Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Verse omission on Mark 9:43-48
#1
The Peshitta, TR and the Majority Text have "where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched" for Mark 9:44 and Mark 9:46.

The Minority text / Eclectic Text omits Mark 9:44 and Mark 9:46.

Why would a Greek scribe omit those two verses? It does not make sense.

Any speculation?
Reply
#2
Not sure about scribes motives back in those days, but the modern scribes, who edit various English (ESV, NIV) versions of the Bible, don't seem to think it was spoken by Jesus in those two verses, and a number of other verses...because they don't find them in the 4th century Greek "Alexandrian" MSS of the NT....But they should tell that to the Christians who lived in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd centuries, long before those earliest Greek copies (4th century, that is shown to lack those verses) could be read...The Christians before that time, who had these words recorded as the words of Jesus in their Bible, knew well that they were the word of God.

If they could go back in time and try to erase those verses/words out of those Christian's Bibles...I don't think it would go over too good for them.

Mark 9:44 ?Where their worm does not die and their fire is not quenched.?- It is witnessed in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.) it was in Ireneaus? Bible (180 A.D.) as quoted in his book ?Against Heresies? Book II: 32

Mark 9:46 ?Where their worm does not die and their fire is not quenched.?- It is witnessed in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), and Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.)

I have done some research on the various omitted verses in the modern English versions, and have found that but for one verse, they all date earlier than the earliest Greek text that lacks them, showing that they were part of Christian's Bibles in the 1st-3rd centuries. If you want to know about other verses, I can share what I have found.

Shlama,
Chuck
Reply
#3
Yes, please share what you know about the other verses.

(And a side note: I doubt Tatian wrote "Diatessaron", source -- go to "Diatessaron Wiki" for more information.)

And other question, any possibilities why does Galations 5:1 in "Alexandrian" text reads different from Peshitta? Unless the Aramaic text was mistranslated somehow...

Quote:"For freedom did Christ set us free: stand fast therefore, and be not entangled again in a yoke of bondage." (ASV) {"Alexandrian"}

"Stand firm therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and don?t be entangled again with a yoke of bondage. (WEB) {Majority Text and Peshitta}
Reply
#4
:

Tatian did make the Gospel Harmony called "Diatessaron" about the year 160 A.D. This is well attested, both by the ancients and the moderns. Some people today doubt that Jesus was a real person too...Does their doubt make it so? No.

And the verse in Galatians is the same. But for the order of the sentance, the message is the same in both. This seems to me to be a case of translational style, where the Majority text gives a more literal rendering, sticking to the word order of the Original text, and the Minority text going with a more dynamic equivalence type of rendering...saying the same thing, but in another way. The Message matches either way.

Shlama,
Chuck
Reply
#5
:

Ok...this is a good mystery here. Gal 5:1 does not read this way --> "Stand firm therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and don?t be entangled again with a yoke of bondage." in any Greek text that I have seen. Where did the KJV translators get this reading? They normally stick with word order with their translating work...but here, the source texts that they had in Greek, do not read this way...but rather as what is found in the modern translations.

I would show the Greek texts here, but any time I try to put anything other than English in this forum, it wont take.

I was told once that the KJV did not have the Aramaic text to look at when they did their translation work...but so far, it is the only text that I can see that has the reading as they have translated it.

I'm scratching my head here...the Majority Greek Text is the same as the Alexandrian text type, neither having the same reading as the KJV and Peshitta share in common...

All these texts below have the very same reading: ---> "For freedom did Christ set us free: stand fast therefore, and be not entangled again in a yoke of bondage."

Greek NT: Westcott/Hort (1881)
Greek NT: Greek Orthodox Church (official text)
Greek NT: Stephanus Textus Receptus (1550)
Greek NT: Byzantine/Majority Text (2000)
Greek NT: Textus Receptus (1894)

So, where did the KJV translators get their reading from, if not from the Peshitta?

Shlama,
Chuck
Reply
#6
(1) And may you please mention all the Critical Text verse omissions - about the ones disputed by Peshitta? -- For you offered to share them.

And (2)- heads up, there is an omission of "fasting" in the "Alexandrian" text.

Matthew 7:21 and Mark 9:29 have the omission too. Mark 9:29 only omits fasting, but Matthew 7:21 is gone. 1 Cor. 7:5 has this too. This occurs in comparison of Peshitto to Critical Text.



