|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/5/2008 5:17:27 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2829
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Marksman
quote:
If that is true, that is scary because it means that your computer excludes many of the prominent versions of the bible like the NRSV, NIV, NLT, etc...
As you don't know what versions I have on my computer, you contention is pure speculation and unworthy of a serious debater.
There was no speculation! Please read the very first part of that statement; did you notice that very important word at the beginning i.e. IF ?
In other words, that was a concession to you that, however unlikely, your computer program may have 10 versions that all used non-inclusive language. Because I have copies of the NRSV, NIV, and NLT, I do know that either your statement was incorrect or that your software doesn't include those (or similar) versions. However, there is absolutely no question that either your computer program doesn't contain these versions, or your statement about the contents of all ten versions on your computer was incorrect; my guess is that latter is the truth, the former was simply a concession to you.
quote:
quote:
I have brought up the issue solely because verses like this should be given consideration.
Consider it done and discounted as you don't EVER base a doctrine on one verse of scripture.
Did you notice the plural "verses", in just this one passage their are a 1/2 dozen verses that have been discussed that relate to this topic. And if you look through this thread you will find verses that have been discussed in the Gospels, Galatians, Eph, Col, 1 Tim, and others. No one is trying to build a doctrine on one verse. You can close your eyes and your ears and ignore everything anyone has said if you want to, but it doesn't change the facts.
< Message edited by benelchi -- 10/5/2008 5:23:27 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/5/2008 5:49:06 PM
|
|
|
Marksman
Posts: 271
Joined: 6/7/2007
From: Drouin, Victoria, Australia
Status: offline
|
quote:
Did you notice the plural "verses",
What I did note was that in the post you said īn this verse"and ""īn this passage"". That sounds like one to me.
_____________________________
God Bless America
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/5/2008 6:01:14 PM
|
|
|
Stephanos
Posts: 1115
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in KC MO
Status: offline
|
NRSV, NIV, NLT
Lets see, a liberal translation, a bad translation, and a paraphrase translation. Gee nice selection.
Oh and FYI, I was raised on the NRSV, used the NIV during most of my early christian years, and was a student of member of the NLT translator board. So I do know each version quite well. I prefer to stick with the NASB, ESV, KJV, and of course the original languages.
And again, since the Greek, does not in any way imply or even suggest Junia is a female, any translation that tries to do so, is doing some serious eisegesis.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/5/2008 6:45:19 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2829
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Stephanos
NRSV, NIV, NLT
Lets see, a liberal translation, a bad translation, and a paraphrase translation. Gee nice selection.
An opinion shared by very few of the translators. Many of the translators of the NIV actually worked on the translation committees of your "less liberal" translations as well. The reality is the differences in these translations has to do with the extent that dynamic equivalent language is used, and not a liberal or conservative theological leaning. Every one of these versions uses dynamic equivant language to some extent, but the NIV, NRSV, NLT use it to a much greater extent.
BTW - I selected these versions, not because they added anything to the argument, but because they are included in almost every bible study program, and their translations of this verse don't even allow for the confused claim that Marksman made. The point was that either is computer program did not include these versions or his claim about all ten versions was complete false.
quote:
Oh and FYI, I was raised on the NRSV, used the NIV during most of my early christian years, and was a student of member of the NLT translator board. So I do know each version quite well. I prefer to stick with the NASB, ESV, KJV, and of course the original languages.
Oh and FYI, I was raised on the KJV, and my pastor growing up was one of the minor contributors to the NIV. He is the one who first began teaching me Hebrew.
quote:
And again, since the Greek, does not in any way imply or even suggest Junia is a female, any translation that tries to do so, is doing some serious eisegesis.
You are correct, the Greek in this case neither implies nor stands in opposition to the question about Junia being a female; however, the use of a name that is generally accepted as a female name does make it difficult to argue that she was a he. All known references to Junia in Greek are female, and some of the older manuscripts actually read Julia (another feminine name). Is it possible that the one instance of Junia in the bible wasn't in reference to a female? It is possible, but unlikely.
BTW - the translators of the NASB, NKJV, ESV, all readily admit that Junia is most likely a female name (take a look at their translation notes), and those translations do not grammatically require that "she" be a "he" any more than the Greek does. Regardless of whether Junia was a man or not, Marksman's claim still remains entirely without merit.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/5/2008 6:47:44 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2829
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Marksman
quote:
Did you notice the plural "verses",
What I did note was that in the post you said īn this verse"and ""īn this passage"". That sounds like one to me.
