It is currently Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:03 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 185 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 9  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:29 am 
Bishop
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 2:05 pm
Posts: 484
Quote:
Of course I know who said it, Tal. I would be interested to know what you understand the "true and living Church" to be. We would need to define the terms before moving on in this direction.


---Actually, the phrase is: "The only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth".

By the way, if you really think that phrase allows for non-exclusive authority claims, then...there is no point in me discussing this with you. Why don't you convince me otherwise by telling ME what "what you understand" that phrase to mean? And after that, you can try telling me what you think Hinckley's baldly black-and-white statement "really" means.

I await your answers...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:41 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:25 pm
Posts: 4947
Moniker wrote:
What is up with the mention of ad homs all the time? Sheesh, let's just insult people if we may and move on with it. I see that at MAD now, a lot, too. Good grief, the mentioning of the ad homs is more annoying then the ad homs themselves.

Wade, if your intent is to clarify how come I rarely can converse with you without a misunderstanding? :)


Regardless of how adept one may be at clarifying (I don't know that I am all that skilled), that because of peoples' diverse fields of experience and differing world views, it may often take many steps and attempts and much effort to scale the, at times, mountain of faulty perceptions. ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 12:21 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:50 am
Posts: 2799
Tal Bachman wrote:
Quote:
Of course I know who said it, Tal. I would be interested to know what you understand the "true and living Church" to be. We would need to define the terms before moving on in this direction.


---Actually, the phrase is: "The only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth".

By the way, if you really think that phrase allows for non-exclusive authority claims, then...there is no point in me discussing this with you.


As soon as I ask for a definition of terms you point out that there is "no point" in discussing it further?

Quote:
Why don't you convince me otherwise by telling ME what "what you understand" that phrase to mean?


I'd be glad to discuss it. I'd prefer, however, to have you answer my question first. I know it seems lame to say but "I asked you first." I'm disappointed that I even have to point that out.

Quote:
And after that, you can try telling me what you think Hinckley's baldly black-and-white statement "really" means.

I await your answers...


I don't see a problem with some absolutes, that hasn't been my contention. My contention is over what, where or how those absolutes are described or understood. This is one reason why I am asking you to define the terms. I await your explanation of what the "only true and living Church upon the face of the whole earth" statement indicates.

I see you await my answers, but I have been "awaiting" longer, and still await.

_________________
One moment in annihilation's waste,
one moment, of the well of life to taste-
The stars are setting and the caravan
starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste!

-Omar Khayaam

*Be on the lookout for the forthcoming album from Jiminy Finn and the Moneydiggers.*


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 1:23 pm 
Bishop
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 2:05 pm
Posts: 484
Quote:
I await your explanation of what the "only true and living Church upon the face of the whole earth" statement indicates.


----What is up with you guys? Could Mormonism's exclusive authority claims be any clearer?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 2:18 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:50 am
Posts: 2799
Tal Bachman wrote:
Quote:
I await your explanation of what the "only true and living Church upon the face of the whole earth" statement indicates.


----What is up with you guys? Could Mormonism's exclusive authority claims be any clearer?


Are you saying the "only true and living Church" statement consists of the claim exclusive divine of authority?

_________________
One moment in annihilation's waste,
one moment, of the well of life to taste-
The stars are setting and the caravan
starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste!

-Omar Khayaam

*Be on the lookout for the forthcoming album from Jiminy Finn and the Moneydiggers.*


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 5:58 pm 
Bishop
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 2:05 pm
Posts: 484
Quote:
Are you saying the "only true and living Church" statement consists of the claim exclusive divine of authority?


---I don't know if that was a typo, or you actually meant to write the words "the claim exclusive divine of authority". I don't know what that might mean...

If by that phrase, you meant to say that the church claims exclusive divine authority, of course it does, if words have any meaning.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 6:26 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:50 am
Posts: 2799
Tal Bachman wrote:
Quote:
Are you saying the "only true and living Church" statement consists of the claim exclusive divine of authority?


---I don't know if that was a typo, or you actually meant to write the words "the claim exclusive divine of authority". I don't know what that might mean...

