It is currently Mon Jan 20, 2020 10:22 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1718 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 ... 82  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:08 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 4:23 am
Posts: 13770
Location: On the imaginary axis
the narrator wrote:
Sammy Jankins wrote:

By arguing that the language used in the Book of Mormon is not special you may succeed in delinking the Great War and the Book of Mormon, but you simultaneously destroy the supposed langauge evidences. All of the alleged hebrewims and other language evidences are now dead in the water. The metholodgy is now shown to incredibly flawed and prone to false positives. Where once the arguments were made for their rarity and uniqueness of the langauge of the Book of Mormon they must now be made to show how common it was as you have done above.
You might suceed in separating the Book of Mormon from the late war, but by doing so you will demonstrate the Book of Mormon is simply a product of its time.
So good luck!


And where have I said that supposed Hebraisms were evidence of ancient origins?

To the contrary, I would say that these stretched parallelisms between the BofM and LW are just as problematic as attempted parallelisms between the BofM and other ancient texts.


For me the parallelisms, if real, are interesting but not central.

What matters much more is the fact that in the decades before Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon, it was common practice to write pseudo-Biblical accounts of the past, real or imagined, using an imitation of Jacobean English.

_________________
Zadok:
I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:09 pm 
1st Quorum of Seventy
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:33 am
Posts: 734
Location: LaLa Land
Runtu wrote:
There's the rub. Most apologetic arguments work well enough in isolation from the rest of the text and other possibilities. When you put them in the larger context, they tend to fall apart.


Exactly. Apologetic arguments are about individual trees, never the forest.

It's as if, in apologetics, they give each problem a value of 1, and then multiply all the problems together, rather than add them. Thus, to the apologist, ten small problems (each with a value of 1) when multiplied, is still 1, thus still a small problem. In other words, 1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1 = 1.

So what's the big deal? So what if Joseph Smith didn't use the plates in translating? So what if there is language in the Book of Mormon that reflects Joseph Smiths environment rather than an ancient setting? So what if he tried to sell the copyright? So what if the there are problems with the witness statements? So what if there are similar witness statements to other works? So what if there is no DNA evidence? So what if the American Indians are not the literal or principal ancestors of the Lamanites? So what if there are themes, language, and story similarities to the Late War. So what if Joseph Smith heard the story of Lehi's Dream from his dad when he was young? In the apologist mind, all these problems multiply together to 1. So why worry about something so small?

Conversely, critics see each problem adding together (1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1=10) and collectively all these "small" problems add up to carry great weight.

_________________
There are some who call me...Tim.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:11 pm 
1st Quorum of Seventy
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:33 am
Posts: 734
Location: LaLa Land
ElGuapo wrote:
I certainly noticed your mention of this, Tim. It's an astounding correlation for sure, one of many laugh-out-loud revelations I've had reading this thread.


Thanks ElGuapo. I feel validated. All my efforts were worth it. Phew!

And welcome to MormonDiscussions.com!

_________________
There are some who call me...Tim.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:11 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 6753
Location: The Land of Lorn
Kishkumen wrote:
Bennett's article on Mitchill and Harris shows that Mitchill was, by 1816, promulgating a theory about climactic, ancient battles in New York that brought about the destruction of a great people. That is very interesting.

As for the connection between Harris and Mitchill, it would seem that another individual, perhaps Luther Bradish of Albany, New York, referred Harris to him, not that Joseph Smith sent him directly to Mitchill. Mitchill then referred Harris to Anthon.


Hey Kish,

I believe that Joseph sent him to Mitchill. I believe that Bradish was an afterthought by Harris. This book connection is fascinating, and helps to confirm a lot of things about why Jo sent Harris to Mitchill. (There is also the connection between Mitchill and the Detroit Manuscript). The first mention of Harris' visit to New York doesn't even mention Anthon, it features Mitchill, and this from the Palmyra Freeman from 1829:

So blindly enthusiastic was Harris, that he took some of the characters interpreted by Smith, and went in search of some one, besides the interpreter, who was learned enough to English them; but all to whom he applied (among the number was Professor Mitchell, of New York,) happened not to be possessed of sufficient knowledge to give satisfaction! Harris returned, and set Smith to work at interpreting the Bible.