Did you notice that almost all of my references to "this verse" were used in the context of demonstrating your failure to follow accepted hermeneutic principles, and not as a support for doctrine?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/5/2008 7:56:18 PM
|
|
|
Qtman
Posts: 10086
Joined: 3/21/2006
From: Crimson Tide Country
Status: offline
|
I will have to bow to Benelchi's knowledge of Hebrew and Greek but as I understand it it depends on where the emphasis is placed on the name Junia. Although typically used as a females name said properly it could be a male's name. However, in most cases I can find where is refers to a male a "s" is added on at the end. IOW Junias. That would be a male. I am not so sure Junia refers to a male.
_____________________________
Remember: God loves you and I'm trying!
~rogasinger4Him
Body Piercings
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/5/2008 10:45:56 PM
|
|
|
Stephanos
Posts: 1115
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in KC MO
Status: offline
|
Point of fact, I did not call the NIV a liberal translation. I called it a bad one. The NRSV (and the RSV before it) are both strongly liberal in its translation practices.
For instance NRSV says "born of a young woman" in Isaiah, not the proper Hebrew AND Greek LXX "virgin" translation. It is one of the worse enacters of "gender-neutral" language when in some cases, it CLEARLY was not meant to be gender inclusive in the original texts. It rejects the Psalms 22 prophecy of the peirced hands and feet. Should I go on?
As for textual critisism in the margin, I do take it you have a Greek NT? Because my Nestel-Aland has often the entire bottom 1/3rd of each page full of textual remarks about which manuscripts and codex's have what and where they differ from the original. NASB, ESV, KJV, ect all make it a point to include some of the more problematic textual critism's just to let the reader know that this area does offer a problem.
Finally, I wish to point something further out. Even IF Julia was female, and even IF she was an apostle (this is right out as there were only 14 apostles period...but even if), that still does not mean that A) Julia had teaching authority over a man, or B) that Julia did anything remotely associtated with a "pastor" today. Paul several times in talking of the gifts of the Spirit, makes a difference between Apostle, and teacher/overseer/pastor/ect. Apostle is NOT equal to today's Pastors. If anything, church planter, but even then, as Apostles were called by Christ Jesus in person, nothing today ever will fit that mold.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/5/2008 11:30:54 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2829
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Stephanos
Point of fact, I did not call the NIV a liberal translation. I called it a bad one. The NRSV (and the RSV before it) are both strongly liberal in its translation practices.
For instance NRSV says "born of a young woman" in Isaiah, not the proper Hebrew AND Greek LXX "virgin" translation. It is one of the worse enacters of "gender-neutral" language when in some cases, it CLEARLY was not meant to be gender inclusive in the original texts. It rejects the Psalms 22 prophecy of the peirced hands and feet. Should I go on?
As for textual critisism in the margin, I do take it you have a Greek NT? Because my Nestel-Aland has often the entire bottom 1/3rd of each page full of textual remarks about which manuscripts and codex's have what and where they differ from the original. NASB, ESV, KJV, ect all make it a point to include some of the more problematic textual critism's just to let the reader know that this area does offer a problem.
Finally, I wish to point something further out. Even IF Julia was female, and even IF she was an apostle (this is right out as there were only 14 apostles period...but even if), that still does not mean that A) Julia had teaching authority over a man, or B) that Julia did anything remotely associtated with a "pastor" today. Paul several times in talking of the gifts of the Spirit, makes a difference between Apostle, and teacher/overseer/pastor/ect. Apostle is NOT equal to today's Pastors. If anything, church planter, but even then, as Apostles were called by Christ Jesus in person, nothing today ever will fit that mold.
Actually I have a Greek NT and a Hebrew OT, both with text critical apparatuses; some pages have 1/3 of the paged devoted to text critical notes, but some only have a small section near the bottom. It depends on the passage, and the number of manuscript variances.
I really do understand you perspective, and if you read my notes to you at the end of my post (a few posts back) I actually agree with some. My point is that that reasonable arguments can be made for both perspectives, and although I believe a complementary viewpoint is the correct one, I do respect some of the scholarship of those who disagree with my perspective.
The main point of my original post was that Marksman's claim that the grammar of that verse precludes the possibility that Junia was female was without merit, and by your statement " Even IF Julia was female, and even IF she was an apostle" I assume that you accept that point. My personal take on this verse is that Junia was probably female, but that egalitarians are reading far more into the term apostle than Paul ever intended. Although I am not sure what her role was, I do not believe it was that of one of the Apostles.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/6/2008 5:10:32 AM
|
|
|
TheosCentric
Posts: 1904
Joined: 2/26/2006
Status: offline
|
Question:
Why is there even a discussion going on about Junia? Has anyone even really looked at the passage in question?