If by that phrase, you meant to say that the church claims exclusive divine authority, of course it does, if words have any meaning.


I'll fix my comment to reflect my question again, as I clearly blew it last time.

Are you saying the "only true and living Church" statement consists only of the claim to exclusive divine authority?

_________________
One moment in annihilation's waste,
one moment, of the well of life to taste-
The stars are setting and the caravan
starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste!

-Omar Khayaam

*Be on the lookout for the forthcoming album from Jiminy Finn and the Moneydiggers.*


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 6:42 pm 
Bishop
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 2:05 pm
Posts: 484
Life

I think that that particular quote reflects the Mormon belief that it and it alone possesses divine authority to officiate in God's name and receive revelations from God for the whole world. If you've got some differing interpretation a la BCSpace with the First Presidency evolution statement, I'd be interested in hearing it out of interest in human psychology.

Now that I've answered your question, why don't you answer a question for me:

If Joseph Smith didn't tell the truth and his church was a fraud, would you want to know? Even considering it might rock your marriage (if you're married), destroy your friendships, your identity, etc....would you want to know? Yes or no? Why or why not?


Last edited by Tal Bachman on Mon Apr 07, 2008 6:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 6:46 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 14216
I haven't read all the replies, but have been meaning to add a comment since this thread started. Mormon apologists are a classic example of what Shermer discusses in his book, Why People Believe Weird Things. In particular, smart people believe weird things for nonsmart reasons, but then apply their "smart skills" to defending the weird thing. Men in particular are more prone to this than woman, according to Shermer.

_________________
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 10:26 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:50 am
Posts: 2799
Tal Bachman wrote:
Life

I think that that particular quote reflects the Mormon belief that it and it alone possesses divine authority to officiate in God's name and receive revelations from God for the whole world. If you've got some differing interpretation a la BCSpace with the First Presidency evolution statement, I'd be interested in hearing it out of interest in human psychology.


Does this authority to officiate or receive revelations prohibit anyone else (even those who disbelieve in God) from espousing, teaching or discovering truth in general?


Quote:
If Joseph Smith didn't tell the truth and his church was a fraud, would you want to know? Even considering it might rock your marriage (if you're married), destroy your friendships, your identity, etc....would you want to know? Yes or no? Why or why not?


I'll answer with a question of my own: If Joseph Smith did tell the truth and his church is actually God's church, that God exists, would you want to know? Even considering it might rock your marriage (if you're married), destroy your friendships, your identity, haircut, etc....would you want to know? Yes or no? Why or why not?[/quote]

_________________
One moment in annihilation's waste,
one moment, of the well of life to taste-
The stars are setting and the caravan
starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste!

-Omar Khayaam

*Be on the lookout for the forthcoming album from Jiminy Finn and the Moneydiggers.*


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 10:26 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:50 am
Posts: 2799
beastie wrote:
I haven't read all the replies, but have been meaning to add a comment since this thread started. Mormon apologists are a classic example of what Shermer discusses in his book, Why People Believe Weird Things. In particular, smart people believe weird things for nonsmart reasons, but then apply their "smart skills" to defending the weird thing. Men in particular are more prone to this than woman, according to Shermer.


What an odd person Shermer is to believe such a thing!

_________________
One moment in annihilation's waste,
one moment, of the well of life to taste-
The stars are setting and the caravan
starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste!

-Omar Khayaam

*Be on the lookout for the forthcoming album from Jiminy Finn and the Moneydiggers.*


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:07 pm 
God

Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:35 pm
Posts: 18195
Location: Shady Acres Status: MODERATOR
Tal Bachman wrote:
Life

I think that that particular quote reflects the Mormon belief that it and it alone possesses divine authority to officiate in God's name and receive revelations from God for the whole world.


For the church, yes. For the whole world? I'm not sure that's correct.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 2:14 am 
Bishop
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 2:05 pm
Posts: 484
Quote:
Does this authority to officiate or receive revelations prohibit anyone else (even those who disbelieve in God) from espousing, teaching or discovering truth in general?


---Why would it? Isn't it clear enough?

