the Assyrian Church, and the Oriental Orthodox all accept the Deuterocanon. These are all of the churches that can be historically proven to have existed since the first century onward.

The early Christians didn't even have a defined canon of Scripture. The Orthodox Church still doesn't appeal to a dogmatically defined canon of Scripture (like the RCC), only traditional use. This is partly what the Ecumenical Councils (besides the subject of Christology) did, they determined which books were part of the canon of Holy Scripture. We still have more scriptures that the RCC. In the Orthodox Church, we have 51 books in the OT and one extra Psalm (151). We even refer to books that we don't consider scripture, but still count as true events (ex- the Protoevangelium of James).

As far as the order of the books, I don't know. I have an Orthodox Bible that has some in the middle and the rest after the usual OT- and then the NT. The bible is a collection of books written by numerous people over a period of time. The gospels and epistles take precedence in our services.

To us, scripture is a part of Holy Tradition, and not just the end sum of what we know about the faith. The purpose of scripture is quoted is John 20:30-31: 'And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.'

edit on 31-5-2012 by LeSigh because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


That's what I'm getting at though, if you'd read the scriptures you'd realize that is considered a higher truth, they don't see the world the same way everyone else does and that is an end product of their beliefs, it is based on their respect and realization of the sacrifice and what it meant. It's a revelation of sorts, it doesn't mean it's a truism, it's uncovered truth based on the teachings. You don't start out believing that, it's part of the scriptures that isn't self evident, the scriptures themselves are explaining things that require a person to experience the teachings and truths held within, it's a personal experience. Know Thyself.

This is why Gnostics were highly misunderstood and why today, people come up with concrete beliefs based on something they haven't experienced. It isn't just a bunch of words, it's a path.

Even Docetism itself is based off of a revelation given to John, instead of instantly dismissing it, ask yourself why do they believe that... ?

The whole gnostic movement is revelation based.
It isn't meant to be a story book or just merely moral teachings, it's "transformational" teachings.
It's bringing what is dark into the light, it uncovers the esoteric and deeply held occult beliefs of those who work in the shadows.

EDIT: and I'd like to add that there are two schools of thought on this subject; that the gnostic beliefs are pre-christian or post-christian and many believe that they were the foundation of the new testament.
I believe it was called Scripture Q or something like that..
edit on 5/31/2012 by PuRe EnErGy because: (no reason given)
edit on 5/31/2012 by PuRe EnErGy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 08:12 PM
link   


TextSome one else decided to change his version again for their own reasons....It comes down to greed and control. So there is your answer. Is it a disgrace? I suppose, but it's nothing new. The bible has been changed, altered and had parts left out or even added, for centuries....
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


@ gimmy_some_truth

Your entire concept is dead wrong. The apocrypha does not belong to the gentiles. It is literature which was valued as to its historical content and was found that this literature had nothing to add to the Hebrew bible. Therefore, it was considered outside books of literary value to the Hebrews. The books of Enoch are also valued in this same manner as well as vast amounts of other Hebrew literature.

Most people do not realize that the gentiles have adopted the Hebrew bible and attached that Hebrew literature as their own. In other words they have stolen the Hebrew literature and have led the world into belief that it belongs to them. The apocrypha was added to the Greek bible (New Testament) with their own understanding and then removed in their own understanding in the exact same manner as the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament). In other words it belongs to the Jew and not King James.

King James was a practicing homosexual and a sadist beast. He was also a coward and a murderer. Nothing could ever be said of the man which could describe his vile and filthy being. His order to rewrite the bible was only to suppress the marginal notes of Godly teachers which were in the Geneva Bible which was the Bible that he despised. By his decree he forbid the marginal notes that taught the people the truth from the King James Version. That was the only reason for the KJV -- The KJV is a most accurate translation but is nothing more than the Geneva Bible without notes. The Geneva Bible is actually the forerunner of all English Bibles.

The gentiles have no authority to attach any work to another work and mislead anyone into thinking that they had the authority to do it in the first place. That is why the Jews do have the the outside books in a separate containment and not attached to the Tanach. If you want to purchase the outside books then do so with the understanding that the apocrypha never has been part of the Hebrew Bible and shall never be included in that literature. The 1560 Geneva Bible does have the apocrypha as a separate bundle but not as the Hebrew Tanach. As you read that literature, understand that it is not the inspired works of the Hebrews.