(Rom 16:7 ESV) Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me.
1) Both of these were Paul's kinsmen, or cousins, as the Greek seems to indicate.
2) They were in prison with Paul.
3) They were well known to the apostles (note: it says "the apostles," but does not indicate they were apostles).
4) They were believers before Paul was.
Regardless of whether or not Junia was male or female, nothing indicates that he/she had any kind of office in the church to begin with, other than being associated with Paul by blood and prison. The matter should be closed.
We should be discussing the offices of deacon and elder in the church and whether or not women can serve in those positions. I say no, because I don't see any indication in scripture that they do/have serve(d) in those positions.
Have a nice day.
_____________________________
"Missions exists because worship doesn't." -- John Piper, Let the Nations be Glad
God at the Center - Latest post - John 3:16 conference?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/6/2008 9:53:36 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2829
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TheosCentric
Question:
Why is there even a discussion going on about Junia? Has anyone even really looked at the passage in question?
(Rom 16:7 ESV) Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me.
1) Both of these were Paul's kinsmen, or cousins, as the Greek seems to indicate.
2) They were in prison with Paul.
3) They were well known to the apostles (note: it says "the apostles," but does not indicate they were apostles).
4) They were believers before Paul was.
Regardless of whether or not Junia was male or female, nothing indicates that he/she had any kind of office in the church to begin with, other than being associated with Paul by blood and prison. The matter should be closed.
We should be discussing the offices of deacon and elder in the church and whether or not women can serve in those positions. I say no, because I don't see any indication in scripture that they do/have serve(d) in those positions.
Have a nice day.
This is a really good example of why it is important to check more than one version. The ESV is one of my favorite versions, but here they made a translation choice that is simply unsupported by the Greek. The argument for this translation is that the translators here are trying to convey what they believe Paul meant, but not what he said i.e. "dynamic equivalence". The problem with doing that in this verse is that there is quite a bit of disagreement among scholars about what Paul really meant, and this question should not be settled by the choice a translator makes. Interestingly enough, the NASB translators "solved" this same problem by taking the opposite tactic. They changed the name to Junias (making a female name into a male one). In other words, they decided that "Paul couldn't have meant that Junia was a "woman apostle" either, but they decided to make sure their translation indicated she was a man; they couldn't escape the fact that Greek indicated that Junia was "among the apostles", and not simply "known to them"
BTW - I happen to think that the possibility that Paul was trying to convey that Junia was "well known to the Apostles" is a good interpretive choice, but it is an interpretation and I believe strongly that it was a mistake for the translators produce a translation makes their interpretation the only possible choice. However, this is a mistake that almost all versions make at one point or another and the solution to identifying these kinds of inconsistencies is to check a number of different versions and (if possible) the original languages. When one version presents a translation that is different from all of the others it is often an indication of this kind of bias. An example of this same kind of bias displayed on the part of the NIV translators can be seen in Exodus 1. In that passage every version except the NIV describes the Israelites as becoming strong, powerful, and mighty as the basis for Pharaohs fear; however, the NIV simply describes them as numerous; the Hebrew text (as reflected in almost every other English translation) clearly describes the Israelites as powerful/mighty. When you are studying the bible you should always use more than one version.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/6/2008 10:40:26 AM
|
|
|
Marksman
Posts: 271
Joined: 6/7/2007
From: Drouin, Victoria, Australia
Status: offline
|
Exactly TheosCentric. That is the core of the issue but I have a feeling that benelchi wants to argue for argument sake.
Quite regardless as to whether he is a she or othewise, the scripture does not support female leadership of the local congregation and there is no indication of he/she being an apostle, end of story.
any other speculation is er, um, speculation.
_____________________________
God Bless America
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/6/2008 10:50:09 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2829
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Marksman
Exactly TheosCentric. That is the core of the issue but I have a feeling that benelchi wants to argue for argument sake.
Quite regardless as to whether he is a she or othewise, the scripture does not support female leadership of the local congregation and there is no indication of he/she being an apostle, end of story.
any other speculation is er, um, speculation.
Wow, what a change of position!
Just a few posts ago you told all of us that all 10 versions you checked said that Junia was a man, and now you are endorcing a translation that supports the idea that she was a woman!
I guess the issue for you is simply that you have decided there could not have been a "woman apostle" and any interpretation that precludes that possibility is fine with you; even if they are in stark contrast with one another.