Quote:
Quote:
If Joseph Smith didn't tell the truth and his church was a fraud, would you want to know? Even considering it might rock your marriage (if you're married), destroy your friendships, your identity, etc....would you want to know? Yes or no? Why or why not?


I'll answer with a question of my own: If Joseph Smith did tell the truth and his church is actually God's church, that God exists, would you want to know?


---Of course! What in the world do you think this is all about?!

Now answer the question: Would you want to know? Why or why not?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 2:16 am 
Bishop
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 2:05 pm
Posts: 484
harmony wrote:
Tal Bachman wrote:
Life

I think that that particular quote reflects the Mormon belief that it and it alone possesses divine authority to officiate in God's name and receive revelations from God for the whole world.


For the church, yes. For the whole world? I'm not sure that's correct.


---It may not be correct, but that's LDS doctrine.

How long have you actually been a member?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 8:26 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:50 am
Posts: 2799
Tal Bachman wrote:
Quote:
Does this authority to officiate or receive revelations prohibit anyone else (even those who disbelieve in God) from espousing, teaching or discovering truth in general?


---Why would it? Isn't it clear enough?


Apparently not, Tal. That's why we're discussing it. So if I read you correctly you are saying the truth claims of the Church do not prohibit other religions (theistic, atheistic and otherwise) from believing, discovering or teaching truth?

Quote:
Now answer the question: Would you want to know? Why or why not?


Of course, Tal. As a corollary, if my wife actually did not love me though she tells me she does, I'd want to know that, too. I'm that kind of crazy guy.

_________________
One moment in annihilation's waste,
one moment, of the well of life to taste-
The stars are setting and the caravan
starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste!

-Omar Khayaam

*Be on the lookout for the forthcoming album from Jiminy Finn and the Moneydiggers.*


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 8:27 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:50 am
Posts: 2799
Tal Bachman wrote:
harmony wrote:
Tal Bachman wrote:
Life

I think that that particular quote reflects the Mormon belief that it and it alone possesses divine authority to officiate in God's name and receive revelations from God for the whole world.


For the church, yes. For the whole world? I'm not sure that's correct.


---It may not be correct, but that's LDS doctrine.

How long have you actually been a member?


It's actually not LDS doctrine. Nothing in the teachings of the Church indicates that people will be held accountable for covenants they never even made based merely on the fact that the Church exists or that they have a periphery knowledge that it exists.

_________________
One moment in annihilation's waste,
one moment, of the well of life to taste-
The stars are setting and the caravan
starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste!

-Omar Khayaam

*Be on the lookout for the forthcoming album from Jiminy Finn and the Moneydiggers.*


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 12:20 pm 
Bishop
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 2:05 pm
Posts: 484
Quote:
LifeOnaPlate wrote:
Tal Bachman wrote:
harmony wrote:
Tal Bachman wrote:
Life

I think that that particular quote reflects the Mormon belief that it and it alone possesses divine authority to officiate in God's name and receive revelations from God for the whole world.


For the church, yes. For the whole world? I'm not sure that's correct.


---It may not be correct, but that's LDS doctrine.

How long have you actually been a member?


It's actually not LDS doctrine. Nothing in the teachings of the Church indicates that people will be held accountable for covenants they never even made based merely on the fact that the Church exists or that they have a periphery knowledge that it exists.


---It never ceases to amaze me how ignorant most church members are of their own church's claims. I don't know whether it's tragic or comic, or if I should just tune them all out. It's certainly embarrassing.

I guess official statements entitled "“The Family: A Proclamation to the WORLD" , weren't enough of a tip-off, were they? Or statements like "The prophets, seers, and revelators have had and still have the responsibility and privilege of receiving and declaring the word of God for the WORLD. He has been ordained and set apart as the prophet, seer, and revelator to the WORLD."

Wake up, bro.

By the way, the point in question has NOTHING to do with "being held accountable for covenants they never even made", etc. It's like you're spontaneously changing the topic in mid-sentence. The point is that it is LDS doctrine, and always has been, that the LDS prophet is the only man authorized by God to reveal his will not just to the Mormon church, but to the world. Hence the repeated presence of the word "WORLD" in the statements above, and about four thousand others.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 1:08 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:50 am
Posts: 2799
Tal Bachman wrote:
---It never ceases to amaze me how ignorant most church members are of their own church's claims.