Were there sects in Greek Christianity that removed fasting from their spiritual lives?
I am puzzled by the Critical Text!
Reply
#7
Here is a list I am working on...

The following passages and whole verses are missing in their entirety in some of the modern English versions of the Greek New Testament, which are based upon "The Critical Text", while in the older English versions, which are based upon the "The Majority Text" and or "The Textus Receptus" they are present. Some of these verses are not in the Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? New Testament, but are found in the Western Syriac Peshitto version, which conforms with the Greek New Testament, sometimes against the Eastern Aramaic "Peshitta" New Testament.

Ancient witness that I have personally checked against these verses are shown after the quotation of the missing text in the modern versions, showing were they have been seen throughout the New Testament's history.

Note: I am not finished checking this list for ancient witnesses, but this will get you started for now. I'll update the list as I find more along the way.

1: Matthew 12:47 ?Someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.? It's in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), It is in the Greek Majority Text, Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.) it is in Archelaus? book ?Disputations with Manes? (277 A.D.) and in Jerome?s Latin ?Vulgate? Bible (385 A.D.)

2: Matthew 17:21 ?But this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting.? It?s in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), It?s in the Greek Majority Text, Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.) Tertullian?s Bible (190 A.D.), Origen?s Bible (240 A.D.), Jerome?s Latin ?Vulgate? Bible 385 A.D.)

3: Matthew 18:11 ?For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.? It?s in the Greek Majority Text and is in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), The Old Latin ?Vulgate? Bible (c. 90-150 AD), Tertullian?s Bible (2nd century), Ambrose?s Bible (4th century), and Augustine?s Bible (5th century), The Ancient Coptic Bible (5th century), The Armenian Bible, The Ethiopic Bible, The Georgian Bible, and The Slavonic Versions of The Bible.

4: Matthew 23:14 ?Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you devour widows' houses, and for a pretense you make long prayers; therefore you will receive greater condemnation.? ? It?s in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.)

5: Matthew 27:35 (b) ? [Only the second half is omitted in the Peshitta New Testament]
(Peshitta) -"And when they had crucified Him, they divided His clothes by casting lots."[that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, ?They parted My garments among them, and upon My vesture did they cast lots.?]"

6: Mark 7:16 ?If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.?- It?s in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.)

7: Mark 9:44 ?Where their worm does not die and their fire is not quenched.?- It?s in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.) it was in Ireneaus? Bible (180 A.D.) as quoted in ?Against Heresies? Book II: 32

8: Mark 9:46 ?Where their worm does not die and their fire is not quenched.?- It?s in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.)

9: Mark 11:26 ?But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.?- It?s in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.)

10: Mark 15:28 ?And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "And He was numbered with transgressors."? ? It?s in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.) The verse is translated in the KJV, NKJV, and NASB.

11: Luke 9:55-56 Partially omitted in text in brackets: (?And he turned and he rebuked them) and he said, ?you do not know of which spirit you are. For the Son of Man has not come to destroy lives but to give life.? (And they went to other villages.?) ? It?s in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.) Jerome?s Latin Vulgate Bible (385 A.D.) Verse 56 was in Cyprian?s Bible (200-258 A.D.)

12: Luke 17:36 ?Two will be in the field; one will be taken and the other will be left.? ? It?s in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.)

13: Luke 22:17-18 (Not in the Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? New Testament) ["And He took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, ? Take this, and divide [it] among yourselves: For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.? "]

14: Luke 23:17 ?Now he was obligated to release someone for them at the festival.? ? It?s in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century),

15: John 5:4 ?for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool and stirred up the water; whoever then first, after the stirring up of the water, stepped in, was made well from whatever disease with which he was afflicted.? ? It?s in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.) Tertullian?s Bible (190 A.D)

16: John 7:53 (Not in the Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? New Testament) ["And every man went unto his own house."]

17: John 8: 1-11 (Not in the Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? New Testament)

18: Acts 8:37 ?And Philip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." ? It?s not in the Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? New Testament (1st Century). It?s in the Old Latin (157 A.D.), Ireneaus? Bible (185 A.D.), Cyprian?s Bible (250 A.D.), Pontius? Bible (270 A.D.), and the Western Syriac ?Peshitto? Bible (5th century).