Anthon wrote in 1841:

Many years ago, the precise date I do not now recollect, a plain looking countryman called upon me with a letter from Dr. Samuel L. Mitchell, requesting me to examine, and give my opinion upon, a certain paper, marked with various characters which the Doctor confessed he could not decypher, and which the bearer of the note was very anxious to have explained. A very brief examination of the paper convinced me that it was a mere hoax, and a very clumsy one too.

Harris, two years later, told Charles Butler (a lawyer he tried to borrow money from to finance the Book of Mormon) he visited Anthon, then Mitchill then Anthon again after Mitchill. I think that the purpose of Harris' trip was to visit Mitchill. He then was recommended to Bradish (who was on the way) and he recommended him to Anthon. Harris simply saw Anthon first. He then went to Mitchill, who was enthusiastic about what Harris showed him, and then Haris took that to Anthon who he visited a second time. (Who then possibly, tore up Mitchill's paper) and wrote his own that Harris did not keep, because it was critical of the whole story. I have this documented here. http://mormonitemusings.com/2013/09/22/ ... -new-york/

_________________
Riding on a speeding train; trapped inside a revolving door;
Lost in the riddle of a quatrain; Stuck in an elevator between floors.
One focal point in a random world can change your direction:
One step where events converge may alter your perception.


Last edited by grindael on Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:14 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:11 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2012 12:56 am
Posts: 1864
the narrator wrote:
And where have I said that supposed Hebraisms were evidence of ancient origins?

To the contrary, I would say that these stretched parallelisms between the BofM and LW are just as problematic as attempted parallelisms between the BofM and other ancient texts.


Terrific so we are on the same page. One of the precious few "evidences" for the Book of Mormon is ____.
Do any have any other pseudo-scholarship to prop up my sagging testimony of the Book of Mormon? How about you tell me that if I feel really good about it that means it's true.


Last edited by Sammy Jankins on Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:13 pm 
Stake High Council

Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 2:17 pm
Posts: 555
Back on topic...

I liked the graphic the author showed that had Alma as being the "hot spot". This is the kind of detail that I have hope will someday give us real information about how the Book of Mormon came about.

What I liked the most about the Jockers study was the detail about how they broke down things into war chapters and preachy chapters. And Spalding was the loudest voice in the war chapters and Rigdon was the loudest voice in the preachy chapters. Then we had a chapter or two attributed to Oliver Cowdery which fit the timeline of D&C 9. This is the kind of stuff that gets me excited.

I would like to see a breakdown of the Book of Mormon. For example:

1st Nephi, 2nd Nephi non-Isaiah chapters
Alma-Helaman war narrative
Sermon chapters: 2 Ne 9, end of 2nd Nephi, Mos 2-5, Alma 5,7,33,34,36,41 (just thinking off the top of my head), Ether 12, Mor 7-11

You get the idea. The Book of Mormon is a hodge podge of different stuff. So break it out into categories and then analyze each piece as if it were a distinct book. This will lead us closer to the answer, I believe.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:23 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 6753
Location: The Land of Lorn
Tobin wrote:
Now cries the critic, there were no Gold Plates!?! Well, that is the assumption they are operating under and it may not be true. If there are Gold Plates, all of these other notions are superfluous because of that.


The reality of Jo's having gold plates is the least likely scenario in all of this. Why? Because they were never produced for independent examination and were supposedly shown only to a group of men who were in toto superstitious, easily duped, later lied about almost every circumstance surrounding the supposed showing of the plates, and they were shown to them by a known con man.