It never ceases to amaze me how dogmatic vocal critics, former members, are in regards to doctrine.

Quote:
I don't know whether it's tragic or comic, or if I should just tune them all out. It's certainly embarrassing.


We have more in common than we thought! I just appear more polite in keeping my snide thoughts to myself.

Quote:
I guess official statements entitled "“The Family: A Proclamation to the WORLD" , weren't enough of a tip-off, were they? Or statements like "The prophets, seers, and revelators have had and still have the responsibility and privilege of receiving and declaring the word of God for the WORLD. He has been ordained and set apart as the prophet, seer, and revelator to the WORLD."


I don't deny that the prophets and apostles can issue statements to the world. Our mission itself is to the world, eventually to every nation kindred tongue and people, as you know. However, there are many inspired people in and out of the Church, and while they don't bear the title of "prophet" or "apostle" in the same sense, all are invited to be prophets. A premortal, mortal, and postmortal outlook from the LDS perspective makes it clear (in addition to the teachings of apostles and prophets past and present) a person can receive "all that the father hath" even if they weren't aware of LDS prophets and apostles during their lives.

But we're getting side tracked. We were talking about what makes the Church the "only true and living Church upon the face of the earth." This statement sometimes concerns members of other religions. I believe the options given us by God are larger than the simple joining of or belonging to a Church.

Quote:
By the way, the point in question has NOTHING to do with "being held accountable for covenants they never even made", etc. It's like you're spontaneously changing the topic in mid-sentence.


I apologize for being unclear; it seems I was inadvertently shifting the goal posts, got off on a tangent. Still, I believe my comments regarding covenants do apply, as the Church itself is a covenant community. We learn in the Book of Mormon that we will be judged by the law we have received. I have connected the concept of covenants, laws, revelation, community and the Church. Again, sorry for any confusion.

Quote:
The point is that it is LDS doctrine, and always has been, that the LDS prophet is the only man authorized by God to reveal his will not just to the Mormon church, but to the world. Hence the repeated presence of the word "WORLD" in the statements above, and about four thousand others.


There have been, and are, prophets to different people in the world who do not belong to the LDS Church. As far as doctrine and pronouncements of the Church are concerned, you are right in implying that revelation for the Church would come through the ordained apostles and prophets.

But being the "only true church" does not mean the "only good church," or the only church with any truth, etc. On that point, I believe you and I are agreed.

_________________
One moment in annihilation's waste,
one moment, of the well of life to taste-
The stars are setting and the caravan
starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste!

-Omar Khayaam

*Be on the lookout for the forthcoming album from Jiminy Finn and the Moneydiggers.*


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 1:19 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:25 pm
Posts: 4947
beastie wrote:
I haven't read all the replies, but have been meaning to add a comment since this thread started. Mormon apologists are a classic example of what Shermer discusses in his book, Why People Believe Weird Things. In particular, smart people believe weird things for nonsmart reasons, but then apply their "smart skills" to defending the weird thing. Men in particular are more prone to this than woman, according to Shermer.


Your prejudiced (highly biased, stereotyped, sexist) analysis of Mormon apologists is a classic example of what George Fuechsel coined as "garbage in, garbage out". ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 1:27 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 2425
wenglund wrote:
beastie wrote:
I haven't read all the replies, but have been meaning to add a comment since this thread started. Mormon apologists are a classic example of what Shermer discusses in his book, Why People Believe Weird Things. In particular, smart people believe weird things for nonsmart reasons, but then apply their "smart skills" to defending the weird thing. Men in particular are more prone to this than woman, according to Shermer.


Your prejudiced (highly biased, stereotyped, sexist) analysis of Mormon apologists is a classic example of what George Fuechsel coined as "garbage in, garbage out". ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-


Ugh.