As far as your accusation that the bibles are myths made up to control people is pure nonsense. Yes, the English churches have misused their own purpose and have committed many atrocities but that was not the literature that was at fault. In fact the literature was kept from the people and not fed to the people at that time. It was morbid satanic people who were evil to the core just as the German Reich was a group of morbid evil people. We see this even now throughout the world. You will always have this in the world. If you look at American history you will see that even we had this same problem and we have returned to that same problem today. Our nation is not controlled by the bible totes today. In fact it is just the opposite. We are controlled by the filth of industrial complexes and not the bibles. Your ignorance surpasses your hatred and your hatred is fuel for your ignorance.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   
The Book of Enoch was quoted by Jude in the New Testament. Jude was almost cast out of the cannon because of this. If Jude is considered an inspired writing then Enoch or portions of it could be as well. Just look at one comparison.


Jude 14-15
"And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."

Enoch 2:1
"Behold, he comes with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon them, and destroy the wicked, and reprove all the carnal for everything which the sinful and ungodly have done, and committed against him."


After reading Enoch I found some interesting passages worth mentioning.


Enoch 64:1,3
"In those days Noah saw that the earth became inclined, and the destruction approached...Tell me what is transacting upon the earth; for the earth labours, and is violently shaken."

This implies an observable tilt to the earth and some major geological instability before the flood.

Enoch 79:3,6
"In the days of sinners the years shall be shortened...The moon shall change its laws, and not be seen at its proper period...Heaven shall shine more than when illuminated by the orders of light."

Genesis 6:3 says that man shall only amount to 120 years compared to the hundreds of years life span of the antediluvians. The moon had a different orbital period and or position than it does today. The pre-flood atmosphere diffused the intensity of the sun we see today.


These are just a few gems I found locked up in the Book of Enoch.


The quoted passages above were taken from the King James Bible and the 1883 Richard Laurence translation of the Book of Enoch.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 


Simply put these Apocryphal books are not inspired by God. They are written by people that believe in God, but not inspired to write divine thoughts. It would be like me writing an essay on the Bible today.

Jerome, who is described as “the best Hebrew scholar” of the early church and who completed the Latin Vulgate in 405 C.E., took a definite stand against such Apocryphal books and was the first, in fact, to use the word “Apocrypha” explicitly in the sense of noncanonical as referring to these writings. Thus, in his prologue to the books of Samuel and Kings, Jerome lists the inspired books of the Hebrew Scriptures in harmony with the Hebrew canon (in which the 39 books are grouped as 22) and then says: “Thus there are twenty-two books . . . This prologue of the Scriptures can serve as a fortified approach to all the books which we translate from the Hebrew into Latin; so that we may know that whatever is beyond these must be put in the apocrypha.” In writing to a lady named Laeta on the education of her daughter, Jerome counseled: “Let her avoid all the apocryphal books, and if she ever wishes to read them, not for the truth of their doctrines but out of respect for their wondrous tales, let her realize that they are not really written by those to whom they are ascribed, that there are many faulty elements in them, and that it requires great skill to look for gold in mud.”—Select Letters, CVII.

Here is just one example.


Tobit (Tobias). The account of a pious Jew of the tribe of Naphtali who is deported to Nineveh and who becomes blinded by having bird’s dung fall in both of his eyes. He sends his son, Tobias, to Media to collect a debt, and Tobias is led by an angel, impersonating a human, to Ecbatana (Rages). En route he acquires the heart, liver, and gall of a fish. He encounters a widow who, though married seven times, remains a virgin because of each husband’s having been killed on the marriage night by Asmodeus, the evil spirit. Encouraged by the angel, Tobias marries the widowed virgin, and by burning the fish’s heart and liver, he drives away the demon. Upon returning home he restores his father’s sight by use of the gall of the fish. The story was probably written originally in Aramaic and is estimated to be of about the third century B.C.E. It is obviously not inspired by God because of the superstition and error found in the narrative. Among the inaccuracies it contains is this: The account states that in his youth Tobit saw the revolt of the northern tribes, which occurred in 997 B.C.E. after Solomon’s death (Tobit 1:4, 5, JB), also that he was later deported to Nineveh with the tribe of Naphtali, in 740 B.C.E. (Tobias 1:11-13, Dy) That would mean that he lived more than 257 years. Yet Tobias 14:1-3 (Dy) says he was 102 years old at the time of his death.


This is just a fable, and should never even have been part of the bible to begin with, like the other Apocryphal books.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue_Jay33
 

Good explanation.

On the other hand a lot of the Bible is like that, and in the OT there are people who reached 900 years in age, from what I recall.

A lot is conflicting, even in the Gospels, and Jesus's genealogies alone seem rather strange.
Some have postulated that Jesus had a kind of twin, while nowadays one is ascribed to Mary, and another to Joseph (who wasn't His father anyway).