19: Acts 15:34 ?But it seemed good to Silas to remain there.? ? It?s not in the Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? New Testament (1st century), or in the Alexandrian Greek text (4th century), the Arabic, or the Coptic versions; but is in the Western Syriac ?Peshitto? Bible (5th century), the Latin ?Vulgate? Bible reads, "It seemed good to Silas to remain, but Judas went alone to Jerusalem."

20: Acts 24:7 ?But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands,? ? It?s in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), and in the Western Syriac ?Peshitto? Bible (5th century)

21: Acts 28:29 ?When he had spoken these words, the Jews departed, having a great dispute among themselves.? ? It?s not in the Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? New Testament. It?s in Jerome?s Latin ?Vulgate? Bible (385 A.D.) It?s in the Western Syriac ?Peshitto? Bible (5th century); it?s in the Majority of Greek Manuscripts.

22: Romans 16:24 ?The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.? The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century) and Western Syriac ?Peshitto? version (5th century) both have this verse at the end of the chapter.

23: 1st John 5:7 ?For there are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit: and these three are one.? ? It?s not in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), and there is no ancient Greek Manuscript Support for this verse, it?s not quoted by any Greek, Latin, or Syriac Church fathers, is not in the Western Syriac ?Peshitto? version (5th century) and not in Jerome?s Latin ?Vulgate? translation (385 A.D.) It is not in the ancient Bible versions of the Coptic, Armenian, Slavonic, Ethiopic, or Arabic New Testament.


Shlama,
Chuck
Reply
#8
Thirdwoe Wrote:10: Mark 15:28 Omitted in the ESV & NIV text: -> ?And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "And He was numbered with transgressors."? ? It?s in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.) The verse is translated in the KJV, NKJV, NASB, and even in the NIV.

Hey Chuck, the copy of the NIV I have does not have this saying, as you noted in the beginning of your quote, but then you turn a 180% and lay claim that it is in the NIV (?) <!-- s:eh: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/eh.gif" alt=":eh:" title="Eh" /><!-- s:eh: -->


Any way not to pick apart your work (as I see you are doing a good work) but to try and share advise to make it better, I would encourage you to instead of giving the ESV as the text that omitted the verse it would be better if you gave the ancient texts in which do not have it, alone, (such as Sinaticus, Vanaticus, Alexandrian, Western PeshittO, etc.....).

Also if the Eastern PeshittA does not have a verse but if Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.), Archelaus? book ?Disputations with Manes? (277 A.D.), etc (in which you normally use, when ever possible, to show support for the PeshittA) had it it would be good to mention this as well.

The soul purpose should be to objectively show whether there is Ancient Textural support for the verses or not from ancient text alone (no matter which way the evidence slants), not whether an English translation/version decided to include or exclude the verses. As it really does not matter which English translations/versions have or do not have what. English is good for many today as they may only understand English (such as me) but again we can hunt through the English translations/versions to see which ones have or have not the verses, but if we do not have an objective veiw of the ancient text it still leaves the out come more so upon speculation, as compared to facts.

So again just because a source does not have a verse that the Eastern PeshittA has is not a good reason to not mention the source is lacking it, when you do so against the Alexandrian text type.

Be fully objective please as you keep up this good work, awmain. Once the evidence is fully established then one can wade through all the English translations/versions to decide which ones are best for studying the truth. But as I said before if the dissertation of evidence is slanted by way of incompleteness, one way or the other, then we will not be able to truly make any intelligent decision as to which of the English translations/versions we should hold dear and which ones we should discard. It is a given that the KJV is not the best it could be, but again without complete evidence on this particular subject of which verse should or should not be in a translation we will still be at a lost as to what is what if evidence is purposely left out (in one direction or another). So if you use an ancient source once to support or not support one verse from then on you should continue mentioning whether or not that source has or does not have the other verses as well. This is the only way help your students when criticing their English translations/versions to be fully objective in the long run. As this should be the goal. You have the knoledge and sources to to achieve that which many of us do not and or can not.

Sincerely, one student looking for the whole truth,
will

P.S. - Thank you for all you have done!

.
Reply
#9
Thanks for the correction Will, it was fixed above.

The reason I'm doing it this way right now, is for some people I know who think that the ESV, NASB, and NIV (Modern English translations from the critical Greek text) believe, and have been lead to believe that their English translations reflect the oldest and best readings, and that the missing verses were not really part of the NT from the start. They even honor if above any source text that you show them, sort of like the KJV only guys. But I wanted to give the witnesses anyway, so that they might consider them.