_________________
You can’t trust adults to tell you the truth.

Scream the lie, whisper the retraction.- The Left


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 1:54 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:58 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Elsewhere
I haven't had the time nor the inclination to follow this thread closely, but I have prepared the following reply to our esteemed interlocutor:


I wrote:
Quote:
I perceive no such restraints, for in my defense of my beliefs, I will as easily appeal to the metaphysical as to the empirical, and to regard metaphysical discernment as being, generally speaking, more reliable, in terms of its use as a sensor of fact/truth, than the tools employed in any laboratory. Of course, the inherent difficulty of using metaphysical sensors is the degree of fine calibration required – calibration parameters which seldom have relevance for someone else. We communicate “beyond the veil” on a frequency peculiarly our own, and learn how to make judgments based on the peculiar nature of the signals we discern.


To which Talmage replied:

Quote:
---Hence, the success of science over tarot card reading.

By the way, is it just me, or did you finish this paragraph by undermining your very first words in it? You began by saying that you don't see Mormonism as denying that empirically-established facts and logic impose constraints on what we may justifiably believe, but then ended by championing a wholly occult (in the true sense of the word) "epistemology" - which by definition DOES deny those constraints. You began by disputing my characterization, but ended by agreeing with it. How does that work?

And thus Talmage once again reveals his seeming incapacity for three-dimensional thinking. He would have us believe that if we appeal to the existence and reliability of occult knowledge – the metaphysical, then we cannot simultaneously appeal to the empirical.

This, of course, is quite predictable – for once one makes the jump to absolute naturalism, then there can be no further accommodation of the metaphysical in the equations that seek to explain our existence. Needless to say, those who have experienced, firsthand, the concrete clarity of such occult transmissions, have come to recognize that everything in this world is, at its most fundamental level, transitory and therefore inherently unreliable – whereas the communications from beyond the veil speak of things as they really are and as they really will be.

Talmage continues:

Quote:
All you have to do to feel 100% metaphysical certitude about something is to be human, William. And yes, I've felt the same 100% level of certainty about Mormonism as you have, though I understand how difficult that will be for you to believe right now. I have also come to accept the fact that feeling certain that something is so, is not equivalent to it actually being so.

I never said anything about “feelings” in all of my response to your initial post. That is your definition of “metaphysical sensors,” not mine.

You see, I was quite clear in my descriptions of the nature of the metaphysical communications to which I referred – and to which many others have referred over the years. I’m talking about articulated intelligence. That all you (and many others) ever experienced in your days as a “believer” was some kind of vague “feeling” is not my problem, nor is it an indictment of the means by which intelligence is communicated across the divide of the veil.

I also wrote:
Quote:
… those who have paid the price to “grow into the principle of revelation” are not likely to be very impressed by your insistence that such things are not real.

To which Talmage replied:
Quote:
---You seem to have mistaken me for someone else...

Have I now?

I will admit that you are quite similar to many others I have known.

Although I will give you credit for a measure of unique eloquence, you’re following a very typical pattern here; one which I have observed several times over the course of my life. In a way, I feel a sense of sorrow for you. By all indications, you might have excelled in righteousness. On the other hand, your apparent inability to resist the urge to cover your sins, gratify your pride, and aspire to the honors of men has rendered you defenseless against the malady which has now consumed you.

In any event, I will simply reiterate, for the benefit of our readers, that revelation, as it is understood and has been experienced by many, is much, much more than a feeling. Subjective “feelings” might attract and even convince a considerable number of people to pursue a life path, but the level of communication to which I refer goes far beyond any fleeting sensation of well-being. Rather, as stated previously, it consists of articulated intelligence – although its “articulation” often challenges and sometimes defies the capacity of human language to convey second-hand. But those who know also recognize others who know, and according to the capacity of each, are able to share that knowledge; combining together (and thus augmenting) their strength in such a way that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Thus my statement:

Quote:
Those who have grown “into the principle of revelation” are cognizant of others who are like them. They have seen that there is consistency to what they and others have learned through this unique sensory pathway. They form a whole, and combined as such, they constitute a power you cannot understand and they create a gravity that pulls into their orbit others who are attracted by the light and intelligence they exude.


So, I welcome you to continue “to kick against the pricks,” but, in time, you’ll see – like all those who have preceded you in this venture – that it was all an exercise in futility.

_________________
... every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol ...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 185 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 9  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dr Moore, Fence Sitter, Philo Sofee and 11 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