< Message edited by benelchi -- 10/6/2008 1:58:14 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/7/2008 3:17:37 PM
|
|
|
Marksman
Posts: 271
Joined: 6/7/2007
From: Drouin, Victoria, Australia
Status: offline
|
quote:
Regardless of whether Junia was a man or not, Marksman's claim still remains entirely without merit.
That is just your opinion, which as we know is not always backed up by the word of God.
quote:
The main point of my original post was that Marksman's claim that the grammar of that verse precludes the possibility that Junia was female was without merit
That is just your opinion which we know is not always backed up by scripture.
quote:
Just a few posts ago you told all of us that all 10 versions you checked said that Junia was a man, and now you are endorcing a translation that supports the idea that she was a woman!
As I said, you seem to like argument for argument sake.
quote:
I guess the issue for you is simply that you have decided there could not have been a "woman apostle" and any interpretation that precludes that possibility is fine with you;
I guess you are wrong. I guess you have a reason why you want to defend women in leadership contrary to scripture. I guess that you prefer tradition to scripture. I guess everyone else is wrong if they disagree with you. But then, that is only a guess, just ike yours.
_____________________________
God Bless America
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/7/2008 3:23:36 PM
|
|
|
Qtman
Posts: 10086
Joined: 3/21/2006
From: Crimson Tide Country
Status: offline
|
Actually women in leadership positions is not contrary to scripture. There are several instances where women were in leadership positions oth in the OT and NT. I guess it would do no good to post references. It seems like there are some discussions that are not worth it.
_____________________________
Remember: God loves you and I'm trying!
~rogasinger4Him
Body Piercings
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/7/2008 4:01:27 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2829
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Marksman
quote:
Regardless of whether Junia was a man or not, Marksman's claim still remains entirely without merit.
That is just your opinion, which as we know is not always backed up by the word of God.
quote:
The main point of my original post was that Marksman's claim that the grammar of that verse precludes the possibility that Junia was female was without merit
That is just your opinion which we know is not always backed up by scripture.
quote:
Just a few posts ago you told all of us that all 10 versions you checked said that Junia was a man, and now you are endorcing a translation that supports the idea that she was a woman!
As I said, you seem to like argument for argument sake.
quote:
I guess the issue for you is simply that you have decided there could not have been a "woman apostle" and any interpretation that precludes that possibility is fine with you;
I guess you are wrong. I guess you have a reason why you want to defend women in leadership contrary to scripture. I guess that you prefer tradition to scripture. I guess everyone else is wrong if they disagree with you. But then, that is only a guess, just ike yours.
What is interesting is that I don't know of even one Greek scholar who would support the grammar claims you have made, even those who support the "traditional" view of women in ministry to an even greater extant than you do, do not support the grammar claims you have made about this passage.
However, without any support from any reputable sources, you declare that I am wrong because you say so. Like everything else you claim, I assume the proof is the the paper you are working on i.e. truths that no other scholar has yet stumbled upon.
So, I guess I must be wrong, because you say so!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/8/2008 5:45:59 PM
|
|
|
Lycea
Posts: 205
Joined: 6/18/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
Those of you who have been on for a long time know my position. But I will restate it for those newcomers, and because I don't think it has ever been discussed beyond my bringing it up.
There is more than one way to look at the scriptures in question. First of all, not every scripture being quoted to forbid women in ministry roles has anything to do with church leadership. Most are clearly referring to husband and wife roles, which are completely separate from men/women roles in the church. Even the one scripture most often seen as the "nail in the coffin" of women in ministry--the I Timothy passage could fall into this category.
The difficulty is that in the Greek there are no separate words for husband and wife. There is simply man and woman. The context must be used to determine whether the author is intending man or husband, woman or wife. I contend that in the I Timothy passage, where it says "I do not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man" is actually better read "I do not permit a wife to teach or have authority over her husband." I glean this from context. First of all Paul then moves on to talk about Adam and Eve, who most neglect to remember were not only a man and a woman, but husband and wife as well. Second, if Paul had intended to state "I do not permit a woman to have authority over men" why the consistent use of the singular? A wife over a husband makes more sense than a woman over a man.
Paul then moves on to talk about requirements for leadership roles within the church and gives instructions for men who are elders and deacons, and then I believe he gives instructions to women who are in leadership roles in the church as well. He does not set aside a different office, simply saying "the women likewise are to be..." Nowhere in scripture do you find the role of "deaconess" as a separate office with different/distinct duties from that of deacon.
I believe it is entirely possible for a woman to be submissive to her husband and hold a church leadership position.