Was the instruction to find a colt (Luke 19) or a donkey and a colt (Matt 21)?
What really happened at the resurrection and the tomb, and who was present?

When the temple's veil was rent and the saints rose up from their graves and people saw them in Jerusalem, it doesn't sound like they had much to say, or that people were very impressed. (Matt 27:51-54)
What happened to these saintly zombies?
Did they die again and crawl back into their tombs?

Never even mind the resurrected Jesus, who is physical but also walks through walls, and then He went up on a cloud to heaven.
I mean that's all very fable-like.
If fables make bad scripture, I'd have thought they would take out Balaam and the talking donkey (Numbers 22:28), or perhaps the Ark with all the animals.

However, the fact is that the Apocrypha was kept for almost 2000 years.
They sure took their time taking it out in 1885!

edit on 1-6-2012 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   


TextI mean that's all very fable-like. If fables make bad scripture, I'd have thought they would take out Balaam and the talking donkey (Numbers 22:28), or perhaps the Ark with all the animals.
reply to post by halfoldman
 


@ halfoldman

I believe your thoughts have described many other people's thoughts.
The first several centuries of the birth of Christianity found those first Christ followers with no bible and few letters which were read and devoured with an appetite for truth. They had nothing as we have today except the manuscripts of Torah and in some cases the Tanakh.

Actually no one knows how much has been scribal changed by purpose and by error. We will never know the truth. What we have today are copies of copies at the best. Wars and power struggles change history and we all realize that campfire tradition is always embellished. Even today we have literature deliberately altered to suite the pocket books of those who do such things.

The dark age was terrible and many good people were murdered by the evil power brokers. Even the ones who championed freedom were guilty of their own personal prejudices and Martin Luther was no exception. Luther was a man who wanted change but who is to say that all of his wants were justified? The following is a sample of some of his dislikes and he was successful in much of what he disliked.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------
Taken from "The Church of God News" read the following -- ---

As the following quotes show, Martin Luther did not care for several books in the Old Testament either:

“Job spoke not as it stands written in his book, but only had such thoughts. It is merely the argument of a fable. It is probable that Solomon wrote and made this book.”…

“Ecclesiastes ought to have been more complete. There is too much incoherent matter in it…Solomon did not, therefore, write this book.”…

“The book of Esther I toss into the Elbe. I am such an enemy to the book of Esther that I wish it did not exist, for it Judaizes too much…”

“The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible.” (as quoted in O’Hare, p. 202).

Furthermore, Martin Luther had little use for the first five books of the Old Testament (sometimes referred to as the Pentateuch):

Of the Pentateuch he says: “We have no wish either to see or hear Moses” (Ibid, p. 202).

Martin Luther hated the Jews, which may be why he was against Esther, the first five books of the Bible, and other parts of the Hebrew scriptures.

Notice that Martin Luther advised his followers,

…to burn down Jewish schools and synagogues, and to throw pitch and sulphur into the flames; to destroy their homes; to confiscate their ready money in gold and silver; to take from them their sacred books, even the whole Bible; and if that did not help matters, to hunt them of the country like mad dogs (Luther’s Works, vol. Xx, pp. 2230-2632 as quoted in Stoddard JL. Rebuilding a Lost Faith, 1922, p.99).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------

There is the typical example of hate that is in this world and along with hate comes change. This is an example of a man who has taken the Hebrew literature, which is not even intended for his use, and thrown some of it in the garbage dump of his own mind. A man who took what was not his to take and sort out what he wants. A thief by all means. A man who wanted 18 books of literature (Bible) discarded and destroyed from the minds of others while insisting that his own writings were somehow sacred. A very sick man indeed.

But Martin Luther is not alone in this quest for power. Our world is full of Luther's and Hitlers and even today we have the same type and shadow of these men and we have them by the score. Regardless of whether some of literature is embellished, and there very well may be much that is fable, that literature belongs to those who revere that literature and not to those who would destroy it in hatred. It is a matter of ownership and not to be coveted by others who do not have a right to it. The old testament of the Hebrews and the apocrypha belongs to the Jews and what they decide to do with their own literature should not concern those who are not part of them.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Okay! Anyone got a pre1885 bible? That should end this thread! or Keep it going in Factual Knowledge!



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 10:01 AM
link   


TextOkay! Anyone got a pre1885 bible? That should end this thread! or Keep it going in Factual Knowledge!
reply to post by putnamcrab
 


A pre 1885 bible is available to everyone who can get on the internet.