_________________
Riding on a speeding train; trapped inside a revolving door;
Lost in the riddle of a quatrain; Stuck in an elevator between floors.
One focal point in a random world can change your direction:
One step where events converge may alter your perception.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:25 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 1774
Chris, Craig (Criddle) is offering to send you the texts for the Spalding attributed chapters of the Book of Mormon. You could then compare those chapters alone against the texts you believed influenced Mosiah and Alma. You really need to chat with Craig on this. He is contactable on Facebook.

_________________
"It's a little like the Confederate Constitution guaranteeing the freedom to own slaves. Irony doesn't exist for bigots or fanatics." Maksutov


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:26 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 6753
Location: The Land of Lorn
Here is a great example of one of the so called "witnesses" lying:

David Whitmer told this story that he told to Orson Pratt and Joseph F. Smith in 1878:

Joseph sent for me to come to Harmony to get him and Oliver and bring them to my father's house. I did not know what to do, I was pressed with my work. I had some 20 acres to plow, so I concluded I would finish plowing and then go. I got up one morning to go to work as usual and, on going to the field, found between five and seven acres of my ground had been plowed during the night. I don't know who did it; but it was done just as I would have done it myself, and the plow was left standing in the furrow.

Yet, Lucy Smith remembered the incident a little differently and wrote,

In the mean time Joseph was 150 miles distant and knew naught of the matter [A complaint by Lucy Harris against Joseph Smith to a Magistrate in Lyons, New York] e[x]cept an intimation that was given through the urim and thumim for as he one morning applied the<m> to his eyes to look upon the record instead of the words of the book being given him he was commanded to write a letter to one David Whitmore this man Joseph had never seen but he was instructed to say him that he must come with his team immediately in order to convey Joseph and his <Oliver > back to his house which was 135 miles that they might remain with him there untill the trans lation should be completed for that an evil designing people were seeking to take away Joseph’s life in order to prevent the work of God from going forth among the world This was accordingly done and the letter received and Mr Whitmore showed it to his Father mother sisters and brothers and asked their advice as to what it would be best for him to do his Father said why David know you have sow ed as much wheat as you can harrow in tomorrow and next day and then you have a quantity of plaster to spread that is much needed on your land and you cannot go unless you get an evidence from God that it is very necessary. This suggestion pleased David and he asked the Lord for a testimony of the fact if it was his will that he should go he was told by the voice of the spirit to (sow) <(har) inn his wheat> his wheat and then go straightway to Penn In the morning he went to the field and found that he had 2 heavy days work before him He then asked the lord to enable him to do this work sooner than the same work had ever been done on the farm before and he would receive it as an evidence that it was the will of God for him to engage in forwarding the work which was begun by Joseph Smith. he then fastened his horses to the harrow and drove round the whole field he continued on till noon driving all the way round at every circuit but when it came to be time to eat dinner he discov ered to his surprize that he had harrowed in full half the wheat. after dinner he again went on as before and by evening he finnished the whole 2 days work http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSumma ... 1845?p=100

I have many more such examples. It gives me no confidence that these men knew what the truth was, or saw what they said they did.

_________________
Riding on a speeding train; trapped inside a revolving door;
Lost in the riddle of a quatrain; Stuck in an elevator between floors.
One focal point in a random world can change your direction:
One step where events converge may alter your perception.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:28 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 6753
Location: The Land of Lorn
Mary... I love your avatar. :razz:

_________________
Riding on a speeding train; trapped inside a revolving door;
Lost in the riddle of a quatrain; Stuck in an elevator between floors.
One focal point in a random world can change your direction:
One step where events converge may alter your perception.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:42 pm 
Sunbeam

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013 10:00 pm
Posts: 67
Mary wrote:
Chris, Craig (Criddle) is offering to send you the texts for the Spalding attributed chapters of the Book of Mormon. You could then compare those chapters alone against the texts you believed influenced Mosiah and Alma. You really need to chat with Craig on this. He is contactable on Facebook.