_____________________________
It all boils down to this: Love God, Love Each Other.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/8/2008 7:47:42 PM
|
|
|
Stephanos
Posts: 1115
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in KC MO
Status: offline
|
Point of fact...Most of us complementarians do not believe that a woman can hold no possition or authority in a church at all. I for one believe that churches SHOULD have ladies serving as Pastor of Women's studies (or something worded like that). I have no problem with a lady serving as Music Minister. I have no problem with a lady being the Minister of Childrens Education. And frankly I right now am questioning wether or not a woman could even be say a Missions Minister.
However, if it truly is properly translated as a wife can not have teaching authority over her husband, then I guess He can not be in the sanctuary as she leads the sermons now. Right? If he is, and she is leading the congregation in teaching and authority, then does that not make her over him in this regard? Thus in violation of what Paul commands? Maybe you could have an argument with a single woman, but logicly a married woman is placed under the same restriction by your rendering as women in general are in the proper translation of the text.
Furthermore, you still have to get past the passages that talk about elders/overseers being "husband of one wife". And no, this is can in no way also refer to "wife of one husband" as some try to claim. "mias gunaikos andra" is quite clear. One wife (in the possession of the[aka genitive case]) husband (in the accusative case).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/8/2008 8:39:22 PM
|
|
|
Qtman
Posts: 10086
Joined: 3/21/2006
From: Crimson Tide Country
Status: offline
|
Maybe someone can explain this to me. I agree that women can hold leadership positions in church. I used to believe they could not be a Pastor or Deacon. However I am having second thoughts about that. I know what scripture says about "husband of one wife" and all but, I find that in Paul's writings he is always addressing a particular church and not necessarily the church as a whole. He seems to always be talking to a particular church about the problems of that church. How can we then expand his letters to include all of the church? Serious answers will be appreciated.
_____________________________
Remember: God loves you and I'm trying!
~rogasinger4Him
Body Piercings
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/8/2008 8:52:35 PM
|
|
|
Stephanos
Posts: 1115
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in KC MO
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Qtman
Maybe someone can explain this to me. I agree that women can hold leadership positions in church. I used to believe they could not be a Pastor or Deacon. However I am having second thoughts about that. I know what scripture says about "husband of one wife" and all but, I find that in Paul's writings he is always addressing a particular church and not necessarily the church as a whole. He seems to always be talking to a particular church about the problems of that church. How can we then expand his letters to include all of the church? Serious answers will be appreciated.
If Paul was writing JUST to a particular church, then nothing he said in ANY of his epistles can be applied to us right? As they ALL were directed towards people and churches not us. Also notice that Paul makes some mention in some fashion of women not teaching men in several places to several different people/churches. Corinthians, Timothy, Ephesians, Titus come to mind. Furthermore, the arguments Paul uses are based off of the OT, thus clearly these arguments are not culturally based, but fluid across multiple cultural lines ( unless you wish to argue that Patristic and Kingdom era Hebrew culture is very similar to Greek and Roman culture). Seeing as the people Paul wrote two were in different locations, and that all audiences had a mix of cultures in them (Greek/Roman, Hebrew/Aramaic, Creteian, ect) when he told them these rules, it continues to lay evidence that what Paul says is not limited to the "culture" at the time, but are general rules for the church as a whole, both then AND now.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/8/2008 8:54:37 PM
|
|
|
Roberta_
Posts: 6915
Joined: 9/28/2007
From: East Bay Area
Status: offline
|
Thank you Qtman and Stephanos for giving me food for thought and being so polite about it.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/8/2008 9:06:23 PM
|
|
|
Qtman
Posts: 10086
Joined: 3/21/2006
From: Crimson Tide Country
Status: offline
|
But that still does not explain Priscilla. She was instrumental in the founding of the church at Ephasus and even taught Apolos. And it seems funny that when referring to her and Aquila Priscilla's name is always first. This just don't happen in the Bible. Every time I can remember the husband's name comes first such as Adam and Eve etc. So Paul obviously thought highly of Priscilla and her knowledge and ability to teach both men and women.
_____________________________
Remember: God loves you and I'm trying!
~rogasinger4Him
Body Piercings
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 10/8/2008 9:07:24 PM
|
|
|
Qtman
Posts: 10086
Joined: 3/21/2006
From: Crimson Tide Country
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
Thank you Qtman and Stephanos for giving me food for thought and being so polite about it.
DenmDiva this is a subject I would not want to debate. Just maybe spark some thoughts on the matter.
_____________________________
Remember: God loves you and I'm trying!
~rogasinger4Him
Body Piercings
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