You can purchase a 1534 William Tyndale new testament at all bookstores and Walmart. The 1525 Tyndale translation from Greek to English is the first translation in English of the New Testament only. Myles Coverdale used much of Tyndale's work in completing the first English complete old and new testaments. Tyndale finished his new testament in 1525 but was not in print till 1534. This is actually the first English New Testament. Tyndale was strangled and burned at the stake for this work.

The 1535 Coverdale bible is available for online reading. This was the first complete English bible. You may have a tough time reading it because it is in the old Gothic font and dialect but it is still understandable to most educated people. Just take your time and use another modern English bible as a reference if you need. You can also buy this copy from book dealers.

Then you have the 1560 Geneva bible which is also readable on line. This is a little more readable for the modern English understanding. This is the bible that the founding fathers of this nation used. It was proofed into modern English for more readable modern people of today without change of translation. Example - Ye would be You or Daye would be Day --- You can also buy this from book dealers.

And now we have the 1611 King James Bible which has been also modernized in readable language without transliteration. I have a copy of the 1611 KJV as well as the Geneva bibles and after some study have no difficulty in reading either one. The main difference in these bibles is that the KJV has no notes as does the Geneva bible. Basically they are compatible. The main difference is that the KJV bible has been authorized by James the first of England while the Geneva Bible was the private work of John Calvin, John Knox, Miles Coverdale and John Fox.

My own personal study bible is the Geneva Bible but of course that is my own personal preference. Hope that may help some that may want to go online and look at these bibles.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   
Another thing I find very strange is that there are a number of clips on Youtube by creationists, who claim the dinosaurs exited in historical times, and possibly still exist today.

One creature mentioned as a folklore description of a historical dinosaur is the dragon, and creationsists like Dr. Carl Baugh discuss the Biblical Leviathan as a real dinosaur that was created with man according to their reading of Job (at the creation of man 6000 years ago), but mostly died in what they see as the great flood about 4000 years ago.
However not all dinosaurs died according to creationism, and they have no problem using multicultural fables from tribal cultures to prove that the beasts survived into modern historical narrative and art.

Yet, in the Apocrypha, Bel and the Dragon seems to have a real animal as a dragon (possibly with some embellishments).

So it's strange that Baugh and other crypto-creationists will find evidence in non-Christian mythologies and obscure pygmy tribes rather than mention the Apocrypha.

They will mention all kinds of mythologies on dragons, except the Christian mythology in the Apocrypha that was in the standard Bibles for almost 2000 years!

Isn't that strange?
It's like they are anxiously avoiding the mention and existence of the censored books by all means possible!



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 


I have not read all the posts in this thread, and wonder if someone has mentioned that reincarnation was a concept that was also part of the Bible originally:


"The theory of reincarnation is recorded in the Bible. But the proper interpretations were struck from it during an Ecumenical Council meeting of the Catholic Church in Constantinople sometime around 553 A.D, called the Council of Nicea. The Council members voted to strike those teachings from the Bible in order to solidify Church control." [New York: Bantam Books, 1983, pp. 234-5.]



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:42 AM
link   
On dinosaurs and dragons:

The story of Bel and the Dragon:
quod.lib.umich.edu...
I seems Danial destroys two fake gods.
The idol of Bel, and a living beast or "dragon", which the Babylonians mistook as a god:


[23] And in that same place there was a great dragon, which they of Babylon worshipped.
[24] And the king said unto Daniel, Wilt thou also say that this is of brass? lo, he liveth, he eateth and drinketh; thou canst not say that he is no living god: therefore worship him.
[25] Then said Daniel unto the king, I will worship the Lord my God: for he is the living God.
[26] But give me leave, O king, and I shall slay this dragon without sword or staff. The king said, I give thee leave.
[27] Then Daniel took pitch, and fat, and hair, and did seethe them together, and made lumps thereof: this he put in the dragon's mouth, and so the dragon burst in sunder : and Daniel said, Lo, these are the gods ye worship.


Now here is a typical US fundamentalist Christian view on dinosaurs and dragons.
By 14 minutes into the clip they've mentioned South American figurines, Aztec dragons and Chinese dragons.
But they will never mention the Apocrypha!
So other cultures are more proof for Christianity than traditionally Christian books!



So there's a deliberate attempt to hide the Apocrypha, and one wonders if these younger Christians have ever heard of it?
So far some Christians I know will not believe it, and they say it's some nonsense I read on the Internet.
edit on 3-6-2012 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Where have all of you been? this is sooooo 200 years ago

Get the catholic edition of the bible, with extra 14 book bonus
edit on 3-6-2012 by Jordan River because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join