Thanks, Mary. I've let Chris know about this and he will get in touch with Craig.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:00 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 8:26 pm
Posts: 3323
I've been watching these threads, biding my time. It has come, now that Wade has served up perhaps the most ridiculous turd of all:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/620 ... 1209311392

Any bets on whether he'll dare come over here and defend this? Jesus, what a ____ idiot.

_________________
"It doesn't seem fair, does it Norm--that I should have so much knowledge when there are people in the world that have to go to bed stupid every night." -- Clifford C. Clavin, USPS

"¡No contaban con mi astucia!" -- El Chapulin Colorado


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:08 pm 
First Presidency
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 11:59 pm
Posts: 810
Location: Autistic fact-checker downunder.
canadaduane wrote:
Mary wrote:
Chris, Craig (Criddle) is offering to send you the texts for the Spalding attributed chapters of the Book of Mormon. You could then compare those chapters alone against the texts you believed influenced Mosiah and Alma. You really need to chat with Craig on this. He is contactable on Facebook.


Thanks, Mary. I've let Chris know about this and he will get in touch with Craig.


This is so cool!

I can't imagine apologist defenders of the LGT collaborating with defenders of the Heartland model to put data to the test which potentially could damage a model they have been working on for years.

one thing that needs to happen is outlining the hypotheses before testing - specifying in advance what different results will mean and detailing what results might falsify the Gold Bible Company model.

For example, under the Gold Bible Company model, Rigdon and Pratt were working at a separate location to Smith and Cowdery - if it is assumed that one pair or one author were influenced by LW, then we should see less similarity with work from the other location.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:08 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm
Posts: 8231
Location: What does the fox say?
Wow.

Just wow.

Wade is a genius of literary criticism. All similarities have been thoroughly trounced as there is not a 1:1 alignment of verses.

_________________
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:10 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 8:53 pm
Posts: 3832
Bob Loblaw wrote:
I've been watching these threads, biding my time. It has come, now that Wade has served up perhaps the most ridiculous turd of all:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/620 ... 1209311392

Any bets on whether he'll dare come over here and defend this? Jesus, what a f*****g idiot.


Bob,

I think you were being overly generous when you described Wade's post as a "turd".

Does Wade realize how ridiculous his post is? How does his post help address the issues? It's beyond stupid. It worries me if this is the kind of dookey we can expect as a response.

_________________
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."

Daniel C. Peterson, 2014


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:13 pm 
Stake President
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 4:45 pm
Posts: 597
Tobin wrote:
cognitiveharmony wrote:

Oops..I forgot, the Book of Mormon shoudn't be analyzed in any way unless the result is faith promoting... :rolleyes:

In other words, I shouldn't expect the dates in a historical book to be random as they are in LW....Oh I get it, so maybe this analysis is actually suggesting that the LW is fictional and the Book of Mormon is actually historical...thanks for pointing that out.
Condescension isn't going to address the problems I noticed. If that is the best response you can muster, it is no wonder you championed such shoddy work in this thread.


They use many examples of events that can be expected to be random such as birthdays, deaths, historical events etc. They then proceed to analyze the Book of Mormon with the same expectation of randomness. This is a reasonable and rational expectation. There is no demonstrable reason for us not to expect the dates in the Book of Mormon to be random if it is in fact a historical text. The analysis simply proves that the chance of the dates in the Book of Mormon being actually random rather than made up is 1 in 2000. I would now ask you to either acknowledge this fact or present an argument that at least challenges the actual premise of the analysis.

Just a hint for you. What makes a birthday and a historical event in this context both apples, is the expectation of randomness. That's why it was such a good example in the analysis.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:18 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 4:23 am
Posts: 13770
Location: On the imaginary axis
Then we have, just after Wade:

Maklekan wrote:
What I think this book can show us is the KJV-influenced vernacular that had currency during Smith's day. A lot of the terminology shared by both books can be found in other publications from the same time period, although this book appears to have the highest concentration of non-KJV linguistic overlap. The Late War very well may have been read by Smith and/or Cowdery growing up (it became marketed as a textbook for children), or even around the time of the rendering of the Book of Mormon. They may have even made a conscious decision to pattern the flavor of the Book of Mormon language after this book. At this point, however, I don't see the relationship being much deeper than that.