So I've been going through and searching for the witnesses to them, were I can find them and it's tedious. <!-- sWink --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /><!-- sWink -->

But, I understand what you say there and if you are led to, feel free to use anything I have shown here to compile a list along those lines. I think it would be a good resource. I don't think I could find the time to make a thorough analysis of all the variants, but you might.

Sinaiticus and Vaticanus do not agree with themselves over 3,000 times, just in the 4 Gospels alone...

Shlama,
Chuck
Reply
#10
Shlama Khulkon:
The origin of the phrase, ?Where their worm does not die and their fire is not quenched.?- is found in Isaiah 66:24. They are also in the New Testament Peshitta. All too often there are those that do not take a moment to check if indeed their origin is in the TaNaK (Old Testament. Christianity is splintered partially because they do not seek to verify the Words of Yeshua as to their origin. Another example of is the command (second greatest) "love your neighbour as yourself". The full context of this saying is found in Leviticus 19:9-18. When Yeshua quoted from the TaNaK he chose a short, potent portion and left the rest to us to partake of the search by opening our ears and our eyes. The Tri-Annual reading of the Parsha in the Synagogue, in His day allowed the people to take part in the reading of the scriptures and various topics were discussed in the Midrash on Shabbat. Along came Yeshua and confirmed the Words of the TaNaK.
Therefore, seeing that in the Peshitta Yeshua quotes these partial portions it is up to the onus is on the seeker of truth to find the origin and read it within the context in which it was originally intended,as Moses our Teacher wrote it by dictation from YHVH. This sheds light on the quotation, where guessing and speculation fail miserably. I hope this may help someone pondering these things and seeking the Truth of the Scriptures.

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->
Reply
#11
Thirdwoe Wrote:But, I understand what you say there and if you are led to, feel free to use anything I have shown here to compile a list along those lines. I think it would be a good resource. I don't think I could find the time to make a thorough analysis of all the variants, but you might.

Sinaiticus and Vaticanus do not agree with themselves over 3,000 times, just in the 4 Gospels alone...

Shlama,
Chuck
Chuck, Hebrew and Aramaic are both, if I may say, Greek to me. I could not verify any of the list you made within any foreign language. I can how ever read your English essay and double check the English translations and version to see what they did or did not do. The list you have made of missing verses should be suffice, as for the variants are far to numerous. But with what you are doing we English only people will be able to see, according to the evidence, whether or not we should change translations (depending on which one we have).

As for passing on your work I would be glad to share it with others but again I could not help in completing it unless we find some ancient English text lying around some where (LOL). If it was not for the SPELL CHECKER I do not think you could translate my writings into English. I have had 20 to 30 or so red lines struin about this reply alone!!!

But really if you want your essay to be useful you should post the ancient text that have or do not have as opposed to the ESV and other English translations/versions. The ESV lovers instead of thinking you have shown where the ESV translator used the wrong text to translate from will just think you have slanted the evidence against their beloved ESV, which will harden their hearts even more to hearing anything else upon the matter. Personally I can make arguments for or against something and make them sound pretty good until another comes and fills in the missing pieces that I have to leave out in order to make it seem one way or the other. But if all the truth be know all will/should be able to make an intelligible decision based upon the evidence of the ancient text.

As I said before, the current English translations provide no evidence one way or the other as to determining whether a verse should or should not be in the Scriptures. This can only be shown from the evidence of ancient text alone. So until you mention the opposing ancient text in your essay it is basically useless. I mean you clearly show that the ESV does not keep in line with the PeshittA but you do not show the ancient text they came from, or whether the majority of ancient text lend weight in all particular instances. And when you use a text to back up the PeshittA in one instance and then not in the next five instances it makes it look as if they bare in line with the underlying text of the ESV, which gives it credence five times that of the PeshittA. If you only post the Ancient text for and against not only will the ESV people see that their text went wrong but the KJV people can also see where the underlying text of their translation went wrong as well.

for example
Thirdwoe Wrote:1: Matthew 12:47 Omitted in the ESV text: -> ?Someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.? It is in the Greek Majority Text. The verse is translated in the KJV, NKJV, NASB, and even in the NIV, and is in The Eastern Aramaic ?Peshitta? Bible (1st century), Tatian?s ?Diatessaron? Gospel Harmony (160 A.D.) it is in Archelaus? book ?Disputations with Manes? (277 A.D.) and in Jerome?s Latin ?Vulgate? Bible (385 A.D.)
The mention of these English translations/version lend no credence one way or the other and are basically muddying the water in a way. The issue should not be the ESV but it's underlying texts it was translated from. And are there any other ancient text that give weight to its readings as opposed to opposed.