What are the implications of this conclusion? It means, in my opinion, that the theory that the Book of Mormon was revealed letter-by-letter to Joseph Smith is significantly undermined, unless, of course, one wants to assert a very, very tight brand of accommodationism (God so adapted the language of his revelation to Smith's own culture, worldview, and personal lenses that he exactly mimicked the very kinds of phraseology he would have come up with). That begs the question in my opinion.


Um ... all those early witnesses who said that the translation was delivered word by word? (As recounted by an apostle in the Ensign too). How were they 'undermined'?

We wouldn't like to have to admit that a bunch of people so close to Joseph Smith were incapable of bearing witness on a matter intimately connected with the Book of Mormon, now would we?

I continue to be amazed by the evidence that Mormons feel that there is something special in the ability to write in fake KJV English, in a 'biblical' style. Anyone brought up in a church where the KJV is frequently read could do that to some degree or other, with all the 'Hebraisms' you might want.

Sometimes I wonder whether Mormons read the Bible much.

_________________
Zadok:
I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:22 pm 
Stake High Council

Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 2:17 pm
Posts: 555
cognitiveharmony wrote:
Tobin wrote:

They use many examples of events that can be expected to be random such as birthdays, deaths, historical events etc. They then proceed to analyze the Book of Mormon with the same expectation of randomness. This is a reasonable and rational expectation. There is no demonstrable reason for us not to expect the dates in the Book of Mormon to be random if it is in fact a historical text. The analysis simply proves that the chance of the dates in the Book of Mormon being actually random rather than made up is 1 in 2000. I would now ask you to either acknowledge this fact or present an argument that at least challenges the actual premise of the analysis.

Just a hint for you. What makes a birthday and a historical event in this context both apples, is the expectation of randomness. That's why it was such a good example in the analysis.


What's the example of the date that occurred on the first month, first day?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:36 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 9:49 am
Posts: 8738
Location: Somewhere between bemused and curious.
Chap wrote:
Um ... all those early witnesses who said that the translation was delivered word by word? (As recounted by an apostle in the Ensign too). How were they 'undermined'?

We wouldn't like to have to admit that a bunch of people so close to Joseph Smith were incapable of bearing witness on a matter intimately connected with the Book of Mormon, now would we?

I continue to be amazed by the evidence that Mormons feel that there is something special in the ability to write in fake KJV English, in a 'biblical' style. Anyone brought up in a church where the KJV is frequently read could do that to some degree or other, with all the 'Hebraisms' you might want.

Sometimes I wonder whether Mormons read the Bible much.


How many of those witnesses to the translation were also part of the 11 witnesses? O.C. and some of the Whitmers too?

_________________
“The dark skin was placed upon the Lamanites so that they could be distinguished from Nephites and to keep the two peoples from mixing. The dark skin was the sign of the curse. The curse was the withdrawal of the Spirit of the Lord. Dark skin is no longer to be considered a sign of the curse”
LDS Church "Come Follow Me" manual in 2020, print version.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:36 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 1:48 pm
Posts: 2026
Darth J wrote:
So what does the cognate accusative look like?


Ch. VIII, pp. 50

21. And the great Sanhedrim honored Isaac with great honor, [...]


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:38 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm
Posts: 16721
Location: Northern Utah
Fence Sitter wrote:
How many of those witnesses to the translation were also part of the 11 witnesses? O.C. and some of the Whitmers too?


There's an out: Joseph Smith never directly said how the translation was done. We have only secondhand testimony.

Today's quiz: which of the 8 witnesses were not part of the Whitmer or Smith families?

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1718 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 ... 82  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: consiglieri, Meadowchik and 30 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group