So as for now it would do me no good (being I have not the ability to fix it) to share this with other as the people I try and share things with will see that this is an attack on the ESV and not an objective essay that they can gain knowledge to base an intelligent decision. Again I am not trying to shoot your essay down, I am trying to encourage you to make it bullet proof. You would not have to add any more verse just present fully both sides of what you have. And you do not need to post evey Greek text but if you use one once for haves then when it has not you should post it on the other side as well. As far as Senaticus and Vanaticus I do not know if they were actually the underlying text for the ESV or not, I just used them as an example thinking I may, in my illiterate state, have found an acorn so to speak. I come up with far more fools acorns than I get real ones. So please bare with ,me as I barely graduated high school by telling them if they did not pass me I would be back next year in a facetious manner. You could say I was telling them that I would seriously show up again in a manner not befitting the attitude in which they would hope. So I was given a Diploma. I do not even know what I did with it so I can not prove I got one at that. Oh well I never found use for it any way.

Personally, I have stopped using all translations or versions from the Greek. I only use English translations of the Aramaic and try to only use the ones based from the Eastern PeshittA at that. But as you should know at the moment there is no full RC/NT of the Eastern PeshittA as of yet. There is one in the making and another in the planing stage but none complete yet. I do have every thing past the Boo of Acts in an English translation and also use Paul Younan's English only translation along with his Interlinear. That just leave the second half of the Book of Acts for me to have to use either the Greek or the Western PeshittO for.
Reply
#12
Will, I've modified the list's wording...read it again and see if you feel this is a better approach and might be more useful in getting the point across.

Shlama,
Chuck
Reply
#13
Thirdwoe, for Luke 9:55-56 -- it should say with a lower case s: ' But he turned and rebuked them, ?You don?t know of what kind of spirit you are. For the Son of Man didn?t come to destroy men?s lives, but to save them. (WEB)?

And thank you Thirdwoe for all this info, it really helps.

If you have other verses from rest of NT, please post.
Reply
#14
Fixed...glad to help.

Peace,
Chuck
Reply
#15
Thirdwoe Wrote:Will, I've modified the list's wording...read it again and see if you feel this is a better approach and might be more useful in getting the point across.

Shlama,
Chuck

Hey Chuck, to me this approach is far better as it puts fourth information whereby leaving the readers to wonder why their Bible does not have verses that are attested to by the most ancient witnesses. Which should/would/will, if their hearts are receptive, cause them to inquire further into the matter of textural criticism. Eventually leading them to the Eastern PeshittA, awmain.

And now even though you are still out to educate people to the fact that these verse should be in their Bibles they will not be able to accuse you of having a bias toward any thing other than telling the truth. I think that by the time you spiffy this composition up it not only will be bullet proof but a powerful witness towards leading people toward facts, that which none can deny, or at lest not with any reasonable/sensible/sane/logical/rational excuse that is.

<!-- s:eh: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/eh.gif" alt=":eh:" title="Eh" /><!-- s:eh: --> on the note of spiffing things up - in #23 where you have "is not [in] the Western Syriac ?Peshitto? Bible (5th century)" is missing the "in" as you see here.

I gladly second the motion of well done. Yes thank you for this very informative essay. It saddens me that I have not the education to help you build this work, but all the same I will be more than elated in helping to distribute this <!-- s:bomb: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/bomb.gif" alt=":bomb:" title="The Bomb" /><!-- s:bomb: --> -shell of information to as many people as I possibly can in order to assist in the endeavor of educating the masses as to the FACT that their Bibles should contain many of these verses while leaving out the others, as shown clearly within the structure of your document.

I can see it now - the theory that the RC/NT Scriptures where first penned in Greek will soon be doomed to no end <!-- sCool --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/cool1.gif" alt="Cool" title="Cool" /><!-- sCool --> !

<!-- s:onfire: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/onfire.gif" alt=":onfire:" title="On Fire" /><!-- s:onfire: --> The PehittA Rocks <!-- s:bigups: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/bigups.gif" alt=":bigups:" title="Big Ups" /><!-- s:bigups: --> !!!

Your Brother in Yehoshuah The Anointed One.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)